Delhi High Court
93,563 judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-I v. C.J. International Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court delivered a judgment on appeals filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) against C.J. International Hotels Pvt. Ltd. concerning TDS-related tax disputes.
Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-I v. C.J. International Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Income Tax authorities' orders confirming the respondent's liability under the Tax Deducted at Source provisions of the Income Tax Act.
Amit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal partly, holding that the appellant was not liable to repay compensation to the insurer due to bona fide belief in the driver's valid licence, while upholding the compensation amount awarded for damage to the army vehicle.
Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-I v. C.J. International Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that tax deduction default proceedings under Section 201 must be initiated within four years and that loans to a non-shareholder cannot be treated as deemed dividends under Section 2(22)(e).
Manoj Chandak v. M/S Tour Lovers Tourism (India) Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that a mediated settlement under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is binding and executable as a decree, and the trial court must allow evidence on voluntariness before refusing to act on it.
Nathia & Ors. v. Mohd Imtiaz & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against motor accident compensation, holding no addition for future prospects without evidence and affirming deductions and enhanced amounts for loss of consortium and love and affection as per binding Supreme Court precedents.
Shriram General Insurance Co Ltd v. Shabir & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal, upholding negligence and a structured, fair method for assessing compensation for loss of services rendered by a deceased homemaker in a motor accident.
Kamini v. New India Ass. Co. Ltd
The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by accepting the deceased's occupation as a car driver and assessing income based on minimum wages, applying appropriate deductions and multipliers for loss of dependency.
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd v. Suraj Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal for recovery rights due to failure to give mandatory notice under Order 12 Rule 8 CPC and prove conscious breach of policy terms.
New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Mithlesh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal and upheld the compensation awarded for the death of a police constable in a motor accident, rejecting claims based on alleged police salary continuation rules and affirming the quantum of damages including loss of love and affection.
Rajeshwar Kumar Gupta v. State CBI
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of an FIR as the petitioner was not named in the FIR but added later in the charge sheet, holding that such relief is not maintainable at this stage.
A Kumar Sharma v. CBI
The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings against an advocate for alleged fraudulent legal opinion in bank loan sanction, holding that mere professional error without direct evidence of conspiracy does not attract criminal liability.
Karan Nath v. Minakshi Nath & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a consent decree is not binding on a non-party son born through surrogacy, affirmed his right to visit his ailing father, and set aside an interim injunction restraining him from representing himself as co-owner of the suit property.
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) v. Mullah Muzib
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's appeal against acquittal under Section 377 IPC and POCSO Act, holding that the prosecution failed to prove sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt due to contradictions and lack of medical evidence.
Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi –XVI v. Ram Gopal
The Delhi High Court held that provisional booking rights constitute acquisition of a capital asset under the Income Tax Act and allowed deduction of improvement expenses, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
Bishan Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for over five years without payment of compensation or full possession are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Siddharth Gupta v. Union of India and Others
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending for over five years without payment of compensation under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, and that the 2014 Ordinance cannot retrospectively deprive vested rights.
Abhishek Jain v. Union of India and Others
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is unpaid, and the 2014 Ordinance cannot retrospectively affect vested rights.
M/S. ADHISHWAR LAL JAIN & SONS (HUF) v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act when possession is not taken and compensation unpaid for over five years, notwithstanding court stay orders or subsequent Ordinance provisos.
Rahul Bhatia & Anr v. Union of India & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was not taken and compensation not paid for over five years, regardless of court stay orders, and that subsequent amendments cannot affect vested rights.