Delhi Court December 1984 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.
Collector of Customs Vs. Indian Cable Company
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-31-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC550Tri(Delhi)
1. The captioned appeal has its genesis in the show cause notice F. No.380/76/81-Cus II dated 7-9-1981 issued by the Central Government to the respondents proposing to re view the impugned order. O.i the setting up of this Tribuaa!, it was transferred to the Tribunal in terms of Section 131B of the Customs Act, 1962 to be disposed of as if it were an appeal filed before the Tribunal.2. The respondents imported two consignments of "Hypalon 40" at the Port of Calcutta. The Customs Authorities assessed the goods to basic customs duty under heading No. 39.01/06 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (CTA 1975), and to additional (countervailing) duty of Customs corresponding to the excise duty leviable under Item No 15A(1) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (CET). The goods were treated for the purpose of classification under both the schedules as artificial resins or plastic materials. After clearance of the goods on payment of the duty so asse...
Ashok Kapur (Huf) Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-31-1984
Reported in: (1985)12ITD520(Delhi)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and relates to the assessment year 1980-81.2. The assessee is assessed in the status of a HUF. Besides share income in a firm, the assessee owned a part of the property which was situated at 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. The property in question belonged to the larger HUF and after the partition of this family, the assessee acquired one-fifth share in five-eighth part of the property as per decree by the Delhi High Court. According to the assessee, he wanted to start a business of real estates in the name of Ashok Kapur & Co. and he, therefore, shifted from this property and on 6-11-1979 made a declaration stating that he was converting his share in the property into stock-in-trade of the new business to be started in the name of Ashok Kapur & Co. As on 6-11-1979, the assessee valued his right in this property at Rs. 5,58,000. It was on the basis of the rates fixed by the Land and Deve...
Indian Explosives Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-28-1984
Reported in: (1985)(20)ELT139TriDel
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a revision application before the Central Government which, under the provisions of Section 35-P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal filed before it.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that M/s. Indian Explosives Ltd., the appellants (hereinafter referred to as IEL) are engaged in the manufacture of urea fertilizer. On the day appointed for presentation of the annual Budget of the Central Government for 1978, namely, 28-2-1978, IEL applied for and secured from the Central Excise authorities permission for taking clearance of the goods between 17.00 hours and 24.00 hours on 28-2-1978 on furnishing an undertaking that they would pay the differential amount of duty in case there was an increase in the rate of duty applicable to the goods on the day following 28-2-1978. This was in terms of Central Excise Rule 224(2A).The quantity of urea whic...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Kesaria and Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-28-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC843Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal relates to a claim of the respondents for refund of excise duty paid by them on clearances of tea during the financial year 1977-78. It is the contention of the respondents that they were entitled to the 25% duty relief under Notification No. 198/76-CE dated 16.3.1976. Their claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector. In appeal the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta allowed their claim. Thereafter the Central Government of India initiated revisional proceedings under Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act (as then in force), which proceedings are now to be continued before us as an appeal filed by the Collector.2. According to the show cause notice dated 5.1.1982, the following are the relevant dates:10.6.1977 to 11.3.1978 Clearances on payment of duty.08.1.1979 Declaration and application for fixing base clearances.31.3.1979 Refund application received by the Superintendent of Central03.5.1979 Application received in the office of the Asstt. ...
Birla Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-27-1984
Reported in: (1987)(31)ELT501TriDel
1. The applicants herein, namely M/s. Birla Jute Manufacturing Company Limited, have moved this application under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), seeking reference to the High Court, of some questions described as that of law, after the dismissal of their appeal by the Tribunal Order dated 18-8-1983 passed in Appeal No. 446/80-D, being Order No. 50/83-D.2. On this petition coming up for hearing on 27-2-1984, Dr. Gauri Shankar, Advocate, appeared with Miss Rukmini Nair, Advocate, whereas the respondent was represented by Shri K. Chandramouli, SDR.3. In view of the fact that the subject matter of dispute in the case related to questions of rate of duty as applicable on the date of import effected by the applicants, it was pointed out to Dr. Gauri Shankar, at the outset, that the Bench considered that an application for reference to High Court does not lie in terms of Section 130 of the Act inasmuch as there was a specific exclusion in respect t...
Orient General Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1984
Reported in: (1985)(21)ELT326TriDel
1. The application for revision filed by the appellants before the Central Government is being treated as an appeal. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 1032-1034/C.E.-79, dated 13-9-1979 passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Delhi.' Through a common order, the Appellate Collector has considered three cases involving identical issues; the present appeal is restricted to the period 1-2-1970 to 31-12-1972.2. The appellants are manufacturers of electrical fans under the brand name of 'ORIENT' in their factory at Faridabad. The usual marketing procedure of the appellants during the material period was to distribute their products area-wise through chief distributors. There is no sale of the goods by the appellants to these distributors. The appellants despatched the goods to the Chief Distributors from their factory on consignment/transfer basis. These distributors explore the market and sell the goods according to the areas assigned to them.These distri...
Mohinder Kumar Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1984
Reported in: 1984(3)Crimes58; 28(1985)DLT41
J.D. Jain, J. (1) The appellant has been convicted of offences under sections 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code, by an Additional Sessions Judge vide his judgment dated 26/12/1983. He has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years on the first count and rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs. 2.0CO.00 on the second count ; in default of payment of fine, he has been awarded further rigorous imprisonment for oneyear. However, the substantive sentences on both the counts have been made to run concurrently. Feeling he has come up in appeal against his conviction and sentence.(2) The appellant is resident of house No. 5/5230, Regharpura, KarolBagh, New Delhi. He also owns house No. F-240, Street No. 12, LaxmiNagar, which is a trans-yamuna colony. Balkrishan Gupta (PW 8), father of the prosecutrix, was living in a portion of the said house at the relevant time as tenant of the appellant. He plies a scooter rickshaw. On 16/10/1981 at about 10.00 p.m. he lodged a report...
State Vs. Brij Mohan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1984
Reported in: 27(1985)DLT322; 1985(8)DRJ223; 1985RLR204
J.D. Jain, J. (1) The facts giving rise to this revision petition which is directed against order dated 18th July 1984 of Shri V.K. Shali, Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, succinctly are that on 25th August 1983 Sanjiv Kumar, Food Inspector, purchased a sample of mustard oil from M/s. Durga Provision Store, Street No. 12, Kailash Nagar, Delhi, in accordance with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short 'the Act') and the rules made there under for analysis. The said oil had been stored by the aforesaid firm for sale and .was meant for human consumption. The respondent-Brij Mohan was conducting the business of the firm at the relevant time. The sample oil was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis and it was found to be sub-standard in quality. Thereupon, after obtaining the consent of the State Government (Secretary (Medical), Delhi Administration) a complaint was instituted by the Delhi Administration for the prosecution of the respondent under Section ...
Salih Sulaiman Sindi Vs. Abdul Basid
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1984
Reported in: 1985(8)DRJ213
N.N. Goswamy, J. (1) This revision petition by the natural father of the minor, is directed against the order dated 22-7-83 passed by the learned Guardian Judge whereby he allowed the application filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the Guardian & Wards Act (here-in-after called 'the Act') and gave interim custody of the minor to the respondent.(2) The brief facts, leading to this petition, are that the petitioner married Mst. Najma on 4-4-1976, daughter was born from this wedlock on 4-4-1979. The marriage between the parties was dissolved by divorce on 6-12-1980. Unfortunately Mst. Najma died on 21-8-81 while residing with her family members. In April 1982 the appellant filed an application for custody of the minor daughter in a court at Muradabad. He obtained an ex parte order for restoration of the child to him on 28-5-1982. Abdul Rab a maternal uncle of the minor filed an application for setting aside the ex parte order on 30-6-1982. During the pendency of that application A...
Mehta Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC1115Tri(Delhi)
1. The facts giving rise to these appeals are that the appellants inter alia manufacture Padding Solution formed by the reaction of Urea and Formaldehyde and use the same in their own factory for the purpose of processing man-made fabrics. During the material period they paid the duty on the said product under Central Excise Tariff Item No. 15A. In April, 1977, the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda, issued a Trade Notice No. MP/74/77 clarifying that such solutions should be treated as Precondensates falling outside the purview of Central Excise Tariff No.15A and the same shall be liable to the Central Excise duty under T.I.No. 68. The appellants preferred number of refund claims before the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Surat who granted the refund in respect of the duty paid within the period of three years from the date of the filing of the refund claims before him. Four refund claims for the period from 25.12.1971 to 16.3.1972, 1st March 1972 to 31st December, 1972. 1st J...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »