Though Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers v. Basic Equipment Corporation

4 SCC 687Reported decision1976#24834 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing Though Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers v. Basic Equipment Corporation

Principal Com0Missioner of Income Tax (Central) - 3 vs. M/S Suncity Project Pvt. Ltd

ITA/178/2021HC Delhi20 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

…Page 14 of 18 568, wherein the following principles have been culled out:- “17. Accordingly, the principles stated in para 8 of Mechelec case [Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers v. Basic Equipment Corpn., (1976) 4 SCC 687] will now stand superseded, given the amendment of Order 37 Rule 3 and the binding decision of four Judges in Milkhiram case [Milkhiram (India) (P) Ltd. v. Chamanlal Bros., AIR 1965 SC 1698 : (1966) 68 Bom LR 36] , as follows: 17.1. If the defendant satisfies the court that he has a substantial defence, that is, a defence that is likely to su…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 vs. M/S Rainbow Powder Coaters Pvt. Ltd

ITA/30/2018HC Delhi12 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 151Section 96

…2018 Page 9 of 18 appellants/defendants/judgment debtors to leave to defend. Though Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers Vs. Basic Equipment Corporation (1976) 4 SCC 687 has in IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. Vs. Hubtown Ltd. 2017 (1) SCC 568 been held to be not good law qua amended CPC, from the date of its pronouncement, but in ignorance of the same, has been referred to by the Suit Courts in the judgments subject matter of RSA No.30/2018 as well as RFA No.474/2017. 14. The controversy in both the appeals…

Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax 8 vs. M/S Super Malls Pvt. Ltd

ITA/449/2016HC Delhi22 Nov 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 14(1)(e)Section 25B(8)

…nder the Rent Act whereunder eviction application is filed. 21. Before proceeding further, I may mention that though qua Order XXXVII of the CPC the dicta of the Supreme Court in Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers Vs. Basic Equipment Corporation (1976) 4 SCC 687, particularly in para 8 thereof, held:- “(a) If the defendant satisfies the court that he has a good defence to the claim on its merits the plaintiff is not entitled to leave to sign judgment and the defendant is entitled to unconditional leave to defend. (b) If the defendant raises a triable issue indicating that he has a fair or bona fide o…