Delhi Court August 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.
Shri V.C. Bhalla Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC2045DTri(Delhi)
1. In this appeal under Section 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962, it would appear that (a) the Appellant was continuously residing in London from 19.12.79" to 11.7.82; (C) he claimed the benefit of exemption under the T.R. Rules in respect of the following (d) in adjudication, it was only item 5-6 supra that were given the benefit of exemption claimed: (e) in appeal, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) extended the benefit of exemption for item 2-4 supra as well; (f) the subject matter of the instant appeal is thus item I only, namely, the two air-conditioners; (g) while the adjudicating officer had held that they were "brand newnot used", the Appellate Collector would appear to have preceded to hold that notwithstanding their purchase on 15.12.80, the appellant's contention of having used them is not plausible because England is a cold country where centrally heated accommodation is provided and there is hardly any scope for using the articles in question. The claim for use for nearly t...
Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1983
Reported in: (1983)6ITD713(Delhi)
1 to 5. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.] 6. The 5th ground, which is the main ground involved in this appeal, pertains to the contribution of Rs. 5,00,000 made by the assessees to Goetze (India) Ltd. Employees' Welfare Trust. The board of directors of the assessee-company passed the following resolution on 31-12-1976: Copy of Resolution passed by the board of directors of Goetze (India) Ltd. in the meeting held on 31-12-1976: Resolved that an irrevocable trust under the name and style of Goetze (India) Ltd. Employees' Welfare Trust be formed for the purpose of welfare of the employees of the company and the following persons be and are hereby appointed as trustees thereof: Resolved further that consent be and is hereby given for making payments of Rs. 5 lakhs only to the trustees of the said trust for effectuating the deed of declaration of trust-cum-settlement as per draft placed before the meeting and copy kept on record duly signed by the Chairman...
Lieutenant Governor and ors. Vs. Jagdish Chand Kardam and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1983
Reported in: 24(1983)DLT312
Prakash Narain, C.J.(1) Only one point arises for determination in this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent as applicable to this Court. The point is whether schedule castes constitute a minority within the meaning of Article 30 of the Constitution.(2) The learned Single Judge has observed in his judgment under appeal that, 'Admittedly it is a minority educational institution of the schedule classes' while giving a resume of facts in the earlier part of his judgment. How the learned Single Judge got this impression is not very clear. It seems that though a return was filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, by an affidavit sworn by Shri Lal Chand, Secretary of the Baba Saheb Ambedkar Higher Secondary School, no appearance was put in at the time when the writ petition was heard by the learned Single Judge. Be it as it may, we have to construe the provisions of the Constitution. Respectfully we must observe that the provision of the Constitution as such was not construed by the lear...
F.G.P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1854DTri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against the order dated 18-1-1983 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay, in which he has held that the "glass lumps" produced in the appellants' factory were dutiable under Item 23A of the Central Excise Tariff and that they should take out a manufacturing licence accordingly.2. According to the appellants, they manufacture fibre glass and fibre glass products, including glass wool and glass staple tissues. Raw materials like Silica Sand, Soda Ash, Borax/Rasorite, etc., are mixed in the required proportion and heated in a furnace to a temperature of around 1400C to form molten glass. The molten glass is drawn as stream through a revolving disc to manufacture glass wool. During the process, the appellants drain the glass tank of surplus molten glass which forms into lumps when drained and sprinkled with water. This is the substance referred to as "glass lumps", whose classification is at issue. These glass lumps are further crushed into pieces of powd...
Shree Una Taluka Khedut Sahakari Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT183TriDel
1. The appellant herein which is a sugar factory feels aggrieved by the decision of the excise authorities in calling upon them to refund the amount allowed by way of rebate, by adjustment in their Personal Ledger Account, in pursuance of the notification issued under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, being, Notification No. 203/C.E., dated 28-9-1972.2. The Central Government by virtue of the aforesaid notification had provided for relief to some sugar factories for different periods on some quantity of sugar produced during a given period in excess of the production, in the corresponding period, as mentioned in different parts of the notification. So far as the present matter is concerned, the rebate was claimed for the months of October and November, 1972 in terms of part I of the aforesaid notification and a sum of Rs. 6,87,600 was allowed to be adjusted by way of rebate by the concerned authorities in pursuance of the claim lodged by the party, for such rebate, on the ground ...
Machine Products (i) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1359DTri(Delhi)
1. The impugned order-in-appeal was a combined order passed by the Appellate Collector in respect of two orders in original bearing Nos.114/81 dated 23-10-81 and 117/81 dated 31-10-81: The appellants, however, filed only one appeal. The said appeal is being disposed of through this order in relation to the first mentioned order in original. The appellants were directed to file a supplementary appeal in relation to the other order in original by 26-8-1983.2. So far as the present appeal is concerned, the facts in brief are that the appellants manufacture certain components of drafting mechanism of ring frames or inter frames. These components are already excise controlled under Item 68. In addition, they obtain certain other duty paid components of drafting mechanism from M/s. S.K.F. They get contracts from textile mills for converting or upgrading drafting mechanism of ring frames and inter-frames already installed in the Mills. In pursuance of the contract, they take their own manufa...
Punj Sons P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1928DTri(Delhi)
1. The short point involved in this appeal is whether Slagwool was classifiable under item 18 of the Central Excise Tariff which at the material time covered rayon and synthetic fibres and yarn.2. The appellants are aggrieved against the demand for duty of Rs. 6,800/- in respect of the Slagwool cleared by them from 1-5-73 to 3-5-73. Slagwool was exempt from payment of duty by virtue of an exemption notification before 30-4-73. However, a fresh notification No. 115/73-C.E. issued on that date withdrew the earlier full exemption and laid down a concessional rate of duty for Slagwool. The appellants cleared some quantity of Slagwool from 1 -5-73 to 3-5-73 without payment of duty. The appellants' main plea is that Slagwool was not covered by the Tariff Entry No. 18 itself and the exemption notification No. 115/73-C.E. could not reverse this position. They were heard at length by us on 1-8-1983. They put forth their arguments as under:- (1) Slagwool is manufactured from the waste product c...
Nand Gopal Vs. S. Kartar Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ213; 1983(5)DRJ299
M.L. Jain, J. (1) The petitioner Nand Gopal, Proprietor of Gupta Steels (India) was in occupation of the ground floor premises in dispute situated in Karnal Road, Delhi, and owned by respondent Kartar Singh, on a rent of Rs. 2000.00 per month under a license deed dated 1-1-1977 due to expire on 31-12-1979. It was agreed that the petitioner will be entitled to use the water and industrial power. The petitioner then installed furnaces and machines of the steel resoling factory. By an agreement of 22-2-1978, Rs. l,00,000.00 was advanced by the petitioner to the respondents upon the conditions that the loan shall be payable within a year and the petitioner shall not be evicted until the amount of loan was repaid. On 19-9-1979 a suit for recovery of the said loan was filed by the petitioner.(2) On 5-11-1979 the respondent Kartar Singh came to the premises, began to quarrel, manhandled him, got the power supply disconnected and broke the telephone. The petitioner lodged a report of this occu...
Shree Shew Sakti Oil Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-19-1983
Reported in: (1983)(14)ELT1790TriDel
1. As common question of law and fact is involved in Appeal Nos. CD (SB) (T) 1/56, 2/56 and 3/56, they will, therefore, be disposed of by this one common judgment.2. M/s. Bharat Marble Company, M/s. Bharat Mineral Industries and M/s.Gopal Dass Saksaria, three different firms filed three shipping bills No. 457, 458 and 459 for exporting Sesame Cake (Gingelly Cake) and the weight of each consignment was 99 tons odd. The No. of bags in each shipment was 1426 and the weight of each bag as indicated therein was 160 Lbs. gross. The Customs authorities had reasons to believe that the declarations in the shipping bills concerning the above mentioned consignment were not correct and that the samples were drawn from the goods sought to be exported and were found to be of groundnut oil cakes which were assessable at a much higher rate of duty than that given in the case as declared in the shipping bills. It was further found that each bag weighed 200 Lbs. It was thus found that there was misdecl...
Mange Ram Alias Mahindra Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-19-1983
Reported in: 1984(1)Crimes1; 1984(6)DRJ85
G.R. Luthra, J.(1) Mange Ram appellant was charged with the commission of offence of committing murder on the night between August 2 and 3 1979 of Dewan Chand, punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life by an Additional Sessions Judge (Shri R.D. Aggarwal) by means of judgment dated May 24, 1980. The present appeal is directed against the said conviction and sentence.(2) The version of the prosecution, briefly stated, is as follows. Ram Nath (Public Witness 3) is the owner of shop No. 90 at Rajpura Quarters Gurmandi, Delhi. He purchased the said shop from Mansa Ram a year or so before the murder of Diwan Chand. Previously Mansa Ram used to do confectionary business in the said shop and after he had sold it off to Ram Nath the said shop was let out by Ram Nath to Diwan Chand, now deceased, who was carrying on business of confectionary.(3) Mange Ram appellant is a notorious bad character of the locality. He had some dispute with Mansa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »