Delhi Court March 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.
Mrs. Monica Chanda Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-1984
Reported in: [1984]10ITD412(Delhi)
ORDERPer Shri K. C. Srivastava, Accountant Member - The deceased, Shri A. K. Chanda, died on 25-10-1972. Earlier he was the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. He owned a flat No. 4 in Akash Deep at 5, Lower Rawdon Street, Calcutta. There is no dispute that this was a self-acquired property of the deceased. By a declaration made on 6-11-1967, the deceased threw this property in the common hotch pot of the HUF consisting of self, his wife, Mrs. Monica Chanda, and his two daughters, Mrs. Anjali Pal and Miss Malavika Chanda. It was also declared that the income from this property shall absolutely belong to the said HUF, of which he was the karta. After this declaration, income-tax assessments were made in the hands of the HUF. For the assessment year 1973-74, the ITO had assessed the income in the hands of legal heir, representing the deceased, as her individual income. Against this order revision petition was made before the Commissioner, who held that at the relevant time both the...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Durga Prashad
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-1984
Reported in: 1984(1)Crimes1049; 1984(7)DRJ339
Jagdish Chandra, J. (1) Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter to be referred to as the MCD) has filed this criminal revision petition assailing validity and correctness of the order dated 19-9-1977 passed by Shri B.N. Chaturvedi then Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi whereby all the accused persons were discharged in the complaint filed by the M.C.D. under Sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act.) (2) On 29-7-1976 at about 2-20 P.M. Food Inspector M.L. Sharma of M.C.D. lifted a sample of besan measuring 600 grams for analysis on payment of Rs. 1-08 P. from the shop carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. Durga Prashad Pawan Kumar in shop No : 3, old Market, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi Durga Prashad, Kalu Ram and Mai Ram accused persons are the partners of the aforesaid firm. This purchase of besan was made from Durga Prashad. After necessary formalities the food Inspector divided the purchased besan into three equal ...
Alchemic Research Centre Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-1984
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT534TriDel
1. M/s. Alchemic Research Centre P. Ltd. have filed the revision application against the order-in-appeal passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay dated 21-9-1979 which on being transferred to the Tribunal is disposed of as an appeal.2. The short question for decision relates to classification of two items namely Silica Cell and Cycle Timer imported along with Spectrophotometer by the Appellants, and cleared under B/E Cash No.2/36 dated 24-5-1978. These items were classified by the Asstt.Collector of Customs under heading 70.17/18 and 91.01/11 of the Customs Tariff Schedule respectively. In their appeal before the Tribunal the appellants have contended that these items should be assessed under the heading 90.25(1) and 90.28(4) read with 90.25 of the Customs Tariff Schedule respectively.3. Shri S.N. Mathur appearing on behalf of the appellants has cited the ruling Sarabhai Chemicals, Bombay v. C.C., Bombay reported in ELT 1983 161 wherein the Tribunal has ruled that Quartz C...
Okara Electric Supply Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(Del)9; [1985]154ITR493(Delhi)
Goel, J.1. By this reference, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench 'D'), has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that Rs. 1,34,390 was income assessable under section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the assessment year 1966-67 ?' 2. The assessed is a limited company which had been running an electric supply undertaking. The assessment year concerned is 1966-67 of which the relevant previous year ended on March 31, 1966. The assessed was granted by the Government of East Punjab sanction to engage in the business of electric supply energy by a notification dated may 26, 1958. The State Government had the option to acquire the undertaking at any time after October 26, 1950, provided not less than one year's notice in writing of its election to acquire was served upon the supplier by the Provincial Government. The p...
Jalaram Trading Company Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1984
Reported in: (1984)(17)ELT447TriDel
1. These proceedings, which were originally by way of revision petition before the Central Government, and now being treated as an appeal having been received by transfer in pursuance to the provisions of Section 131B(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), raise a limited issue; namely, as to the legality of the orders of the lower Customs authorities in dismissing the refund claims of the appellants herein, as being barred by time in terms of Section 27(1) of the Act.2. The plea as raised in the appeal is based on the contention that on import of a consignment of snap fasteners, customs duty together with auxiliary and countervailing duty as assessed, namely @ 100%+20%+8% or 25%+5%, was paid but subsequently the appellants gained knowledge of the fact that the goods could not be subjected to customs duty, in excess of 40% in view of Entry No. 12, in the Exemption Notification being Notification No. 29-Cus., dated 10-2-79 covering : "other embellishments for...
Weston Electroniks Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1984
Reported in: (1987)(12)LC946Tri(Delhi)
1. Since the issues involved in both the appeals are identical, the same are being taken up for disposal together and a consolidated order is being issued. The facts of the case briefly are that the appellants manufacture electronic goods of various types including colour television sets. The appellants imported 744 picture tubes of 20" size, Hitachi Brand from Hong Kong for the manufacture of colour television sets. On importation, the goods were put under three separate Into-Bond Bill of Entry bearing Nos. 899/134, 135 and 136. The appellants had declared the FOB price of these picture tubes at JY 16480 per piece.The Customs Authorities after making investigations took the view that the correct FOB price of the goods should be JY 23690 per piece.Accordingly, the appellants were served a show cause notice dated 9-8-1983 to explain the discrepancy in the declared value and also called upon as to why action should not be taken against them for infringement of the ITC Regulations. On re...
N.K. Textile Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1984
Reported in: (1984)43CTR(Del)343; [1985]152ITR594(Delhi)
Kapur, J.1. The following question has been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1967-68 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right that no deduction of Rs. 36,916 was permissible from the total income towards the possible sales tax which might be levied on the assessed subsequently ?' 2. It will at once become apparent that the answer to the question has to be in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the case which, in fact, change the meaning of the question. In case, the assessed was keeping accounts on a cash basis and the sales tax had not been quantified, the answer to the question would obviously have been that the Tribunal was right. So, before answering the question, it is necessary to note the actual facts of the case. 3. The sales tax in question was payable under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The assessment year being 1967-68, an amount of Rs. 36,916 h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›