VERSUS M/S. BHAGAT CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD... Respondent. VERSUS M/S. M.R.G. PLASTIC TECHNOLOGIES AND ORS... Respondent

Similar documents
ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.5 SECTION IIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

the income was received from letting out of the properties, it was in the nature of rental income. He, thus, held that it would be treated as income f

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. - versus M/S ZORAVAR VANASPATI LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER. Judgment delivered on: ITA 243/2008. versus

CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos OF 2004

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2017 J U D G M E N T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON: versus

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income-tax) (Original Side) I.T.A. No.219 of 2003

RANCHI CLUB LTD. IS STILL GOOD LAW [Published in 267 ITR (Jour.) p.40 (Part-5)]

it has been received or not. We have heard Ms. Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellant herein. She has brought t

Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No. 7 OF 2019 [Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014] Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 171/2001. Date of decision: 18th July, 2014

% Date of order; December 14,2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VERSUS

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 2. + ITA 665/2015. versus AND 3. + ITA 666/2015. versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. ITA No.798 /2007. Judgment reserved on: 27th March, 2008

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.2530 OF Birla Institute of Technology.Appellant(s) VERSUS

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: ITA 232/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

G.A no.1150 of 2015 ITAT no.52 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2017 VINOD VERMA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD. Judgment reserved on Judgment delivered on Income Tax Appeal No.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 8273/2015 & CM No /2015 (for stay) versus

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT R A N C H I ---- Tax Appeal No. 04 of I.T.O., Ward NO.1, Ranchi. Appellant. Versus

with ITA No.66/2011 % Decision Delivered On: JANUARY 20, VERSUS ORIENT CERAMICS & INDS. LTD. VERSUS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2007 COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, RAJKOT VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DVAT ACT, 2004 Decided on : ST.APPL. 65/2014. versus

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2007 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT ITA 3/2001 Date of Decision: 5th September, 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO.

DATED: 9th January, 2009

ITA No. 331 of IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. ITA No. 331 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: November 4, 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction (Original Side) I.T.A. No.264 of 2003

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + WP(C)No.8902/2007 & CM No.16817/2007

For The Respondent : Mr. Basava Prabhu S. Patil, Sr. Adv., Mr. V. N. Raghupathy,Adv.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. ITA No-160/2005. Judgment reserved on: 12th March, 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER. Judgment delivered on : ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus PRABHU DAYAL AND BROTHERS

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and A.D. Jain JM]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P.(C) No.5282/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 2nd July, 2013

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO OF 2015) VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION No OF 2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Tax Appeal No. 7 of 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

challenging the order dated passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P. 2. The appellant had approached the Central

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).9310/2017 (Arising from Special Leave Petition(s)No.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3198 OF 2019 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No of 2017) VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Reserved on: 21st February, 2012 Pronounced on: 2nd July, 2012 MAC.APP.

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH C. Vinay Mishra. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. IT Appeal No. 895 (Bang.) of s.p. no. 124 (Bang.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate VERSUS

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF B.L. Passi... Appellant(s)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA ITA NO.

M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd. The Additional Commissioner of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 20 th January, 2010

Appellant :- Commissioner Of Income Tax, Meerut And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INTEREST ON THE AMOUNT OF LEAVE ENCASHMENT Judgment delivered on W.P.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of decision : 26 th November, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. Through Mr.P.K.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H : NEW DELHI VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : THE DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1957 Date of decision: 31st July, 2012 LPA. No.48/2006.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT. Judgment delivered on : ITA Nos. 697/2007, 698/2007 & 699/2007.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena A. Pillai, JM

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF Tapan Kumar Dutta...

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. Dated this the 17 th day of June 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No OF Food Corporation of India.Appellant(s) VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT RESERVED ON: PRONOUNCED ON: ITA No.119/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD. TAX APPEAL NO. 866 of 2013 ======================================

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER. Date of decision: 7th March, LPA No. 741/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGNAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1017 OF 2011

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Advocate. Versus

Vs. Date of hearing : Date of Pronouncement : O R D E R

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.634 OF Navin Jindal...Appellant(s) Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF JULY 2015 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3 OF 2013 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.1381 OF Chennai Port Trust.Appellant(s) VERSUS

+ LPA 330/2005 & CM No.1802/2005 (for stay) Versus J U D G M E N T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT Decided on: ITA 31/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. M/s Lakhani Marketing Incl., Plot No.131, Sector 24, Faridabad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 605/2012. CIT... Appellant. Through: Mr Sanjeev Rajpal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus ORIENTAL STRUCTURAL

Indus Tower Limited and another. State of Andhra Pradesh and others

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH "F : NEW DELHI. Before Shri. G. E. Veerabhadrappa, VP and Shri. George Mathan, JM

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER. ITA No.

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: versus

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA. ITA No.450/Ag/2015 Assessment Year:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8732/2015

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH 'B' NEW DELHI. ITA Nos.2337 & 4337/Del/2010 Assessment Years: &

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

Transcription:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1169 OF 2006 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI... Appellant VERSUS M/S. BHAGAT CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD.... Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1198 OF 2006 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-XVII... Appellant VERSUS M/S. M.R.G. PLASTIC TECHNOLOGIES AND ORS.... Respondent O R D E R Civil Appeal No. 1169 of 2006 The present appeal by the Revenue raises a question which lies within a very narrow compass. On the facts of the present case, it is an admitted position that the assessment order dated 29.03.1995 of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi, does not contain any direction for the payment of interest. The appellate order in the present case merely stated that interest is payable under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'), without more. In the first round, before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'ITAT'), the ITAT's attention was not drawn to the payment of interest at all. On an application made, the ITAT by its order dated 12.11.2002 specifically held that since no direction had actually been given in the assessment order for payment of interest, the present case would be covered by the decision of this Court reported in 'Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. v. Ranchi Club Ltd' [(2001) 247 ITR 209] which merely dismissed the appeal affirming the High Court judgment reported in 'Ranchi Club Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax' [(1996) 217 ITR 72]. In an appeal to the High Court of Delhi under Section 260 A of the Act, the impugned judgment dated 23.07.2003 merely reiterates that the present issue has been decided by the judgment in 'Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. v. Ranchi Club Ltd' [(2001) 247 ITR 209] referred to above. Shri Guru Krishna Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue, presented three submissions before us and relied upon the decision contained in 'Kalyankumar Ray v. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal-IV, Calcutta [1992 Supp (2) SCC 424]. shetty@ssrshetty.co.in 1

According to him, the interest under Section 234B is, in any case, part of Form I.T.N.S. 150 which is not only signed by the assessing officer but it is really part of the assessment order itself. His other submissions are that the judgment in Ranchi Club Ltd.'s case is distinguishable inasmuch as it arose only in a writ petition and arose in the context of best judgment assessment whereas on the facts of the present case, there was a shortfall of advance tax that was paid, which, therefore, led to the automatic levy of interest under Section 234B. In addition, he argued before us that not only is Section 234B a provision which is parasitic in nature, in that, it applies the moment there is shortfall of advance tax or income tax payable under the Act but that it is compensatory in nature. Countering this submission, Ms. Shipra Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, supported the judgment of the ITAT and the High Court by stating that the judgment in Ranchi Club Ltd.'s case squarely covers the facts of this case. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We do not feel the need to go into the various submissions made by Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar as this appeal can be disposed of on a short ground. In a three-judges Bench decision, viz., 'Kalyankumar Ray v. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal-IV, Calcutta' [1992 Supp (2) SCC 424], this Court took note of a similar submission made by the assessee in that case and repelled it as follows: - "6. In this context, one may take notice of the fact that, initially, Rule 15(2) of the Income Tax Rules prescribed Form 8, a sheet containing the computation of the tax, though there was no form prescribed for the assessment of the income. This sub-rule was dropped in 1964. Thereafter, the matter has been governed by departmental instructions. Under these, two forms are in vogue. One is the form of, what is described as, the "assessment order", (I.T. 30 or I.T. N.S.65). The other is what described the "Income Tax Computation Form" or "Form for Assessment of Tax/Refund" (I.T.N.S.150). The practice is that after the "assessment order" is made by the ITO, the tax is calculated and the necessary columns of I.T.N.S. 150 are filled up showing the net amount payable in respect of the assessment year. This form is generally prepared by the staff but it is checked and signed or initialed by the ITO and the notice of demand follows thereafter. The statute does not in terms require the service of the assessment order or the other form on the assessee and contemplates only the service of a notice of demand. It seems that while the "assessment order" used to be generally sent to the assessee, the other form was retained on file and a copy occasionally sent to the assessee. I.T.N.S. 150 is also a form for determination of tax payable and when it is signed or initialed by the ITO it is certainly an order in writing by the ITO determining the tax payable within the meaning of Section 143(3). It may be, as stated in CIT v. Himalaya Drug Co. only a tax calculation form for departmental purposes as it also contains columns and code numbers to facilitate computerisation of the particulars contained therein for statistical purposes but this does not detract from its being considered as an order in writing determining the sum payable by the assessee. We are unable to see why this document, which is also in writing and which has received the imprimatur of the ITO should not be treated as part of the assessment order in the wider sense in which the expression has to be understood in the context of Section 143(3). There is no dispute in the present case shetty@ssrshetty.co.in 2

that the ITO has signed the form I.T.N.S. 150. We therefore, think that the statutory provision has been duly complied with and that the assessment order was not in any manner vitiated." The Supreme Court judgment in the Ranchi Club Ltd.'s case, is a one line order which merely states: - "We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. We find no merit in the appeals. The civil appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs." The High Court judgment which was affirmed by this Court as aforesaid arose in the context of a challenge to the vires of Sections 234A and 234B of the Act. After repelling the challenge to the vires of the two sections, the High Court found that interest had been levied on tax payable after assessment and not on the tax as per the return. Following this Court's judgment in JK Synthetics Ltd. [(1994) 94 STC 422], the High Court held that the assessee is not supposed to pay interest on the amount of tax which may be assessed in a regular assessment under Section 143(3) or best judgment under Section 144 as he is not supposed to know or anticipate that his return of income would not be accepted. The High Court further held that interest is payable in future only after the dues are finally determined. Given the above controversy, it is necessary to set out the provisions contained in Section 234B. The relevant portion of Section 234B reads as under: - "234B. Interest for defaults in payment of advance tax. - (1) Subject to the other provisions of this section, where, in any financial year, an assessee who is liable to pay advance tax under section 208 has failed to pay such tax or, where the advance tax paid by such assessee under the provisions of section 210 is less than ninety per cent of the assessed tax, the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate of one per cent for every month or part of a month comprised in the period from the 1st day of April next following such financial year to the date of determination of total income under subsection (1) of section 143 and where a regular assessment is made, to the date of such regular assessment, on an amount equal to the assessed tax or, as the case may be, on the amount by which the advance tax paid as aforesaid falls short of the assessed tax. Explanation 1 - In this section, "assessed tax means the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 and where a regular assessment is made, the tax on the total income determined under such regular assessment as reduced by the amount of, - (i) any tax deducted or collected at source in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XVII on any income which is subject to such deduction or collection and which is taken into account in computing such total income; shetty@ssrshetty.co.in 3

(ii) India; any relief of tax allowed under section 90 on account of tax paid in a country outside (iii) any relief of tax allowed under section 90A on account of tax paid in a specified territory outside India referred to in that section; (iv) any deduction, from the Indian income-tax payable, allowed under section 91, on account of tax paid in a country outside India; and (v) any tax credit allowed to be set off in accordance with the provisions of section 115JAA or section 115JD." It will be seen that under the provisions of Section 234B, the moment an assessee who is liable to pay advance tax has failed to pay such tax or where the advance tax paid by such an assessee is less than 90 per cent of the assessed tax, the assessee becomes liable to pay simple interest at the rate of one per cent for every month or part of the month. Shri Guru Krishna Kumar is right in stating that levy of such interest is automatic when the conditions of Section 234B are met. We are of the view that the facts of the present case are squarely covered by the decision contained in Kalyankumar Ray's case inasmuch as it is undisputed that contained a calculation of interest payable on the tax assessed. This being the case, it is clear that as per the said judgment, this Form must be treated as part of the assessment order in the wider sense in which the expression has to be understood in the context of Section 143, which is referred to in Explanation 1 to Section 234B. This being the case, we set aside the judgment of the High Court and allow the appeal of the Revenue. There will be no orders as to cost. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the abovesaid order in Civil Appeal No. 1169 of 2006...., J. [ A.K. SIKRI ]..., J. [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ] New Delhi; August 06, 2015. C.A. No. 1169/2006 7 ITEM NO.113+116 COURT NO.11 SECTION IIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No. 1169/2006 shetty@ssrshetty.co.in 4

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, DELHI Appellant(s) VERSUS M/S. BHAGAT CONSTURCTION CO. PVT. LTD. Respondent(s) (With office report) WITH Civil Appeal No. 1198/2006 CIT, DELHI-XVII Appellant(s) VERSUS M/S. M.R.G. PLASTIC TECHNOLOGIES AND ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) Date : 06/08/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. T. M. Singh, Adv. Mr. Jitin Singhal, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, Adv. Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv. Mr. S. A. Haseeb, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Shipra Ghose, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No. 1169 of 2006 is allowed and Civil Appeal No. 1198 of 2006 is disposed of in terms of the signed order. (Nidhi Ahuja) (Suman Jain) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER [Signed order is placed on the file.] C.A. No. 1169/2006 8 shetty@ssrshetty.co.in 5