Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: recent Court: punjab and haryana Year: 2001 Page 1 of about 52 results (0.019 seconds)

Dec 21 2001 (HC)

Paramjit Kaur W/O Harnek Singh and anr. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-21-2001

Reported in : AIR2002P& H241

bakhshish kaur, j.1. this judgment is against the order dated 16.2.2000 passed by the learned additional district judge, faridkot, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 26.7.1996 passed by the collector, district faridkot under section 47 of the stamps act, was dismissed.2. the fact giving rise to the present revision are that a sale deed dated jan. 20, 1995 was held to be under-stamped to be extent of rs. 3,38, 437. thus, a notice was issued for the recovery of the balance amount of stamp fee of rs. 42,334/- proceedings under section 47a of the stamps act were taken against the vendees and the vendors. 3. paramjit kaur ard karamjit kaur, the vendees in the sale deed appeared before the collector. however, none appeared on behalf of the vendors. therefore exparte proceedings were taken against them. the collector vide order dated july 26, 1996 after assessing the merits of the case besides general inspection of the site was of the opinion that the respondents i.e. the vendors and the vendees had cheated the government by getting the sale deed stamped at low rates. therefore an order for recovery of the deficiency in the stamp duty was passed whereby naib tehsildar was ordered to take action under section 48a of the stamps act (in short 'the act').4. aggrieved by the order, paramjit kaur and karamjit kaur (hereinafter referred to as the vendees) preferred appeal which was also dismissed by the learned additional district judge, faridkot, by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 2001 (HC)

All India L.P.G. Distributors Federation (North-west Region) Vs. Union ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-21-2001

Reported in : AIR2002P& H184

jawahar lal gupta, j. 1. are the instructions issued by the government of india vide letters dated september 17, 2001 and october 18, 2001 by which the public sector oil marketing companies have been directed to close down the extension counters set-up by the dealers and 'transfer all the consumers enrolled through these counters to the newly-commissioned distributors,' arbitrary, illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice? this is the short question that arises in this petition. the facts may be briefly noticed.2. the four oil companies viz. the indian oil corporation and others have appointed distributors for the sale of liquefied petroleum gas. there are more than 300 distributors in the north-west region. they are the members of the petitioner-federation.3. the oil companies allot distributorship to persons belonging to the categories ofex-servicemen, war widows, unemployed engineers/graduates, freedom-fighters, members of scheduled castes and tribes and disabled army personnel etc. each dealer is allotted an area of operation. even the number of refills which can be supplied by the dealer is regulated by the company. ceiling limits on the number of refills have been periodically imposed by the government of india.to illustrate: vide letter dated april 21, 1995, the ceiling limit was revised and raised to 5000 refills p.m. for a town having population upto 10 lacs. on march 10, 2000, the limit was raised to 8000.4. the petitioner alleges that its members .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 2001 (HC)

Munshi Ram Vs. Presiding Officer Labour Court and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-13-2001

Reported in : (2002)IIILLJ93P&H

v.k. bali, j.1. challenge in this appeal filed under clause x of the letters patent is to the judgment of learned single judge recorded in civil writ petition bearing no. 5392 of 1982 dated august 30, 1991, vide which learned single judge, while allowing the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 2001 (HC)

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Jawahar Lal Malhotra

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-07-2001

Reported in : 2002(1)ALD(Cri)867

..... , of the case, on the basis of which a findings of mala-fide could be returned against the 4th respondent. it may be reiterated at this stage that the letters patent appeal filed on behalf of the sub divisional officer (civil), samrala, who too was directed to pay the costs has since been allowed.in view of the discussion made above ..... shamsher singh, 4th respondent. it is this order of learned single judge that has been challenged by the state of punjab and others in this letters patent appeal filed under clause x of the letters patent.2. brief facts giving rise to civil writ petition no.3364 of 1991 filed by jawahar lal malhotra (here-in-after referred to as 'petitioner'), as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Guru Ram Dass Fruit and Vegetable Agenc ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-07-2001

Reported in : [2002]254ITR361(P& H)

1. on august 1, 1988, the assessee filed its return for the assessment year 1988-89. it returned an income of rs. 79,270. on november 22, 1988, the assessment under section 143(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, was completed. on march 9, 1989, the assessee filed a revised return disclosing an additional income of rs. 2,50,000. the assessment was finalised under section 143(3) of the act vide order dated march 26, 1990. penalty proceedings were initiated under section 271(1)(c) of the act. vide order dated august 17, 1990, a penalty of rs. 1,60,000 was imposed.2. aggrieved by the order of penalty imposed by the assessing authority, the assessee filed an appeal. the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) vide order dated march 12, 1991, held that the assessee had filed the revised return and voluntarily surrendered the entire amount 'before the investigation unit had given conclusion regarding concealment in this case . . ,'. it was also noticed that along with the voluntary return, the assessee had paid the additional tax because it 'wanted to buy peace and expected a lenient treatment from the department in view of the voluntary nature of its admission of mistake in accounts ... '. it was further found that notice 'under section 148 was issued long after the appellant had filed its revised return surrendering the amount of rs. 2,50,000. another important factor is that even while finalising reassessment on the second return, the assessing officer had accepted the account books .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Punjab Financial Corporation

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-04-2001

Reported in : [2002]254ITR6(P& H)

g.s. singhvi, j. 1. this case has been placed before the full bench along with i. t. a. no. 83 of 2001 -- cit v. punjab financial corporation, section 17-b, chandigarh, for determination of the following question of law : 'whether section 32ab(5) of the income-tax act, 1961, is mandatory or directory and delayed filing of audit report would disentitle an assessee from claiming the benefit of deduction under section 32ab(1) ?' the background facts : the income-tax returns filed by the assessee -- punjab financial corporation for the years 1988-89 and 1989-90 were accepted by the assessing officer under section 143(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (for short, 'the act'), and deductions claimed under section 32ab(1) were allowed. subsequently, he issued notices under section 154 of the act proposing withdrawal of the deductions on the ground that the assessee had failed to file the audit report with the returns as required by section 32ab(5). on receipt of the notices, the assessee furnished the audit report in the prescribed form but the assessing officer declined to accept the same and ordered withdrawal of the deductions. the commissioner of income-tax (appeals), (for short 'the cit(a)') dismissed the appeal of the assessee, but the income-tax appellate tribunal (hereinafter described as 'the tribunal'), reversed the orders of the assessing officer and the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) and restored the deductions by making the following observations : 'we have carefully .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ghansham Dass

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-04-2001

Reported in : [2002]254ITR355(P& H)

jawahar lal gupta, j.1. is the partner in a firm entitled to standard deduction under section 16(i) of the income-tax act, 1961, against the salary drawn by him this is the short question that arises for consideration in this case. a few facts as relevant for the decision of this case may be briefly noticed.2. the assessee is a partner in a firm. he filed his returns for the assessment years from 1978-79 to 1980-81. besides the share in the profits, he had also drawn salary from the firm. in respect of salary, a claim for deduction under section 16(i) was made. this claim was accepted by the income-tax officer.3. however, on july 14, 1983, the assessing officer passed an order under section 154 and disallowed the claim for deduction. the assessee filed an appeal. it was dismissed. he approached the tribunal. the assessee having succeeded, the revenue filed three petitions under section 256(1). these petitions were accepted. the tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to standard deduction under section 16(i) of the income-tax act, 1961, against the salary income from the firm in which he is a partner in each of the accounting periods relevant to the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81 ?'4. mr. r. p. sawhney, learned counsel for the revenue, contended that the tribunal had erred in accepting the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 16 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 2001 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Wire Products Ltd.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-04-2001

Reported in : [2002]254ITR299(P& H)

jawahar lal gupta, j.1. on december 30, 1992, the assessee filed its return for the assessment year 1992-93. it declared an income of rs. 1,16,99,320. the assessee had submitted a scheme of group gratuity to the commissioner of income-tax, patiala. the scheme was approved by the commissioner vide his letter dated april 23/24 of 1992. the scheme was made effective from february 1, 1992. the assessee paid an amount of rs. 15 lakhs towards the scheme on march 31,1992, by a cheque in favour of the life insurance corporation. this cheque was accepted by the corporation, and a policy no. gg(ca)/207345 was issued. it was made effective from february 1, 1992.the assessee claimed deduction of rs. 15 lakhs from its income on account of the deposit having been made vide cheque dated march 31, 1992. this claim was disallowed by the assessing officer with the observation that the 'case is covered under section 43b(b) read with the second proviso.' various other deductions were also disallowed. aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal. its claim was rejected. the assessee then filed an appeal before the tribunal. the tribunal accepted the assessee's claim and deleted the addition. aggrieved by the order dated november 28, 2000, passed by the tribunal, the revenue has filed the present appeal.the solitary contention raised by mr. r. p. sawhney, counsel for the revenue, is that in view of the provisions of section 43b(b), the tribunal has erred in allowing the deduction. is it so .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 2001 (HC)

Mukta Sharma Vs. U.P. Industrial Corporation Association Ltd.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-28-2001

Reported in : AIR2002P& H232

bakhshish kaur, j. 1. the challenge in this revision is to the order whereby the matter has been referred to the arbitrator as per order dated november 18, 2000 passed by the learned additional civil judge (senior division), kharar.2. the factual matrix of the case is that mukta sharma plaintiff-petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff) filed the suit for possession after ejectment of the defendants-respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendants') from the tenanted premises and for recovery of rs. 25,000/- per month for the ground floor and rs. 10,000/- for the basement, in all rs. 35,000/- for the illegal use and occupation of premises from july, 1998 till delivery of possession thereof. interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum has also been claimed on the amount.3. the facts not disputed are that the defendants were inducted as tenants in the demised premises and an agreement to this effect was executed on 9.12.1989. initially, it was given or rent at the rate of rs. 7,475/- per month with an escalating clause of enhancement of rent at the rate of 15% after every five years. one of the clauses of the agreement deed related to referring the disputes to the sole arbitrator and that the award given by the arbitrator will be final and binding upon the parties.4. during the pendency of the suit, an application was filed for referring the matter to the arbitrator, which has been allowed by the trial court vide the impugned order. but, according to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2001 (HC)

Tarsem Singh and ors. Vs. Smt. Parkash Kaur

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-21-2001

Reported in : AIR2002P& H258

m.l. singhal, j.1. smt. parkash kaur filed suit for permanent injunction against tarsem singh and sardul singh restraining them from making any addition or alteration or re-construction or changing the nature of the property abcd as shown in the plan attached to the plaint as detailed in the heading of the plaint situated at dhangu road, pathankot illegally, forcibly and without due course of law, on the allegations that the allegations that the property in suit was owned and possessed by ajit singh son of wadhawa singh who had purchased it from the managing officer, jalandhar vide deed of conveyance dated 3.3.97 registered on 5.5.67. after the death of ajit singh, his estate was inherited by his sons narinder singh, gurmit singh and harjinder singh daughter smt. balwinder kaur and widow smt. parkash kaur. smt. parkash kaur plaintiff thus inherited 1/5th share in the property in suit. plaintiff and other heirs of ajit singh filed civil suit no. 88 of 1987 against dalip singh father of the defendants in respect of the property in suit in the court of additional senior subordinate judge, pathankot along with other properties which was decreed on 3.6.1988. besides the property in suit, ajit singh had left properties situated at village ugrewal. batala, pathankot etc. said dalip singh in a fraudulent manner in collusion and conspiracy with arbitrator without any proper authorisation and without delegating the powers to the arbitrator obtained illegal award on 2.9.95. said award .....

Tag this Judgment!


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