Delhi Court March 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.
Sudesh Bhandari Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC604DTri(Delhi)
1. In this Revision Application under Section 131 of the Customs Act, 1962, as it was at the relevant time, and transferred to the Tribunal pursuant to Section 131B of the Customs Act, as amended by Finance Act, 1980 (44 of 1980), the admitted facts are as follows: (a) The Appellant imported into India on 8.4.82 about 117 Gms. of gold and Indian currency amounting to Rs. 3001/- together with 30 other articles in his baggage and declared all of them to the Customs Officers in terms of Section 77 of the Customs Act; (b) It was only in regard to the 30 other items of the baggage and not the gold and Indian currency for which he obtained a detention receipt for re-export out of India, in terms of Section 80 of the Customs Act; (c) In consequence of the declaration of the gold and Indian currency as stated supra and his failure to include the same in his request for detention for re-export, a spot adjudication of the gold and currency was made; (d) In as much as the import of gold and Indi...
international General Stores Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC493DTri(Delhi)
1. This matter originally was a revision petition which has been transferred to the Appellate Tribunal and is taken up as an appeal for consideration.2. The learned Counsel for the Appellant argued that in the absence of reasonable belief or reason to believe that the goods were smuggled, the search and seizure were illegal. This point, however, was not pressed because even an illegal seizure can lead to confiscation if the goods are proved to be smuggled. Besides, no prima facie illegality was found in the search and seizure. (1) In the reply to the show-cause notice the petitioners produced purchase invoices covering the goods seized. These invoices have not been disproved by the Department with the help of concrete evidence; (2) M/s Raja Bros., from whom some of the goods were purchased are declarants under Section 11C of the Customs Act, 1962 and they are maintaining all the prescribed accounts as required under Section 11B ibid. The petitioners after submitting valid purchase vou...
Jai Chand BhasIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Delhi508; 1983(5)DRJ97; 1983RLR426
Sachar, J.1. This matter has been placed before us on a reference made by the learned Single Judge, because it was pleaded before him that there was a conflict between judgments of learned two Single Judges of this Court namely in 1980 RLR 313 (Vilayatiram Mital v. Union of India) decided by Dalip Kapur, J., and 1982 RLR 12 (Ram Nath Mehra & Sorts v. Union of India), decided by Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J. On the point as to who is to decide whether if the demand for arbitration is not made within a stated period, the claim will be deemed to have been waived Kapur, J. has held that it is for the arbitrator. Avadh Behari, J. has held to the contrary, and says it is for the court, before making a reference under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act.2. The applicant and the Union of India entered into a contract for the construction of a temporary accommodation for Kendriya Vidyalaya at Faridabad. The terms were reproduced in the agreement. Clause 25 of the agreement provides that except where o...
Sat NaraIn Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1983
Reported in: 23(1983)DLT406
M.L. Jain, J. 1. On 7-5-1979 at about 10.30 a.m. Jagdish Rai was going on his bicycle from his village to his Bhatta, near Bagh Wali Pulia. Accused Sat Narain along with one more both armed with knives met him. The accused stopped Jagdish Rai, carried him behind the stacks of wheat hay heaped nearby, threatened with knives and relieved him of his wrist watch and Rs. 50/- kept in a diary containing the accounts of milk. Sat Narain told him to go away quietly having their knives in mind. The accused sped away on their bicycles. Jagdish Rai was walking back when he came across Ashok Kumar, Saran Kumar and Laxmi Narain and Jagdish Rai and related to them what had occurred. They cried thief and chased the accused. The accomplice of Sat Narain was able to escape, but they were able to apprehend the appellant with the help of the persons from the Railway Quarters near the Railway Station Narela. One of them was Dhani Ram of the Railway Protection Force. The accused was holding a knife in his ...
Smt. Sharda Devi Gupta Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1983
Reported in: [1983]6ITD7(Delhi)
ORDER1. The assessed was betrothed to one Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta prior to April, 1977. Under a deed of partnership executed on 12-4-1977 she became a partner in the firm of Textile Centre, Chandani Chowk, Delhi, the partnership being effective from 1-4-1977. Along with the assessed there were three other partners, viz., Shri Rajendra Pd. Gupta, Smt. Annapurna Devi Gupta and Smt Bimala Devi Gupta. Smt. Annapurna Devi Gupta is the mother of Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, to whom the assessed was engaged at the time of the formation of the partnership.2. The ITO completed the assessment of the firm of the assessment year 1978-79 on 7-3-1981. This is what he stated in that order :'During this year Smt. Sharda Gupta was admitted to the partnership firm vide partnership deed dated 12-4-1977 with effect from 1-4-1977. As per preamble to the partnership deed Kumari Sharda daughter of Shri Vasudev was betrothed to Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, son of Shri Hari Ram Gupta. Regarding the details of investment ...
Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1478DTri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay dated 29th December, 1978. It was originally filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government, but on transfer it has been registered as an appeal.2. The Appellants manufacture tooth paste (dental cream) for sale in the market. It is alleged that this product is also being distributed in the form of gifts to the school children and dentists. While assessing the value for the purposes of excise duty, the Assistant Collector held that even the goods meant for gifts were assessable at the same rate as are the goods ordinarily sold in the market. So the same rate of excise duty as was payable on the goods meant for sale was charged even on those which were meant for distribution as gifts to the institutions or the dentists. Aggrieved from this order of the Assistant Collector, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Collector which was dismissed. Against the said order of t...
Kanti Prasad and Sons Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC749DTri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal to the Gold Control Administrator aganst an order-in-original dated 7th June, 1982 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Meerut, which has been transferred to the Tribunal for disposal.2. The case could not be heard on 15th February, 1982 as the records had not been received by the Department. At the adjourned hearing on 2nd March, 1982, Shri K.R. Mehta, Consultant explained the facts of the case and his arguments against the order appealed against. Before he could complete, however, the Tribunal raised the question as to the appropriate authority to decide this appeal in view of old Section 80 of the Gold (Control) Act and the revised Sections 80 and 81, whereby appeals against a decision or order made by a Collector of Central Excise or Customs are to be preferred to the Administrator or the Appellate Tribunal respectively, and appeals against an order made by any officer below the rank of Collector are to be preferred to the Collector/Appellate ...
Bombay Conductors and Electricals Ltd. and Another Vs. K. Chandramouli ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1983
Reported in: 1983LC315D(Delhi); 1986(23)ELT87(Del); ILR1983Delhi487; [1984]145ITR272(Delhi); [1984]55STC162(Delhi)
Avadh BeharI Rohatgi, J. 1. These are 13 writ petitions. They can be divided into two sets. The first set of 7 writ petitions (C.W.P. Nos. 3416 of 1982, 3464 of 1982, 3465 of 1982, 3700 of 1982, 3701 of 1982, 3820 of 1982 and 3648 of 1982) raises the question of the validity of the notification dated February 28, 1982. By virtue of the notification No. 151/77-Cus. dated July 15, 1977, there was no duty of customs on the melting scrap. By notification No. 35/82-Cus. F. No BLD (Cus) 82, dated February 28, 1982, the exemption was withdrawn with respect to the melting scrap of stainless steel. The effect of withdrawal of exemption was that the petitioners in these seven cases became liable to pay duty at the rate of 40 per cent. ad valorem on the melting scrap of stainless steel. The petitioners impugn the notification dated February 28, 1982, by which the exemption granted in 1977 was withdrawn. It has to be noticed here that the notification of July 15, 1977, was not a time-bound notific...
Bansal Export (P) Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Delhi445; [1984]55CompCas224(Delhi); 1987(30)ELT361(Del); [1984]145ITR642(Delhi); [1984]55STC256(Delhi)
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.1. This is a companion judgment to the one we have just delivered in Bombay Conductors and Electrical Ltd. v. K. Chandramouli (C.W.P. No. 1295 of 1980) (1984) 1 ECC 1 : (1984) 55 STC 162]. Its companionship resides in the fact that the petitioners in these two cases also found their claim on promissory estoppel as in Bombay Conductors. I will deal with the two petitions separately. C.W.P. No. 310 of 1980. 2. The challenge in this writ petition is to the restrictions placed on the export of products wholly or mainly of silver with more than 50 per cent silver contents. 3. The petitioners entered into a contract dated 25th March, 1977, with the foreign buyers for the supply of 25 tonnes of Indian real zari badla. A part of the supply was made. Before the remaining supply could be made the Central Government changed the policy. The policy as laid down in the Exports (Control) Order, 1977, was that manufactures and products wholly or mainly of silver with more than ...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Gobind Ram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1983
Reported in: 23(1983)DLT408
S.B. Wad, J. 1. This is a second appeal against the order of Shri J.D. Kapoor, Addl. District Judge, Delhi dated 19th September, 1981. Through the said appellate order the Additional District Judge held that the respondent should be deemed to have been confirmed automatically in the post of lineman/wireman after he has completed one year service. The learned Judge further held that the Deputy Commissioner was not competent to remove the respondent and the proper authority was the Commissioner of the Corporation.2. The respondent was appointed as a lineman/wireman in the temporary post on 9-12-1961. His services were terminated under Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rule 1949 by the Deputy Commissioner Shri N.N. Tandon, on 1-9-1965. The respondent filed a suit against his termination. The Trial Court held that the termination was valid. As stated above the First Appellate Court upset that order and passed the impugned order.3. The first question is whether the r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »