Delhi Court April 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.
Pigments and Dyestuffs Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1984
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT511TriDel
1. Appeal No. 963/81 has been filed against the order of the Collector of Customs, Bombay dated 19-3-1981. Appeal No. 1372/83 has been filed against the order of the Collector of Customs, Bombay dated 16-3-1983.As common questions of fact and law are involved, both the appeals were heard together. In Appeal No. 963/81, appellants imported Phenyl Alpha Napthylamine during 1974 under Bill of Entry No. 976/84 dated 4.11.1974 and the consignment was released under ex-bond Bill of Entry Cash No.1108 and 1109 dated 10-1-1978. The Customs authorities assessed the goods under Item No. 281.C.T. charging customs duty at 60% + 15%. The goods were cleared in early January, 1978. On 16-5-1978, the Asstt.Collector of Customs, Gr.(V) issued a 'less-charge' memo directing the appellants to pay Rs. 16,068.65 towards duty short-levied erroneously.The appellants submitted the reply on 20-5-1978, informing the Deptt.that the item imported by them was Dye-intermediate used in the manufacture of Basic Dyes...
Fairdeal Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-26-1984
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT516TriDel
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government which, under Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were as appeal filed before it.2. This appeal arises out of the consolidated Order-in-Appeal bearing No. S/49-1039 to 1041,1180,1172,1173/80R dated 24th July 1980 by which the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay disposed of a number of appeals against orders passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay. We are concerned in the present case with the Assistant Collector's Order No. S/6-C-3897/79R dated 25th March 1980.3. The question involved in the present appeal is whether impoted GLYOXAL was chargeable to additional (countervailing) duty of customs corresponding to central excise duty under item No. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff or was it eligible to exemption in terms of Notification No. 55/75-Central Excise as a "drug intermediate". The lower au...
ishwar Singh Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-26-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1625; 1984(2)Crimes127; ILR1984Delhi388; 1984RLR444
Sharief-Ud-Din, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment D/- April 7, 1982 of Shri P. K. Bahri, Additional Sessions Judge, Shahadara Delhi by which he has found the appellant Ishwar Singh guilty of offence under S. 302 I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. The appellant along with one Mangat Ram were tried for an offence under S. 302/34 I.P.C. but the learned trial Judge acquitted Mangat Ram for the reasons mentioned in his judgment. Since there is no acquittal appeal we are not concerned with Mangat Ram. 2. We may give a brief resume' of facts that led to the prosecution of the appellant and Mangat Ram. Prosecution case is that deceased Sukh Dayal and his wife Ram Piari were residing as tenants of one Dittu Ram in House No. 2790, Lane No. 6-B, Raghvirpura No. 2. Mangat Ram acquitted accused is the son of landlord. Appellant was also residing in the same lane just opposite the house of Dittu Ram. It is said that Dittu Ram wanted the deceased to vacate the...
intarcraft India Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-26-1984
Reported in: [1985]154ITR662(Delhi)
Kapur J.1. The assessed has sought a reference of three question under s. 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The question are as follows : '1. Whether, on the faces and in the circumstances of the case, was the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal legally correct in upholding the action of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in setting aside the assessment with the direction that the assessment be re-made by the Income-tax Officer 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the decision of the Supreme Court in Guduthur Bros.' case [1960] 40 ITR 298, is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has misdirected itself in load in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ?' 2. The circumstances are that the ITO had made an assessment order after a revised return had been filed before him during the course of the hearing. It appears that a notice was issued under s. 143...
Harish Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT513TriDel
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a Revision Application before the Central Govt. which, under Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal filed before it.2. The appeal was fixed for hearing on 25-4-1984. However, there was none to represent the Appellants. However, the Registry has received a telegram from the Appellants' Counsel requesting that the Tribunal might decide the appeal on mertis. We have, therefore, heard the Departmental Representative and proceed to dispose of the appeal.3. Shri Sundar Rajan drew our attention to the order passed by this Bench in Appeals Nos. CD(SB)(T)A.No. 17/78-C and CD(SB)(T)A. No.18/78-C - Pearl Plastic Manufacturing Co., Jamnagar v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, and order in appeal No. CD(SB)(T) A. No. 522/78-C - Paresh Products, Jamnagar v. Collector of Customs, Bombay 1987(31) E.L.T. 308 (Tribunal). He stated that the issue in the present appeal st...
Samaj Kalyan Parishad Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: (1984)9ITD799(Delhi)
1. The controversy in this appeal is regarding the exemption of the assessee's income under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), i.e., whether the income is from property held for charitable or religious purposes.2. The assessee-society was registered on 10-5-1956 under the Registration of Societies Act, 1960. The aims and objects of the trust are establishment of (a) children homes, clubs, libraries, (b) centre for adult education, shilpkala, sewing for widows or destitute women, (c) dispensaries, hospitals, (d) centre for social welfare of children, (e) to help with stipends, fooding, clothing for poor or blind or helpless and needy children, (f) centres for homeless children and ladies, (g) institution for imparting vocational and industrial education to children and girls, and (h) dharamshalas, widow homes.3. The admitted facts are that the two activities of the assessee-society were (a) running a tailoring establishment at Modi Nagar, and (b) carrying on business a...
Dharam Dev Malik Vs. Raj Rani
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Delhi389; 1984(7)DRJ19
J.D. Jain, J. (1) This appeal springs from judgment dated 30th September 1982 of an Additional District Judge whereby he dismissed the petition of the appellant/husband for divorce on the grounds of desertion and cruelty as being without merit. (2) The carriage between the parties was solemnised on 7th October 1964 at Sonepat, to which place the parents of the respondent/wife belonged, in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies. Thereafter, they lived together as husband and wife at 123/2, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi, uptil January 1966. The said house had been allotted to the father of the appellant as a railway employee and as such the parties were living with him as members of his family. A son was born to the respondent in December 1965. However, the appellant does not own his paternity). Since January 1966 onwards the respondent has been living at Sonepat with her parents. The contention of the appellant is that she left her matrimonial home on 19th January 1966 for Sonepat without...
Aurangabad Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-1984
Reported in: (1984)(17)ELT554TriDel
1. These are connected appeals involving common questions of law and fact. Hence, these are taken up together for disposal. Appeal No.1390/83 relates to the differential duty for the period 1-1-79 to 30-11-79 for Rs. 3,08,365.71. Appeal No. 1391/83 pertains to the period 1-12-79 to 31-3-80 involving Rs. 2,24,120.64. The third appeal is in respect of the period 1-4-80 to 31-5-80, the differential duty being Rs. 1,33,249.48. The facts leading to the Appeals are as follows: 2. The Appellants are, inter alia, manufacturers of Kraft Paper having their factory at Wahegaon, Aurangabad. During April, 1974, the Appellants decided to instal the said paper mill. On 20-5-74, they filed an application to the Ministry of Industries, New Delhi for the requisite licence to instal the said paper mill with installed capacity of 5000 M T. On 16-9-75, licence was issued to the Appellants to instal the paper mill with an annual installed capacity of 5000 M.T. The Ministry of Industries, by their letter da...
Jasbir Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-1984
Reported in: 1984(7)DRJ94
Jagdish Chandra, J.(1) The petitioner cannot be said to be innocent and rather this evidence point towards his guilt under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act 1923 looking especially to the visits of the petitioner to the aforesaid two libraries and inspecting there the secret and restricted documents-books under an identity card which though belonged to him while in service, ought to have been surrendered by him on his retirement, and was made use of by him or for eliciting information which could be detrimental and prejudicial to the security and interest of the State and advantageous to or foreign country. Furthermore, petitioner's disclosure and the consequent recovery of the defense/telephone directory.belonging to Lt. Genl. Pattangell from the house of petitioner's employer J.S. Gill and the petitioner developing friendly terms with Lt. Genl. Pattangell and thus visiting his house for telephone calls from that directory go to show that the petitioner stole the same from the hou...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Shriram Pistons and Rings Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-23-1984
Reported in: (1993)(66)ELT419TriDel
1. This is an Application by the Revenue purporting to be one for a reference to the High Court of Allahabad of certain questions said to be questions of law arising out of an order of the Tribunal in terms of Section 35G of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944. We say "purporting" because, as will appear below, the applicant had failed to furnish a true and correct statement of facts in Annexure 'A' to his application dated 26th August, 1983. Nor did he furnish the draft of the questions of law sought to be referred initially in Annexure 'B' to the said Application. Subsequently, after the Application became part heard, he filed a revised Annexure 'B' dated 23-3-1984 in which he attempted to set out, what according to him, is a question of law that has to be referred to the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad.2. The Tribunal's order which had, according to the Applicant, given rise to a question of law, is the one contained in Order No. 221/83 dated 14th June, 1983 in Appeal No. ED(D...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »