Delhi High Court

30,090 judgments

Year:

Manish Gupta v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-34(1) Delhi

30 Jul 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:6250-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court remanded the challenge to the Section 148 notice and Section 148A(d) order for fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer after hearing the petitioner, following recent Supreme Court precedents.

tax other Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A(d) Income Tax Act Assessment Year 2014-15 Writ Petition

M/S TRANS INDIA LOGISTICS v. GSTO, WARD-60 & ANR

30 Jul 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:6376-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside ex-parte GST demand orders due to improper notice of Show Cause Notices and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, leaving the validity of extension notifications to the Supreme Court.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Show Cause Notice GST Act Section 168A Notification validity

Roopa Goyal v. Income Tax Officer Ward 28(1) Delhi

30 Jul 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar V. Kameswar Rao · 2025:DHC:6280-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration of notices issued under Section 148 and related provisions of the Income Tax Act for AY 2014-15, directing reasoned orders within four weeks.

tax other Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A Income Tax Act time-bar jurisdiction

B.C. Enterprises v. Income Tax Officer Ward 58(3) Delhi

30 Jul 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:6258-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court remanded the reassessment proceedings under Section 148/148A of the Income Tax Act for fresh consideration, directing the Assessing Officer to hear the petitioner and pass reasoned orders within four weeks.

tax other Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A Income Tax Act Section 149 Income Tax Act Section 151A Income Tax Act

Banyan Capital Advisors LLP v. Income Tax Officer Ward 4 (2) Delhi

30 Jul 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:6255-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that notices issued under Section 148 for AY 2015-16 beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 149(1) are invalid as TOLA does not extend limitation for that year, and quashed the impugned notice and proceedings.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 149(1) limitation Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act 2020 Assessment Year 2015-16

Dhurav Real Estate Developers Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1), Delhi & Anr.

30 Jul 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar V. Kameswar Rao · 2025:DHC:6252-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court remanded the reassessment proceedings under Sections 148 and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2013-14 to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioner.

tax other Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A(d) Reassessment proceedings

Shashi Bala Jain v. Union of India & Ors.

30 Jul 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:6251-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court remanded the reassessment notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer after hearing the petitioner, emphasizing compliance with limitation and judicial precedents.

tax other Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A(d) Notice under section 148

Tejinder Singh v. Beverley Singh

30 Jul 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:6898-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court's injunction restraining alienation of the shared matrimonial property during pending maintenance proceedings, affirming Family Court jurisdiction and protective relief in matrimonial disputes.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Family Court jurisdiction Injunction Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act Shared household

Sunil Kumar v. Union of India

30 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:6311-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside a cryptic Tribunal order dismissing recruitment-related claims and remanded the matter for fresh, reasoned consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Tribunal order Reasoned order Cryptic order Remand

Swadeshi Tubes Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 22(2), New Delhi

30 Jul 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar V. Kameswar Rao · 2025:DHC:6259-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court directed remand of disputed income tax notices and orders to the Assessing Officer for fresh hearing and decision within four weeks, emphasizing compliance with statutory and constitutional requirements.

tax other Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A(b) Income Tax Act Section 148A(d) Income Tax Act Section 149(1) Income Tax Act

Union of India and Anr. v. Manoj Kumar

30 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:6244-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld Tribunal orders setting aside termination of employees for alleged impersonation during recruitment, holding that such stigmatic termination requires departmental inquiry and cannot be based solely on an unproved FSL report.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant termination of service probation departmental inquiry stigmatic order

Sachin Yadav v. Union of India and Ors

30 Jul 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025 SCC OnLine SC 290
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking compassionate appointment filed long after the death of the government servant, reaffirming that such appointments must be sought promptly and are not a right or alternative recruitment mode.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant compassionate appointment government service immediate relief public employment

Monika Juneja v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

30 Jul 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:6316

The High Court declined to interfere under its supervisory jurisdiction where the substantive injunction application was pending before the Trial Court and the appellate court had permitted fresh arguments.

civil petition_dismissed ad-interim injunction Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC supervisory jurisdiction Trial Court

Rajesh Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

30 Jul 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:6294-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to treat it as a representation and decide on the issues within six weeks.

administrative other writ petition representation reasonable time administrative decision

Ritu Sharma v. Kailash Chand and Anr

30 Jul 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:6319

The High Court upheld the execution of a possession decree against a judgment debtor, holding that a purchaser of the property during the pendency of the suit cannot resist execution under the doctrine of lis pendens.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant doctrine of lis pendens execution of decree transfer of property pendente lite

Brigadier Balwant Dahiya Trust v. Shakuntala Dahiya and Ors

30 Jul 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:6322

The High Court granted defendant no. 5 one final opportunity to produce a witness despite earlier closure by the Trial Court due to non-service of summons.

civil appeal_allowed summons witness production trial court evidence non-service of summons

Casablanca Apparels Pvt Ltd v. Polo/ Lauren Company L.P.

30 Jul 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3380

The Delhi High Court dismissed the condonation of delay application and consequently the commercial appeal filed beyond the prescribed limitation period, holding that the appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause under the Limitation Act, 1963 and Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay sufficient cause Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Limitation Act, 1963

Sansadiya Adhikari Welfare Society v. Utpal Kumar Tripathi & Ors.

30 Jul 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:6209-DB

A welfare society acquiring land for residential development for members qualifies as a promoter under RERA and must comply with its provisions including pre-deposit requirements.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 promoter definition welfare society cooperative housing society

Sonu S/O Shri Ben Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi

30 Jul 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:6227

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for sexual offences against a child under IPC and POCSO Act, affirming the reliability of the child victim's testimony and rejecting the appeal despite minor discrepancies in timelines.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act child sexual abuse Section 377 IPC Section 29 POCSO presumption

Vipin Gupta v. The State NCT of Delhi

30 Jul 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:6226

The Delhi High Court held that a compromise with legal representatives of a deceased victim cannot be a ground to quash an FIR under Sections 279/304A IPC, rejecting the petition and allowing criminal proceedings to continue.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant quashing of FIR rash and negligent driving Section 279 IPC Section 304A IPC