News shortcuts: From the Courts | Top Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | Professional Updates | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
« From the Courts »
 M/s Designarch Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd C/o Raj Kumar & Associates, CAs L – 7A[LGF], South Extension, Part –II New Delhi Vs. The I.T.O Ward – 7(1) New Delhi
 The ACIT, Circle – 59(1), Room No.101, F-Block, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi Vs. M/s. Vasundhara Flavours (Presently known as Gopal Consumer World), 339, Functional Industrial Estate, Patparganj, New Delhi – 110 092.
 The ACIT, Central Circle 25, Room No.322, III Floor, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. Vs. M/s. Digicall Teleservices P. Ltd., D-7 Dhawandeep Apartments, 6 Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi.
 DCIT, Circle – 10(1), New Delhi. Vs. M/s. Girdhar International Pvt. Ltd., F-16, Udyoug Nagar, Peeragari, New Delhi – 110 041.
 M/s. Cellnext Solutions Ltd., New Delhi. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 5 (4), New Delhi. (
 The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 5 (4), New Delhi. vs. M/s. Direct Sales Pvt. Ltd., No.7, Village – Tigipur, P.O. Bakhtawarpur, Delhi – 36.
 Noida Power Co. Ltd.,Gr. Noida,Commercial Complex, H-Block, Alpha-Ii Sector Greater Noida Noida Vs. Dcit, Circle-2,Noida
 Savita Raj, C-14, Sector-56,Noida,Uttar Pradesh-201301 Vs. Acit, Circle-3,Noidaroom No. 410, 4th Floora-2d, Sector-24, Noida
 Curewell (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer
 Geeta Narang, 2768, Gali Arya Samaj, Bazar Sita Ram Delhi – 110 006. Vs. ACIT Circle – 46(1), New Delhi
 M/s Precision Gauges & Tools P. Ltd., 283, Agcr Enclave, New Delhi – 110 092 Vs. Acit, Circle 20(1), New Delhi

2G scam: Centre, CBI oppose probe against PC
September, 21st 2011

The Centre and the CBI on Tuesday opposed Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy's plea for probing home minister P Chidambaram's alleged role in the 2G- scam case, saying the Supreme Court did not have the jurisdiction to pass such an order after filing of chargesheet in the case. Senior counsel KK Venugopal and PP Rao, who are representing the CBI and the Centre respectively, questioned the maintainability of Swamy's plea on the ground that his similar application was pending before special judge OP Saini.

Every single document, filed in the Supreme Court, has also been placed before the trial court. He (Swamy) cannot ride two horses at the same time Let him go and pursue the matter there in the trial court, Venugopal told the bench.

He said the probe into the scam during the tenure of former telecom minister A Raja was complete and the trial court was in the process of framing charges. Now it was for the trial court to take decision on any such issue, Venugopal said.

But Swamy alleged Raja was not alone in taking decisions regarding 2G-spectrum allocation and as the then finance minister Chidambaram was also a party to the conspiracy.

Swamy said his application before the SC was different from the one filed in the special court.

In the trial court I have not asked for CBI inquiry. No other court except the High Courts and the Supreme Court can order CBI probe. I have pleaded with the trial court that Chidambaram should be made co-accused in the case and I also told the trial court that I would like to wait till my application is decided by the Supreme Court. There is no clash, Swamy told the bench.

He alleged that the CBI was determined to give a clean chit to Chidambaram.

Chidambaram was not a passive partner ... but was actively involved in the fixing prices for 2G spectrum along with Raja, he said.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2019 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting