|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 931 Records
-
2008 (9) TMI 1019 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... essee before the Tribunal. Paragraph 7 of the said order dated 5-4-2007 clearly indicates that the issue of disallowance of foreign travel expenses has been sent back to the Assessing Officer for a decision afresh after the earlier orders passed by the Assessing Officer and the CIT (Appeals) have been set aside. It was, therefore, contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that since the quantum appeal was allowed on this ground and the matter has been remanded to the Assessing Officer, the penalty proceedings arising out of the very same orders cannot survive any further. It has also been confirmed by the learned counsel for the appellant that the revenue has not preferred any appeal against the said order passed by the Tribunal on 5-4-2007 in ITA No. 1397/Delhi/2005. 4. We find ourselves in agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent and are consequently of the view that there is no merit in this appeal. 5. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1018 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... petitioner is that the permission to travel so far as the child is concerned including issuance of a Passport is under consideration of the Central Government; but no orders have been passed in that regard. The other prayer in the petition is with regard to an extension of the visa of the grandmother of the child requesting for such an order. 17. Learned Solicitor General, on instructions, stated that if a comprehensive application, as required under law, is filed within a week, the same shall be disposed of expeditiously and not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of such application. If the petitioner has any grievance in relation to the order to be passed by the Central Government, such remedy, as is available in law may be availed. 18. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs. All proceedings pending in any High Court relating to the matter which we have dealt with in this petition shall stand disposed of because of this order.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1017 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nch has stated that what the Section 25(3) of the Contract Act requires is an express promise made in writing and signed by the person to be charged therewith. Nothing short of an express promise, therefore, will provide a fresh period of limitation. It is settled law that an implied promise is not sufficient. The learned Division Bench also noted the distinction between an acknowledgment under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and a promise to pay under Section 25(3) of the Contract Act, 1872. Both have got to be in writing. In the case of first, it has got to be before expiry of the period and in the case of second, it could be beyond the period. 9. Since the accused has been acquitted on the basis of the view held by me in Narendra V. Kanekar v. Bardez Taluka Co-op Housing Mortgage (supra), which still holds the field, I have no other option but to follow the same. Consequently, I find this is not a fit case to grant Special Leave to Appeal. 10. Application dismissed.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1016 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on the 8th of October, 1976 and the 16th of March, 1981 whereby he stated Narmadabai died before 10-12 years. I have not served the notice on the owners. I have informed them orally regarding the purchase from time to time. I have not served notice in writing. There were disputes amongst the brothers. Because of that I could not serve the notice regarding the purchase of the land as per Section 32F. Due to no knowledge of law I am not aware of the service of the notice. 19. For the reasons aforesaid, we are of the view that the High Court was justified in passing the impugned judgment and there is no infirmity in the impugned order for which we can interfere with the order of the High Court. Since we have already held that the service of the notice under Section 32F was mandatory and by failure to serve such a notice under the said section, the Appellant had lost his right to claim the disputed land. 20. Accordingly the Appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1015 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... an Industrial Undertaking and in allowing deduction u/s.35D of the IT Act, 1961? 2. Perused the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 14th August, 2008 in Income Tax Appeal No.305 of 2008. For the same reasons as recorded in the aforesaid order dated 14th August, 2008 passed in Income Tax Appeal No.305 of 2008 we are not entertaining the present Appeal. Hence, the present Appeal also stands dismissed.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1014 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f the order passed in connected ITA No. 544 of 2006 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar v. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Delhi Road, Hisar), this appeal is disposed of in same terms.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1013 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... w. Since the law relating to transfer is contained in Sections 22 to 25 of the Code, and they are exhaustive in nature, Section 151 has no application. Even that contention, therefore, cannot take the case of respondent-wife further. 80. For all these reasons, in our opinion, the order passed by the High Court is not sustainable and deserves to be set aside. We hold that a High Court has no power, authority or jurisdiction to transfer a case, appeal or other proceeding pending in a Court subordinate to it to any Court subordinate to another High Court in purported exercise of power under sub- section (3) of Section 23 of the Code and it is only this Court which can exercise the said authority under Section 25 of the Code. The order passed by the High Court, therefore, deserves to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. 81. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, however, the parties are directed to bear their own costs. 82. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1012 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... transaction wise; 3) examine as to whether the burden of the levy has been passed on to the ultimate consumer; 4) decide by recording reason(s) as to whether the traders/dealers concerned are entitled to any refund; and 5) if so, recommend the payment quantified to be refunded; 98. As is obvious from hereinabove, the Committee would administer the exercise as ordered in terms of the determinations made in this decision after affording all reasonable opportunities of hearing to the parties. The decision taken, would be communicated to them in writing as well. 99. In case of an order of refund, the Board or the Market Committee concerned would forthwith arrange for the disbursements in accordance with the Rules. 100. The Commissioner & Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Government Assam, would oversee the entire pursuit to ensure that the same is conducted in meticulous adherence to the directions contained herein. 101. The petitions, are, thus partly allowed. No costs.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1011 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Dishonor of Cheque - proof of a document or admissibility of a document in evidence which is tendered along with a list of documents or along with an affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief - Interpretation of Section 145(2) - procedure followed regarding marking the documents as exhibits - HELD THAT:- The issue of the interpretation of Sub-section (2) of Section 145 is well settled by the Division Bench in the case of KSL Industries Ltd.[2005 (2) TMI 885 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] reads thus: '' The second part of Sub-section (1) provides that the complainant may give his evidence on affidavit and may, subject to all just exceptions, be read in evidence in any enquiry, trial or other proceeding. Thus, it is clear that once the evidence of the complainant is given on affidavit, it may be read in evidence in any enquiry, trial or other proceeding, and it may be subject to all just exceptions.''
The procedure laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Bipin Panchal [2001 (2) TMI 590 - SUPREME COURT] will have to be followed by the Courts sub-ordinate to this Court. However, the said decision-of Apex Court is applicable only to one category of objection regarding admissibility of the document in evidence and that decision has no application when an objection is raised to the proof or to irregular/insufficient mode of proof of a document.
Objection regarding inadequacy of stamp is concerned that is already settled by the larger bench of the Apex Court in the case of Javer Chand [1961 (4) TMI 118 - SUPREME COURT]. In fact, in the decision of this Court in the case of Peacock Industries [2006 (7) TMI 700 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Bipin Panchal (supra) is not read and interpreted to mean that it also applies to the objection regarding proof of documents.
Therefore, after filing of affidavit of examination-in-chief and after recording formal examination-in-chief of the concerned witness, an objection raised regarding proof of documents or insufficiency of proof or of adopting incorrect mode of proof has to be dealt with immediately by the learned Magistrate before proceeding with the recording of cross-examination. Only in a case where the said adjudication involves a decision on complicated questions which require a very detailed adjudication, it can be postponed till the final hearing.
In a case where a document is proved in accordance with Evidence Act but an objection is raised to the admissibility of the said document, as held by the Apex Court in the case of Bipin Panchal (supra), such document can be tentatively marked as an exhibit as objection to the admissibility can be decided at the stage of final hearing as contemplated in the decision of the case of Bipin Panchal (supra). if objection regarding proof of a document is decided, the complainant or accused who has produced the said documents is put to the notice that the document is not held as proved so that he can seek indulgence from the Court of leading further evidence. This, avoids possibility of parties applying at the stage of judgment for recalling the witness or for leading further evidence for proving a document.
I have already held that merely because a document referred to in cross-examination is marked as an exhibit, the same does not dispense with the proof of document, in accordance with law of evidence.
Criminal Application - objection to admissibility of the affidavit of examination-in-chief - The perusal of the order dated 16th July, 2008 shows that there is no specific objection raised regarding the proof of the documents. The order dated 16th July, 2008 has been recorded during the course of recording formal examination-in-chief of the complainant. As far as objection to the admissibility of affidavit of examination-in-chief is concerned, as stated above, the interpretation made by this Court of Section 145(2) of the said Act of 1881 stands and therefore objection to admissibility of the affidavit of examination-in-chief cannot be sustained.
In the circumstances, no interference is called for with the impugned orders subject to what is laid down in this judgment.
In Criminal Writ Petition, the learned Judge has tentatively marked all the documents produced by the complainant as exhibits. As held earlier, before proceeding to record the cross-examination, the learned Judge will have to deal with the objection as regards proof of the documents leaving the objection, if any, as regards admissibility open.
Hence, I pass the following order: Subject to what is observed in this judgment, no case for interference is made out and the petitions are disposed of.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1010 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Claim on loss incurred under the guarantee written off - guarantee given by Agrima was genuine or colourable - Whether the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of CIT(A) allowing the claim of the assessee for loss being guarantee written off, failing to appreciate that Saurashtra Cement and Chemical India Ltd.(SCCIL), Mehta Pvt.Ltd., Maharana Mills Ltd. and Agrima Project had common Directors and were under the same management and the entire exercise was collusive and only to book losses? - Agrima issued a guarantee to SCCIL in favor of Maharana Mills - Maharana Mills failed to repay the loan SCCIL thereon, called upon the assessee to make good the payment of loan with interest in terms of the guarantee executed by Agrima - In view of the amalgamation of Agrima with the assessee, the assessee paid the amount along with interest to SCCIL in instalments.
HELD THAT:- We do not agree with the finding of the A.O. that clause 13 of the Memorandum of Articles of Association is a comprehensive clause and in view of that clause Agrima cannot give any guarantee without security. We are of the view that according to clause 13 of the object clause Agrima could guarantee the performance of any contract or obligation/payment of money of or by any person or company or Corporation. In addition to this, the said Object clause 13 also allows Agrima to secure any guarantee in such a manner as the company may think fit and in particular by the mortgage pledge or other security upon all or on any other properties of the company. This would not mean that Agrima cannot give guarantee without security.
Contention of the revenue that the three concerns/companies were under the control and management of the same group of persons and, therefore, warranted application of principles initiated in Mc Dowel’s case, we are of the view that such a contention in the absence of any material in support thereof should be outright rejected.
It is argued by the assessee before all the authorities that the said three companies are independent and acted as such at arm’s length. Infact, SCCIL is a listed company. This contention of the assessee is accepted by CIT(A) who has reached a finding of fact that the amounts received by Maharana Mills from the Banks and financial institutions and from SCCIL were utilised in purchasing new machinery which was also installed and it is not the allegation of the AO that these funds were misappropriated by the directors or were frittered away. CIT(A) have, therefore, reached a finding of fact that the guarantee given by Agrima was genuine. This finding of fact is also accepted by the Appellate Tribunal. In view of these concurrent findings of fact, we see no reason as to why we should interfere with the said finding of fact.
In view thereof we are of the view that except for making a bare allegation that the entire exercise of giving guarantee by Agrima to SCCIL was collusive and only to book losses on the ground that the companies have common directors and were under the same management, the revenue has failed to produce any material in support of their case that the guarantee given by Agrima was not genuine. Only because some directors were common one cannot reach to a serious conclusion that the entire transaction was collusive and colourable only to book losses.
Therefore, we answer the above question raised in the appeal against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeal stands dismissed.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1009 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... counsel for the parties are agreed that the decision of the Supreme Court in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd (supra) has been over-ruled by a larger Bench of the Supreme Court in CIT v Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd 304 ITR 308. Moreover, the decision in Ram Commercial Enterprises (supra) as well as in the case of Jai Bharat Maruti Ltd (supra) would no longer be applicable in view of the introduction of sub-section (1B) to Section 271 of the Act by virtue of the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1989. The Tribunal has not decided the issue on merits. As a consequence, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for a decision on merits. This appeal stands disposed of.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1008 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... Following the above dictum of this Court in the judgments noticed by us hereinabove, we are of the opinion since we have come to the conclusion that no conviction of any accused is possible based on the prosecution case as presented, it becomes our duty to extend the benefit of acquittal in these appeals also to a non-appealing accused, therefore, Sona @ Sonwa Choudhary who is the first accused before the Sessions Court in Sessions Trial No. 417/93 and who was the first appellant before the High Court in Crl. A. No. 88 of 1995 will also be acquitted of all the charges of which he is found guilty by the two courts below. A similar order had been made by this Court in Raja Ram's case (supra) in the light of Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Be that as it may, in this background, Badri Singh and Briksh Singh who had both filed Criminal Appeal No. 501/1987 in the High Court and were unsuccessful are also entitled to acquittal. The appeals are accordingly disposed of.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1007 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed Company showing its registered office at the place claimed by the Applicant as having been transferred to his proprietary Concern. 24. It is for the Applicant to show his right, title and interest in the attached premises. He has sought to show it by way of the rent receipts. No transfer is seen to have been created under the rent receipts. In any case, the full extent of Garden Resort House is not shown. Whether it consists of only shop Nos.2, 3, 4 and office is not shown. What, if any, is the other part of Garden Resort House is not shown. In which part of the RespondentCompany had its registered office is not specified. Hence, the Applicant's case that it is not the RespondentCompany but his own proprietary Concern Garden Resort which is in possession of the attached premises, cannot be accepted. 25. Consequently, the Chamber Summons is dismissed. No order as to costs. 26. However, the Claimant shall not proceed to sell the attached premises for a period of 2 weeks.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1006 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... omplete set of relevant documents so as to enable them to register a case under various provisions of IPC as stated hereinabove and/or any other and then proceed ahead in the matter in accordance with law so that it acts as a deterrent not only to the delinquent but also to the persons with similar proclivities. Needless to say that once the report is lodged with the local police they will deal with the same in accordance with law without being influenced in any manner whatsoever by any of our observations recorded hereinbefore. With these observations, we dismiss the present writ petition. Copy of this order be sent to the Commissioner of Customs, ICD Tuglakbad for compliance within a period of one month from today with direction to file a report with the Registrar General of this Court. 11. A cost of ₹ 50,000/- is imposed and the same be paid with the sponsoring authority within four weeks failing which it shall open to them to recover the same in accordance with law.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1005 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 5) E.L.T. 120 (Tribunal). According to the learned counsel, the decision given by the Tribunal has been accepted by the Department. Therefore, the appeal cannot be entertained. Appeal is rejected. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate / Private Secretary of the Court. Certified copy is expedited.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1004 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n by the learned Company Judge in paragraph No. 9 of the impugned judgment, learned advocate appearing for the Official Liquidator has placed on record a copy of communication dated 19-09-2008 (it should be 12-09-2008) directing the Official Liquidator to comply with the said directions not later than 15 days from today. 6. At this stage, learned advocate for the appellant prays for time to obtain instructions from the officers of the appellant organisation as to whether contempt proceedings should be initiated or not. The said request is not accepted for the simple reason that whether contempt proceedings should be initiated or not has no nexus with pendency of the appeals, and in fact, pendnecy of the appeals may be to the detriment to the appellant in the event the appellant desires to initiate appropriate contempt proceedings in accordance with law. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeals do not merit acceptance and are accordingly summarily dismissed.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1003 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... which were installed after 1.4.2002? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal failed to consider that additional depreciation was introduced by Finance Act, 2002 and it was to be allowed only if assets are acquired and installed after 1.4.2002 and therefore the additional depreciation of ₹ 5,61,23,019/- was wrongly allowed by the Assessing Officer as the assessee although purchased the assets before 1.4.2002 but the assets were admittedly installed after 1.4.2002?” Let paper book be prepared by the appellant and be served upon the respondent within Four weeks after vacation. Let the appeal appear six weeks after vacation. All parties concerned are to act on a xerox signed copy of the minutes of this order on the usual undertakings. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities. (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) (SANKAR PRASAD MITRA, J.)
-
2008 (9) TMI 1002 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... for consideration before the Supreme Court in a case Indian Cable Vs. Workmen reported in AIR 1972 Supreme Court 2195. In paragraph 20 of the judgment, the Supreme Court held that, such an expenditure was allowable under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act and was not an expenditure of a capital nature. Therefore, following this judgment of the Supreme Court, we feel that appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1001 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... law on the same." 3. In the said affidavit, the respondent/assessee has categorically stated that the appellant/revenue may only allow deduction to the extent of ₹ 90,037.50 instead of ₹ 19,06,844/- which was upheld by the ITAT in the impugned order. 4. In the light of the aforesaid statement of the assessee in the affidavit dated 4th September, 2008, the learned Counsel for the revenue Mr.Kanwal stated that the appellant would be satisfied if the appellant is allowed to claim the actual enhanced rent of ₹ 90,037.50 instead of ₹ 19,06,844/- that the revenue would accordingly calculate the arrears of tax and demand in accordance with law would be made with regard to the same from the assessee. Mr.Jasani, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent states that as soon as such demand is made assessee will pay the amount. In the light of the above nothing further requires to be done in the appeal. The appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
-
2008 (9) TMI 1000 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... peal to the High Court. The Explanation to the Section is extremely significant inasmuch as it prescribes that High Court means "the High Court within the jurisdiction of which the aggrieved party ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain" and further clarifies that if the Appeal is filed by the Central Government it is the residence or place of business of the Respondent which is the relevant and determining factor. Any lingering doubt that may remain stands dispelled by Section 35 of FEMA. 7. Therefore, on two counts this Court ought not to exercise territorial jurisdiction - firstly, on the general principles as culled out in Ambica Industries and secondly by virtue of Section 35 of FEMA. 8. Writ Petition is rejected for the reason that this Court ought not to exercise jurisdiction on the ground of lack of territoriality. Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to approach the appropriate High Court. There shall be no order as to costs.
........
|
