« Top Headlines » Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs  Mock Test Papers Series - I & II for Students appearing in CA Foundation January 2027 Examination.  Income Tax Rules 2026: CBDT Introduces Revised Form 161 for Penalty Waiver, Clarifies Misreporting Categories and Taxpayer Relief  ITR Filing and Income Tax Audit Deadline Extended: 5 Critical Things Taxpayers Must Know  Filing Belated ITR for AY 2026-27? Know Which Losses You Can Carry Forward and Which You May Lose  CBDT Extends Tax Audit Report Deadline to October 21, ITR Filing Last Date to November 21 for AY 2026-27  CBDT Extends AY 2026-27 ITR Filing Deadline for Tax-Audit Cases: New Dates and Key Compliance Details  Foreign Assets Missing From Your ITR? Income Tax Department Opens One-Time Disclosure Window  Tax Audit Deadline September 30: Why AIS, TDS and GST Figures May Not Match Your ITR and What Taxpayers Should Do  Tax audit deadline September 30: Common mistakes taxpayers should avoid  Your ITR says ‘verified’, but the refund hasn’t arrived? 5 reasons why your money could be stuck  Missed the ITR Deadline but TDS Refund Is Due? Here’s How You Can Still Claim Your Money «  Banking services to SEZ units out of tax net... Vam can seek tax refund... » Theft convict can`t be employee of bank, says Delhi HC October, 23rd 2006 The Delhi High Court has upheld a public sector bank's decision to fire an employee guilty of theft, saying banks which constantly deal with cash cannot keep a thief on their payrolls.   Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra rejected the plea of Mohinder Pal Grover, who earlier worked as a peon with Vijaya Bank in Delhi, for quashing the bank's order dismissing him.   The petitioner was guilty of committing theft and was rightly removed from service. There was no ground to interfere in the order of punishment," the court said.   Vijaya Bank's counsel told the court that Grover was dismissed from his job after he was twice found guilty of theft twice while on duty.   A chargesheet was served on him for his involvement in a theft of Rs 900 in 1987 and Rs 650 in 1997, the counsel said.   Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against Grover and the inquiry officer found that the charges of theft were true. As a result, the disciplinary authority recommended his removal from service, the counsel said.   Grover had challenged the validity of the departmental inquiry before the appellate authority but his plea was rejected.   He then filed a case with the Industrial Tribunal seeking benefits under the Industrial Disputes Act. The tribunal, after examining evidence from the bank and Grover, passed an order in the bank's favour and said "the decision taken by the bank was fair and proper."