Evidence — Admissibility — Inconsistent with pleadings — What is — In the present case, in order to prove that the appellant was the adopted son, the appellant summoned the record of the sub-registrar to bring on record adoption...
LATEST JUDGEMENTS
M/s. Shasun Chemicals and Drugs Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chennai
Income Tax — Income Tax Act, 1961 — Ss. 35D, 40A(9) and 43B — Authorisation of expenditure incurred on issue of shares and the deduction for payment of bonus by the assessee to its employees — Legality and justifiability — Held...
Delhi Development Authority v. Rajinder Prasad & Ors.
Land Acquisition and Requisition — Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Ss. 11 and 24(2) — Held, on facts, liberty granted to appellants to initiate fresh...
Veejay Marketing v. Commissioner of Income Tax
These cases are covered by the decision of this Court in ACG Associated Capsules Private Ltd. (Formerly Associated Capsules Private Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central IV, Mumbai [(2012) 3 SCC 321]. Accordingly, the issue...
Delhi Development Authority v. Reena Suri and Ors.
It may be seen that under Section 24(2) of the Act, the proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and culminating in award under Section 11 of the said Act would lapse in case the possession after passing of the...
Raijibhai Bhikhabhai Parmar and Ors. v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (Formerly Known as Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd.) and Anr.
Leave granted.
Chandra Bai (Dead) Thr. Lrs. v. Khandalwal Vipra Vidyalaya Samiti & ors.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 22 R.10 — Substitution of legal representatives — Application for — Delay/laches in filling — It was contended that no period of limitation is prescribed under Or. 22 R. 10 of CPC and that said...
Sachchidanand Singh v. Bihar State Food & Civil Sup. Corp. Ltd.& Ors
Service Law — Retirement benefits including payment of salary — Entitlement to — Petitioner who as Assistant Godown Manager in the Respondent 1/Corporation, was to be retire on reaching the age of superannuation, namely, 58 years...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-II v. M/s. Jyotsna Holdings (P) Ltd.
For the sake of convenience, we take note of the facts in respect of Assessment Year 1987-88 as similar factual situation appears in respect of all three Assessment Years viz. 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.
We had also called upon the State Government to indicate the time frame within which the deficiencies, if any, in plantation work shall be made by the authorities concerned and the areas identified or reserved for such plantation...