Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 257 (0.75 seconds)
Documents citing Lekh Raj Sharma vs Yash Pal Gupta on 30 June, 2015

Bateshwar Jha vs Shyam Nandan Jha on 18 November, 2023

Further, as discussed above, non-mentioning of grant of loan in Income Tax Returns of the complainant does not make the CA No. 22/2023 Bateshwar Jha vs. Shyam Nandan Jha Page 16 of 21 transaction illegal. This was held by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case of "Lekh Raj Sharma vs. Yash Pal Gupta" [Crl. L.P. 567/2014 dated 30.06.2015]. Therefore, this case also can be differentiated from the facts in hand.
Delhi District Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manish Chauhan vs Anil Kumar Meena on 13 August, 2025

1 It has been argued by Ld. Counsel for the complainant that in Raj Sharma v Yash Pal (Supra) reference was placed by the court on Mr. Krishna P. Morajkar vs. Mr. Joe Ferrao, 2013 CRIJ (NOC) 572 Bombay wherein the Court had observed: "The underlined observations do not disclose as to where can one find a prohibition on recovering amounts not disclosed in income tax returns. With utmost humility, I have to state that I have not come across any provision of Income Tax Act, which makes an amount not shown in the income tax returns unrecoverable. The entire scheme of the Income Tax Act is for ensuring that all amounts are accounted for. If some amounts are not accounted for, the person would be visited with the penalty or at times even prosecution under the Income Tax Act, but it does not mean that the borrower can refuse to pay the amount which he has borrowed simply, because there is some infraction of the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Infraction of provisions of Income Tax Act would be a matter between the revenue and the defaulter and advantage thereof cannot be taken by the borrower. In my humble view, to say that an amount not disclosed in the income tax returns becomes irrecoverable would itself defeat the provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In the light of aforesaid discussion, the argument by Ld counsel for the accused that the alleged loan is a not a legally enforceable debt is not tenable.
Delhi District Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Cc Ni Act No. 1306/2022 Mr. Vasim Ahmed vs . Javed Khan Page No. 1 Of 22 Wal 14:11:25 ... on 24 August, 2023

On the other hand, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case of Lekh Raj Sharma Vs Yash Pal Gupta, MANU/DE/1886/2015 has held that non-disclosure of loan in Income Tax Return will not make it unrecoverable. In view of the same, this Court is of the opinion that mere non- disclosure of loan in Income Tax Return will not make it an unrecoverable loan.
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Joginder Pal vs The State on 9 October, 2015

31.Ld. counsel further contended that the accused had issued a blank cheque which has been misused by the complainant thus, the present complaint is not maintainable. It has been held by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Crl. L.P 567/2014 titled as Lekh Raj Sharma versus Yash Pal Gupta that in case the accused issues a blank cheque it means that accused is authorizing the complainant to fill up the due amount in the cheque and present the same for encashment. In the present case, the accused has failed to prove his defence that he had issued blank cheque towards the security and even if it is assumed that accused issued the blank cheque to the complainant, yet, in view of the settled law, it is to be assumed that he had authorized the complainant to fill up the due amount and present the cheque for encashment.
Delhi District Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next