Delhi Court November 1983 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Rita Vs. Brh Kishore Gandhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Delhi291; ILR1984Delhi289
M.L. Jain, J.(1) The respondent husband is employed in the Reserve Bank of India at Jaipur, while the appellant wife in the Food Corporation of India at Delhi. The parties were married on 2-3-1978 at Delhi. The wife filed a petition No. 5180 for divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act) on 10-1-1980 on the ground of treatment with cruelty. It appears that the husband also filed a petition No. 61j80 under sec,.9 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights. By his order of 22-7-1980, the trial Judge declined to consolidate the two petitions and continued to proceed with the wife's petition and eventually dismissed it on 26-8-1982. Hence, this appeal by the wife.(2) The wife alleged in her petition that soon after the marriage, the mother-in-law started complaining about the dowry. However, on 819-1978 the couple left for Simla and stayed there for about four days, where she discovered that the husband was a drunkard. He also complained that her parents did not ...
Kiran Products Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT169TriDel
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as]a Revision Application before the Central Government which, under Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal filed before it.2. The only and simple issue arising for decision in the present matter is whether the goods imported by the appellants, namely, the product by the name of "Delrin 500" at the Port of Bombay and cleared under cover of Bill of Entry Cash No. 515 dated 2-8-1980, was entitled to assessment at the concessional rate of basic and additional duties of Customs in terms, of Customs Notification No. 116/80 dated 19-6-1980.The said Notification exempts the goods specified in the Table annexed to it from so much of the basic duty of Customs as is in excess of 45% ad valorem and from the whole of duty of Customs subject to certain conditions. Serial No. 6 of the Table specifies "Acetal copolymer of purity 99% and above". The goods imported- De...
S.K. Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT216TriDel
1. This appeal dated 6th May, 1983 has been filed on behalf of M/s.S.K. Industries, 82-Vijaya Nagar Colony, Agra against the order of the Collector of Central Excise. Kanpur No. 2/Collr, MP/83. (This order does not bear any date. Although the appellant says that it is dated 5-4-1983, we are unable to find where this date has been shown.) 2. The dispute is about a product manufactured by S.K. Industries of Agra and which they call leather dressing. According to S.K.Industries, a leather dressing is a liquid chemical composition of aqueous or organic solvents. Natural and synthetic resin like rosin and maleic resin are dissolved in denatured spirit in a circular tank.Retarders such as glycerine, butyl acetate, dibutyl phthalate are used.The dissolved solution is filtered remove dust particles through a centrifugal separator. The solution is then pumped into storage tank from which bottles of requisite sizes for sale or marketing are filled.3. A great deal of argument has been presented ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT259TriDel
1. The facts of this case in brief are that Proviso (v) to Exemption Notification No. 226/77-CE, dated 15-7-77 fixed a concessional rate of duty for Drill as defined from time to time by the Textile Commissioner under the Cotton Textile (Control) Order, 1948 for which maximum ex-factory prices had not been specified by the Textile Commissioner under the said order. By the impugned order in appeal, the Central Board of Excise and Customs held that 4-harness Drill manufactured and cleared by the respondents was entitled to this concession. The Central Government was, however, of the view that the said Drill did not conform to the definition of Drill as laid down by the Textile Commissioner and, accordingly, issued the impugned show cause notice for revising the Boards' Order-in-appeal under the then Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The proceedings initiated by the said show cause notice are now before us as the subject appeal by the Department.2. The Department's...
Hindustan Insecticides Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-1983
Reported in: (1988)(33)ELT575TriDel
1. Hindustan Insecticides Ltd., Eluru bought 4196 litres of benzene from Hindustan Steel, Bhilai and the spirit was sent in two railway tankers. Of the despatched quantity of benzene, Hindustan Insecticides received 20592 litres on 12.7.1979 (there was a transit loss of 186 litres), but the other wagon carrying 21138 litres did not arrive.2. As the sale and purchase of the benzene was under Chapter X procedure and the clearance was given concessional duty under Notification No. 34/73-C.E., the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Erna-kulam Division, Cochin, began proceedings to demand duty under rule 196 on the 21138 litres of benzene which did not reach destination. The duty demanded was Rs. 57,389.67. The Assistant Collector held that it had not been shown satisfactorily that the benzene had been lost or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident during transport from the manufacturer of benzene to the factory of Hindustan Insecticides or during handling or storage in th...
Talbros Automotive Components Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT193TriDel
1. These are nine appeals arising out of the combined Order-in Appeal No. S/49-1523/ 77R dated 10-1-1978 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, on 10 appeals (one being a duplicate appeal) filed to him. The appellants had originally filed a single revision application to the Central Government which under Section 131B of the Customs Act, 1962, stands transferred to this Tribunal to be disposed of as if it was an appeal presented before the Tribunal. They have subsequently filed eight supplementary appeals having regard to the practice of the Tribunal to require separate appeals to it in respect of each of the appeals covered by a combined Order-in-Appeal.2. The issue in all these appeals is the same, that is, regarding the classification of several consignments of goods imported by the appellants and described in the Order-in-Appeal as "Beater addition asbestos jointing". These were classified by the Customs authorities under Heading No. 68.01/16 of the Customs Tariff S...
Shakuntia and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-1983
Reported in: [1985]58CompCas677(Delhi); 1984(1)Crimes261; 25(1984)DLT33; 1984(6)DRJ92
R.N. Aggarwal, J.(1) The appellants Laxman Kumar aged 25, Subhash Chander aged 28 and Smt. Shakuntala aged 53 were sent up for trial for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge against them was that on 1st December, 1980 at about 9 p.m. they in furtherance of a common intention had caused the death of Sudha Goel (wife of the first accused). The learned Additional Sessions Judge, who tried the case found all the accused guilty of the offence charged with and has sentenced them to death. The accused have come in appeal. There is also the reference for confirmation of the death sentence. This judgment shall dispose of both the appeal and the reference.(2) Laxman Kumar and Subhash Chander are brothers and Smt. Shakuntala is their mother,(3) The deceased Sudha was married to Laxman Kumar on 18th February 1980. After the marriage the couple started residing at 9-B, Janta Flats, Ashok Vihar, Phase III. Subhash Chander is the eldest brother. He is married and has two ...
J.L. Morison, Son and Jones Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-02-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT251TriDel
1. These proceedings, since transferred to the Tribunal pursuant to the provisions of Section 35P(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to us the Act), arose as a result of rejection of claims for refund of duty paid, that had been filed by M/s. Smith and Nephew (India) Limited. The two refund claims, filed separately by the said company, dated 22-8-1973 and 23-8-1974 covering the period June 1971 to July 1973 and August 1973 to July 1974 respectively, were disallowed by one common order dated 5-12-1974 passed by Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-I Division. The appeal against the said order was also rejected by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, by his order dated 3-12-1975.2. In the meantime, on an order of amalgamation having been passed by High Courts of Bombay and Karnataka in or about September, 1975, the said company stood merged with J.L. Morison, Son & Jones (India) Limited whereby the assets and liabilities of Smith and Ne...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R. Dalmia (Decd.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-02-1983
Reported in: [1987]163ITR519(Delhi)
Chadha, J.1. These two references under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), pose the following questions for the opinion of the court : '1. Whether the Tribunal was right in accepting the assessed's claim of adjustments to the balance-sheet dated September 30, 1961, by reference to the sum of Rs. 47.31 lakhs and on that basis, directing the deletion of the disallowance of interest of Rs. 5,04,537 made by the Income-tax Officer 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the alternative, the Tribunal was justified in restricting the disallowance of the assessed's claim of interest to Rs. 2,14,984 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there were any capital gains 'arising' to the company between April 1, 1946, and March 31, 1948 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the company could be said to 'possess' accumulated profits to the extent necessary to cover the net ...
Mohinder Singh Dahiya Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-02-1983
Reported in: 25(1984)DLT150
H.L. Anand, J.(1) This order would dispose of Criminal Revision Petition No. 247/83 and Criminal Misc. (Main) 581/83. (2) Dr. Mahender Singh Dahiya, an Indian National, belonging to Village Tinkpur, District Sonepat, Haryana, who is an M.B.B.S. and did his M.S. in Orthopedics from All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, married one Namita Lochav, a U.K. citizen of Indian origin in September. 1978. He is alleged to have murdered his wife while the couple were on a honeymoon in Brussels on or about 27/28th May, 1979 and left Brussels the next day and informed his in-laws in London that his wife had abandoned him and thereafter been in India, practicing medicine in a small town in the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is alleged that further investigation in Belgium led to the recovery of different parts of the body of a human being from different places, which were allegedly identified as the parts of the body of Namita Lochav. On receipt of information by the C.B.I, from interpoll...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »