Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: punjab and haryana Year: 2004 Page 17 of about 165 results (0.028 seconds)

Oct 08 2004 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.K. Bhardwaj

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-08-2004

Reported in : (2006)201CTR(P& H)223; [2005]279ITR326(P& H)

ajay kumar mittal, j.1. at the instance of the revenue, the income-tax appellate tribunal, chandigarh bench, chandigarh (for short 'the tribunal') has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court :' (1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in confirming the view taken by the dcit(a) to hold that the question of allowing expenses against the amount incentive bonus received by a development officer of the lic of india was a highly debatable issue and outside the purview of section 154 ?'2. the assessee, an individual, is a development officer with the life insurance corporation of india. he filed his income-tax return for the assessment year 1992-93 declaring total income of rs. 65,479. the case of the assessee was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the act and his income was computed at rs. 71,970. the assessee filed an application for rectification under section 154 with a prayer that additions/disallowance, if any, be deleted. the assessing officer also issued notice under section 154 of the act for adding income received by the assessee on account of incentive bonus. the assessee raised objections to the proposed addition on the ground that it is a debatable issue as to whether incentive bonus is income or not and, therefore, the same cannot be added under section 154 of the act to his total income. the assessing officer, however, did not agree with the contention of the assessee and made the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 2004 (HC)

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Surinder and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-29-2004

Reported in : II(2005)ACC224; 2006ACJ1285

nirmal singh, j.1. this order shall dispose of above said two appeals arising out of common award dated 17.1.2003 passed in two petitions by the motor accidents claims tribunal, faridabad (for short, 'the tribunal'). in claim petition no. 226 filed by surinder kumar, tribunal has awarded compensation of rs. 10,899 whereas in claim petition no. 227, it has awarded compensation of rs. 2,35,200 with interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of petition till realisation in both the petitions, to be paid by the respondents jointly and severally.2. the brief facts of the case are that on 26.12.1999, ram prashad (deceased) and surinder (respondent no. 1 in f.a.o. no. 1404 of 2003) boarded tractor no. hr 52-1256 from bhawan kund, palwal for going to their village devli. the said tractor was being driven by subhash singh, driver, rashly and negligently and at about 4.15 p.m., when they reached near narula rice mill in the area of sadar palwal, the tractor turned turtle along with the trolley due to which the same fell into ditch, as a consequence of which ram prashad and surinder received grievous injuries. ram prashad succumbed to his injuries.3. the legal heirs of ram prashad filed claim petition, claiming compensation to the tune of rs. 5,00,000 whereas surinder, injured, filed claim petition for compensation to the tune of rs. 3,00,000 for his injuries before the tribunal, who awarded compensation as stated in para 1 of the order, against which the above said two appeals have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 2004 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. K.G. Madan

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-07-2004

Reported in : (2005)193CTR(P& H)550; [2005]275ITR294(P& H)

ajay kumar mittal, j.1. this reference under section 256(1) of the it act, 1961 (for short 'the act'), is at the instance of the revenue. the income-tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench 'e' (hereinafter to be referred as the tribunal), has referred the following question for the opinion of this court:'whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in holding that the proceedings under section 148 were not validly initiated ?'2. the assessee, an individual, filed return of income on 28th dec, 1984, for the asst. yr. 1981-82, wherein an income of rs. 20,000 was declared. this return was beyond the time as allowed under section 139 of the act for filing of voluntary return. the ao thus, issued a notice under section 148 of the act. the assessee challenged the validity of the initiation of proceedings under section 148 before the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) [hereinafter to be referred to as 'cit(a)']. the cit(a) rejected the claim of the assessee. however, appeal of the assessee was allowed by the tribunal and initiation of proceedings under section 148 was held to be bad in law. accordingly, the assessment made in pursuance to the notice issued thereunder was quashed.3. shri rajesh bindal, learned counsel appearing for the revenue, submitted that the tribunal has erred in quashing the assessment order and holding that proceedings under section 148 of the act had not been properly initiated.4. we have thoughtfully considered the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 2004 (HC)

Cit Vs. K.G. Madan

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-07-2004

Reported in : [2005]143TAXMAN336(Punj& Har)

ajay eumar mittal, j.this reference under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), is at the instance of the revenue. the income tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench 'e' (hereinafter to be referred as the tribunal), has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in law in holding that the proceedings under section 148 were not validly initiated ?'2. the assessee, an individual, filed return of income on 28-12-1984, for the assessment year 1981-82, wherein an income of rs. 20,000 was declared. this return was beyond the time as allowed under section 139 of the act for filing of voluntary return. the assessing officer thus, issued a notice under section 148 of the act. the assessee challenged the validity of the initiation of proceedings under section 148 before the cit(a) (hereinafter to be referred to as 'cit(a)'). the cit(a) rejected the claim of the assessee, however, appeal of the assessee was allowed by the tribunal and initiation of proceedings under section 148 was held to be bad in law. accordingly, the assessment made in pursuance to the notice issued thereunder was quashed.3. shri rajesh bindal, learned counsel appearing for the revenue, submitted that the tribunal has erred in quashing the assessment order and holding that proceedings under section 148 of the act had not been properly initiated.4. we have thoughtfully considered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 2004 (HC)

Rajesh Kumar Madaan Son of Dayal Chand Madaan Vs. Mrs. Mamta Alias Vee ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-04-2004

Reported in : II(2005)DMC101; (2005)140PLR196

s.s. saron, j.1. there is a delay of 13 days in re-filing the appeal. for the reasons stated in the application and after hearing the learned counsel for the appellant, we find sufficient grounds to condone the delay in re-filing the appeal. civil miscellaneous application seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal is accordingly allowed.2. this appeal under section 28 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 ('act' for short) has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 10.9.2004 passed by the learned additional district judge, faridabad whereby the petition of the appellant-husband for seeking divorce from the respondent-wife has been dismissed.3. the marriage between the parties was solemnised at faridabad in accordance with hindu rites and ceremonies on 19.8.1996. from the marriage, the parties had a female child. the appellant-husband on 19.5.1999 filed a petition under section 13 of the act seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. the learned additional district judge, faridabad after considering the evidence and material on record, as already noticed, dismissed the petition. it was observed that the appellant had failed to prove that the respondent had treated him with cruelty. besides, there was no desertion on her part. the said order of the additional district judge, as already noticed, is assailed in this appeal.4. learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the learned .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //