Delhi Court May 1983 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1983 Page 1 of about 89 results (0.020 seconds)Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Ram Pershad
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1984)7ITD656(Delhi)
1. By these reference applications, presented on 12-11-1982 and made under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'), the Commissioner requires the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the cases and refer to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court for its esteemed opinion, the following two common questions in relation to all the years under reference, claiming these to be questions of law and said to arise out of order dated 19-8-1982 made by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench in WT Appeal Nos. 801 to 805 (Delhi) of 1981 in relation to the assessment years 1970-71, 1972-73, 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76, on appeals by the respondent-assessee : 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in directing the Wealth-tax Officer to recalculate the value of property at Hauz Khas, New Delhi and other property DLF Colony, in accordance with the provisions contained in Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 which was operative with effect from 1-4-1979 and which ca...
Tag this Judgment!Beatitudes Social Welfare Centre Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)LC908DTri(Delhi)
1. The import which is the subject matter of dispute in this case was effected by Beatitudes Social Welfare Centre in December, 1978 against exemption certificate issued by the Central Government under the provisions of Section 25(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter called "the Act"). It was, however, found to be a case, at the time of clearance, where the description of the goods did not tally with the ad hoc exemption on which the Importer had placed reliance, inasmuch as it was discovered that whereas the exemption was for import of Mercedes Benz Ambulance Vans, the imported vehicle was the Volkswagon (Station wagon). Although initially the party was allowed time to obtain ad hoc exemption relating to the imported goods but since the same was not procured and produced by the stipulated time on 26.6.1979, thereafter a notice to show cause was issued on 5.9.1979 under Section 124 of the Act, to show cause as to why goods should not be confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Jiwan Lal Vs. Collector of Customs and C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)LC1352Tri(Delhi)
1. This is a revision application (hereinafter called "appeal" filed before the Central Government which under Section 131B of the Customs Act, 1962, stands transferred to this Tribunal to be disposed of as if it were an appeal before the Tribunal.2. This appeal is against the captioned orders of the Collector in which he ordered the confiscation of a primary gold bar weighing 72.850 gms and, as recorded }n the Order, valued at Rs 5820, and imposition of a penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act.3. Briefly stated, the facts are that Central Excise preventive staff, Ludhiana, visited the appellant's business premises at Jagraon and checked the accounts on 27.2.1979. Certain irregularities were noticed and in addition one bar of primary gold weighing 72.850 gms of 22 carat purity was seized along with some registers etc. One of these was an account book on which the Department relied. On 7.7.1980 the Counsel for the Appellants wrote to the Collector that Sub-sec...
Tag this Judgment!Apar Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)LC934DTri(Delhi)
1. The ten appeals captioned above are directed against one order in appeal dated 20.4.1977 whereby the Appellate Collector of Customs Bombay disposed often orders passed by the Assistant Collector all on one date, namely 21.10.1976, on different refund applications, filed by the appellant company.2. The refund applications were made by the appellant company, in relation to duties paid on certain imports, in the year 1971-72, but refund was applied, though by means of separate applications, in all cases on 16.10.1976. Assistant Collector of Customs rejected those applications without adverting to the merits, on the ground of time-bar, by virtue of the provisions of 27(1) of the Customs Act 1962.The Appellate Collector of Customs confirmed this order of the Assistant Collector on the appeals filed before him after giving the appellants personal hearing, after taking note of their arguments that the duties levied on them which were the subject matter of these refund applications, were n...
Tag this Judgment!Madras Rubber Factory Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)LC1077DTri(Delhi)
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed by the appellants before the Central Government as a Revision Application and has come on transfer to this Tribunal under the provisions of Section 35-P(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 for disposal as if it were an appeal presented before it.2. The goods forming the subject matter of the dispute in the present proceedings are what are known as Cord Repair Fabrics, Pre-shaped Cord Patches and Criss-Cross Patches, the latter two products being made out of the first product. The appellants' contention is that these do not fall for classification under Item No. 16A(2) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act (hereinafter referred to as CET), under which Item the Central Excise authorities have classified the products for assessment to duty. The appellants' contentions were rejected by the lower authorities and they went in revision before the Central Government which has now come to us on transfer under the provisio...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Engg. and Locomotive Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)LC797DTri(Delhi)
1. The goods involved in this case are "Castings in semi-finished condition for manufacture of Motor vehicles CKD Motor vehicle parts - Rear Axle housing (Iron castings)", as per the description given in the relevant Bill of Entry. The appellants are aggrieved of countervailing customs duty being charged on these goods under Item 25 of the Central Excise Tariff. This item covers, inter alia, "iron cast in any other shape or size". During the hearing before us today, the appellants maintained that the subject goods, after being cast, underwent further processes of annealing, straightening, buffing and rough machining and surface protection by metallic or non-metallic coatings in the foreign country before being shipped to India. They stated that after these processes, the goods ceased to be mere iron cast in any shape or size and became semi-finished articles which were not covered (SIC) goods at the material time, the goods were free from countervailing duty. The Departments' represen...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Customs Vs. Adarsh Products Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)LC923DTri(Delhi)
1. In this case, the Appellate Collector passed an order favourable to the respondents, giving them the benefit of lower rate of customs duty as applicable to Project Imports under Heading 84.66 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Govt. of India, being of the tent alive view that the appellate order was not correct in law, issued the subject show cause notice under the then Section 131(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 proposing to review the appellate order and passing appropriate order.The grounds of the proposed review as set out in the subject show cause notice were that the respondents had failed to produce a list of items duly endorsed with Project Import by the Import Trade Control authorities and that they had not made any request for registration of the contract to the Custom House before clearance of the imported goods and thus they did not satisfy the condition which would entitle them to the benefit of the lower rate of duty under Heading 84.66 CTA. The subject show cause notic...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Chander Bhatia Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1983(2)Crimes256; 1983(5)DRJ147; 1983RLR547
N.N. Goswamy, J. (1) The prayer in this petitioner under Section 397/482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioner before the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Patel Nagar, New Delhi including the notice dated 22-7-82 issued under Section 111 of the said code and for declaring the arrest of the petitioner as illegal and void. (2) It is alleged that the petitioner is running an eatable house under the name and style of M/s Hari om Corner, 18 Double Storey, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi and is also a licensee to stock kerosene oil for distribution to the customers registered with him. The petitioner is assisted oy his son, namely, Bharat Bhushan aged about 21 years. The petitioner has a brother by the name of Shri Lachman Dass with whom he had a long standing dispute over the moveable and immoveable properties worth Rs. 15 lacs and because of his influence he had wooed the Rajinder Nagar police in harassing and pressurising the petit...
Tag this Judgment!O.P. Mehta Vs. Saroj Mehta
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1984Delhi159; 1984(6)DRJ58
N.N. Goswami, J.(1) This appeal by the husband is directed against the judgment and decree dated 27/8/1979 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi whereby his petition under Section 13(1-A) of the Hindu Marriage Act for a decree of divorce on the ground that there has not been a resumption of cohabitation between the parties for a period of one year after the passing of the decree for restitution of conjugal rights.(2) The parties were married at Delhi on 18/2/1964 in accordance with Hindu rites. Two children were born out of the wedlock and both those children are with the respondent. The appellant filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act on 3/6/1974 against the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights. The petition filed by the appellant was decreed on 30-5-75. The appellant thereafter on 26/7/1976 filed the present petition for a decree of divorce on the ground that there has been no resumption of cohabitation between the parties for a period of...
Tag this Judgment!Shakti Trading Co. P. Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1985]57CompCas789(Delhi); 1983(5)DRJ356; ILR1984Delhi339
ORDER ON ORAL APPLN. FOR CERTIFICATE TO APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT 56. After we pronounced the judgment, Mr. Salve makes a prayer for grant of a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court under art. 134A of the Constitution. He contends that the provisions have been construed for the first time. We do not think the contention is correct. In any case, we feel it is not a case which needs to be decided by the Supreme Court. We, thereforee, decline the certificate. ...
Tag this Judgment!