Delhi Court February 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.
Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1280DTri(Delhi)
1. This appeal arose on account of a demand for Rs. 2923 by the Superintendent of Central Excise, Range IV, Division V, Bombay C. No.CEXA/CS-IV/ TATA/2355 dated 12-9-74 on Tata Oil Mills Ltd., Bombay.This amount was demanded as duty on the V.N.E. Oil of 29.230 tonnes which the mills are said to have produced between January, 1974 and July, 1974. In his order No. V (12) 2-16/75/1677 dated 29-1-76, the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay confirmed the order of the Assistant Collector and came to the finding that the duty on V.N.E.Oil had to be paid by the appellants.2. Under notification No. 33/63-Central Excise, V.N.E. Oils used in the manufacture of goods falling under Items 13, 14 and 15 of the Central Excise Tariff were exempted from duty. The notification also has a proviso that the exemption is not applicable if the finished products were not liable to excise duty or chargeable to nil rate of duty. The mills after processing the oil, hardens it to obtain vegetable tallow...
India Paint Colour and Varnish Co. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC753DTri(Delhi)
1. The dispute is regarding the assessment of the .product "Catalyst for Zinc Rich Primer" manufactured by M/s. India Paints the appellants, who claim that the product is a catalyst used in conjuction with an expoxy primer. The two are mixed together immediately before use as "Zinc rich epoxy primer". The two, i.e. the primer base and the catalyst are cleared together in a two pack system for use as primer and should be assessed together as paint under Item 14-1(5). They are m fact Paying duty on the total value of base and catalyst at rates applicable to Item 15-I(5) CET. However, the Central Excise authorities have assessed the catalyst as a resin under Item 15-A(l)(i).2. M/s. India Paints say, and it has not been disputed by the department, that the catalyst contains duty paid polyamide synthetic resin dissolved in volatile organic solvent. The solid polyamide is bought in the market and is duty paid. The appellants claim that they clear the epoxy base and the polyamide resin toget...
Indian Airlines Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC737DTri(Delhi)
1. This is a revision application to the Government of India under Section 131 of the Customs Act, 1962 (as then applicable) which in accordance with Section 131B(2) ibid, is to be proceeded with as if it were an appeal filed before the Tribunal. (It is hereinafter referred to for convenience as "the appeal"). After notice had been duly issued, the matter was taken up for hearing on 17th February, 1983.2. This appeal relates to the levy of additional duty of customs under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, on the aircraft tyres sent abroad by M/s. Indian Airlines (hereinafter referred to as "the appellants") and re-imported after being retreaded. The Customs authorities charged the re-imported tyres to basic customs duty under Section 2 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, read with the First Schedule thereto, and also to the additional duty (commonly referred to as "countervailing duty") under Section 3(1) ibid. However, the duty in both cases was calculated not on the assessa...
Hindustan Copper Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC535DTri(Delhi)
1. This is a revision application to the Government of India which, under Section 35P(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, is to be proceeded with as if it were an appeal filed before the Tribunal.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the Appellants are manufacturers of copper in crude form (falling under Item 26-A(1) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule) starting from copper ore as also brass sheets falling under Item 26-A(2) of the said Schedule (hereinafter referred to as the CET). At the material time, Central Excise Notification No. 74/65 dated 1.5.1965, as amended by notification No. 187/73, dated 29.9.1973 prescribed a concessional rate of basic excise duty of Rs. 500/- per M.T. on copper manufactures including copper sheets (Item 26A(2) of the CET) provided that such products were manufactured out of copper or copper alloys in any form and on the virgin copper or the copper content of the alloy appropriate excise duty or additional (countervailing) duty ...
Shri Radhey Shiam Bansal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-1983
Reported in: 1983(5)DRJ45; 1983LabIC1086; 1983(1)SLJ610(Delhi)
Avadh Behari Rohtagi, J.1. This is a straightforward case. On 11-9-1963 Radhey Shiam Bansal, petitioner, entered the service of the Ministry of Education, Government of India, as a peon. In 1967 he became a regular lower division clerk. He was posted in the Manual Section of the Central Hindi Directorate in the Ministry of Education. This section was mainly concerned with the translation of manuals etc. from English into Hindi.2. On 31st December, 1970, the President of India issued a notification transferring this translation work from the Central Hindi Directorate (For short C.H.D.) to the Ministry of Home Affairs. In the Ministry of Home Affairs a separate bureau was constituted on 1-3-1971 called the Central Translation Bureau (For short C.T.B.). By art office order of the same date i.e. 1-3-1971 nearly every member of the staff of C.H.D. was transferred to C.T.B. but the petitioner was not transferred. He was left behind. The names of those who were transferred were set out in the...
Mohd. Ismail Vs. Shri M.K. Rai and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Delhi326
Prakash Narain, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges the order dated April 11, 1972 passed by the Competent Authority under Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act, 1956 whereby permission was granted to Smt. Maina Devi and Shri Sumer Chand, owners/landlords of the property occupied by the petitioner for commencing eviction proceedings against him.2. Petitioner resides in property No. 1444-45, Gali Fayyazganj, Bahadurgarh Road, Delhi. The monthly rent was Rs. 5,50 per month. The owners/landlords filed an application under Section 19 of the aforesaid Act for permission to start eviction proceedings. The grounds given were that the petitioner was in arrears of rent though he had means to pay the rent and property was required bonafide by the owners/landlords for themselves. The Competent Authority rightly come to the conclusion that the question of arrears of rent was not a matter which he is to decide....
Nihal Singh Vs. Parkash Chand Khurana
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Delhi184; 24(1983)DLT145; 1983(5)DRJ23; 1983RLR330
Sultan Singh, J.1. This second appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act') is directed against the judgment and order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 17th July, 1982 confirming the order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 29th January, 1982 dismissing the appellant's application for recovery of possession under Section 21 of the Act. Briefly the facts are that on 3rd January, 1977 the appellant and the respondent jointly filed an application under Section 21 of the Act seeking permission for letting second floor of the premises at plot No. R-810, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi by the appellant to the respondent for a fixed period of two years on a monthly rent of Rs. 1000/-. It has been alleged in this application that the appellant, owner-landlord does not require the second floor premises for a period of two years.2. The landlord made his statement before the Additional Controller as follows on 4th January, 1977 :--'I am the owner of the p...
Karnataka Scooters Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC446DTri(Delhi)
1. The case was argued before us on 17-2-1983. The appellants manufacture scooters for which they obtain duty-paid power pack (engine) from M/s Scooters India Ltd., Lucknow. Exemption Notification No. 21/77-CE permitted them set off of duty of excise already paid on the engines fitted to their scooters. By virtue of another exemption Notification No. 198/76-CE, they were entitled to a further exemption which was in the nature of an incentive for their excess production of scooters calculated in the specified manner. The relevant portion of this notification exempted their excess production of scooters "from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon under the said item [read with any notification issued under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and in force for the time being] as is in excess of 75 per cent of such duty, ." The dispute involved in the present appeal is whether while assessing duty on the scooter, the exemption (or incentive) under Notification No....
O.N. Tandon, Vs. Food Corporation of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1983
Reported in: 1983(5)DRJ124
A.B. Rohatgi, J.1. This is a case of two army officers who fought in the war of India with China in 1962. They were recruited in the Army as Emergency Commissioned Officers in 1963. Hasib Ahmad, petitioner No. 2, joined the army on 19-7-1963. After the war he was released. On 1-9-1969 he was released from the army having served there for a period of 6 years, 1 month and 14 days. Similarly, K.N. Singh, petitioner No. 3, joined the army on 11-4-1963. On 1-11-1967 he was released having served for a period of 4 years, 6 months and 22 days in the armed forces.2. Petitioner No. 1 has died. thereforee, his case need not be considered.3. Petitioners 2 and 3 were appointed as Senior Assistant Managers (General) in the Food Corporation of India, respondent No. 1. Petitioner No. 2 was appointed on 1-11-1972. Petitioner No. 3 was appointed on 11-12-1972.4. The Food Corporation of India is a corporate body. It was created by the Food Corporation Act 1964. It has power to frame regulations. In exer...
Vilayat Raj Alias Vilayat Khan Vs. Smt. Sunila
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Delhi351; 23(1983)DLT434; ILR1984Delhi201
Leila Seth, J.1. The interesting point raised in this appeal pertains towhether an apostate of Hinduism can file a petition under the Hindu MarriageAct, 1955 seeking dissolution of a marriage solemnized under that Act, priorto his change of faith. 2. On 17th June, 1978, Sunila, the respondent was married to Vilayat Raj, the petitioner. The parties were both Hindus at the time. The marriage took place in Delhi and was solemnized in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies. On 15th September, 1980, a child was born of this marriage. Subsequently, the parties spearated.3. Thereafter, on 1st October, 1981, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (to be referred to in short as 'the Act'). He sought dissolution of the above mentioned Hindu marriage on the ground of cruelty.4. In the said petition, the petitioner indicated his name as Vilayat Raj alias Vilayat Khan son of Krishan Lal. In the paragraph dealing with status, he set out his status...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »