Delhi Court August 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.
Director General of Health Services, Govt. of India Vs. Sunder Lal and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1136
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.1. The present appeal has been filed on behalf of the Director General of health Services against an order of the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi dated 12th Apr. 1977 whereby the learned Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted all the respondents under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The respondents had been prosecuted on the ground that a sample of 300 gms. of asafoetida (King) was lifted from the shop of M/s. Nand Lal and Company on 30th Mar. 1973 and one of the samples which was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis was found .1 adulterated due to 20-38 excess in total ash per cent weight and 8.84 excess in ash insoluble in dilute Hydrochloric Acid per cent by weight.3. The respondents had denied adulteration and some of them like Bansi Dhar, Nand Lal, Vidya Sagar and Karam Narain had also pleaded that they were not in charge or responsible to the company for the conduct of its business and it was on...
M. Bassi Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-1984
Reported in: ILR1985Delhi375; 1985LabIC526
Sachar, J.(1) This petition challenges the seniority list of the Assistant Labour Commissioners of the Labour Department issued by Delhi Administration on 8-5-1981. By the impugned list respondent No. 4 is shown as senior to the petitioner. The petitioner claims that the seniority fixed is erroneous. Hence this petition. (2) In exercise of powers conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, the Chief Commissioner of Delhi notified on 15-2-1963 the Rules for regulating the method of recruitment and the qualifications necessary for appointment to the post of Conciliation Officer/Assistant Labour Commissioner. The method of recruitment provided in column No. 10 of the Schedule is by promotion 50% and by direct recruitment 50 per cent. After the coming into force of the Rules one Sh. M. M. Kher, had been appointed as Assistant Labour Commissioner by way of promotion. The next vacancy had been filled by one Harcharan Singh by direct recruitment. It is also common case that the n...
international Meditek Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-08-1984
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1558Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal under Section 129A(1)of the Customs Act, 1962, against Order No. 2/84, dated 17-1-1984, passed by the Collector of Customs, New Delhi.2. On 25-9-1981, the Appellants filed a Bill of Entry with the Air Cargo Unit for clearance of one package, the contents of which had been described as "Electricals" and declared as Life Saving Item-Endoscopic Equipment. The commercial invoice dated 24-8-1981 of the supplier declared the contents as 'Life Saving Equipment, consisting of 10 sets of Microscopes. The clearance of the goods was sought under OGL Appendix 10(42) of the Import Policy AM-82 as Life Saving Item. On examination, the consignment was found to contain - Items (a) to (d) constituted 10 sets of Fiberlight Operating Microscopes claimed by the Importers to be Endoscopic Equipment for the purpose of clearing the same as 'Life Saving Equipment' figuring at S.No. 34 of list 2 of Appendix 10(42) (OGL) of the Import Policy AM-1982.The last item mentioned at (e) above was...
Taito Watch Manufacturing Vs. Collector of Central Excise and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-08-1984
Reported in: (1984)(18)ELT626TriDel
2. In appeal No. 2095/83, Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur by his order dated 16-5-1983, demanded differential Customs duty amounting to Rs. 5,94,075.90 and imposed personal penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/-, under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter called the Act).The appellants, M/s. Taito Watch Manufacturing Industries (hereinafter called M/s. Taito) are registered as Small Scale Industrial Unit with Director of Industries, Rajasthan for the manufacture of wrist watches as per the phased production programme approved by the Development Commissioner Small Scale Industries, New Delhi. The appellants were required to manufacture 20,000, 30,000, 40,000, 50,000, 50,000 50,000 and 50,000 watches in the first, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th year of progressive production programme and for the purpose were permitted to import components in CKD condition without foreign brand names. The appellants were also permitted to import 10,000 pieces each of cases and dials without foreign...
Delhi Development Authority and ors. Vs. Alkarma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-08-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Delhi132; 1984RLR693
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) (ORAL). The two questions which arise for consideration in this First Appeal are (1) Whether the Engineer-Member of the appellant No. 1 can be directed to appoint an arbitrator and to refer to him the dispute between the parties, and (2) whether the provisions of Order .11 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to arbitration proceedings. (2) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that an agreement had been entered into between the parties, whereby the respondent. had to execute some work. The said agreement contained an arbitration clause, namely. Clause 25 which reads as under : 'EXCEPT where otherwise provided in the contract all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, designs, drawings and instructions hereinbefore mentioned and as to the quality or workmanship or materials used on the work or as to any other question, claim, right, matter or thing whatsoever, in any way arising out of or relating to the contract, d...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Emkay Glass Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-07-1984
Reported in: (1989)(44)ELT475TriDel
1. This appeal and 11 others, as indicated above, all filed directly before the Tribunal under the provisions of Section 35B (2) of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), have been taken up together for hearing and disposal because they cover identical issues. The judgment is being recorded in this appeal because it arises out of an order passed on the classification list filed by the respondents herein; namely M/s. Emkay Glass Works, Firozabad; said order, being Order-in-Appeal Nos. 189-194-CE/KNP/82 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi on 29-10/11-1982. This order has been made the basis for orders, relating to demands, stemming from dispute as to classification, raised against this party as well as other manufacturers of Firozabad, two of whom are also respondents in these appeals before us. Whereas the Collector (Appeals) disposed of 5 other Orders-in-Original confirming the demand against this party for different periods by ...
Rakesh Press Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-07-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC646Tri(Delhi)
Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants imported two old re-conditioned printing machines of East German origin through M/s.Induscandia Erikson & Co. AB, a party from Sweden. A partner of the appellants' firm specifically went abroad to see the machines and to conduct negotiations for purchase of the same The negotiated price for the two machines was S.Kr. 2,00,000 for both the machines. In pursuance of this deal, a proforma invoice No. LG/GI 83100, dated 3-1-1983 was sent by the supplier.' The said invoice had been prepared with reference to the negotiated price, namely, S.Kr. 2,00,000. A letter of credit was opened by the appellants on 28-2-1983 with Grindlays Bank p.l.c, New Delhi. As the importation was being effected under Open General Licence under 1982-83 Import Policy, as per the requirement of the OGL, a certificate was furnished by the foreign supplier giving specifications of the two machines and certifying that the machines were not more than 10 years old...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri Ramadhar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-07-1984
Reported in: [1985]156ITR755(Delhi)
D.K. Kapur, J.1. For the assessment year 1964-65, the following question has been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the profit of Rs. 95,935 is assessable in the hands of the firms and not in the hands of the assessed, an individual, and thus upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ?' 2. The controversy in this case was concerned with whether the assessed, whose name is Shri Ramadhar was entitled to the gain resulting from acquisition of land situated in Bagh Majlis Sarai situated at village Wazirpur, Delhi, or whether that gain was to go to the firm, M/s. Ramadhar and Company, of which he was a partner. The facts were that a firm of this name which had six partners, originally purchased the land for a sum of Rs. 10,740 on April 9, 1957. This firm was a coloniser and dealing in purchase of land and conversion into plots and sale of the same. The fi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prem Bandhu Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-07-1984
Reported in: [1985]156ITR737(Delhi)
D.K. Kapur, J.1. The assessed is an individual, who for the two relevant years in question, had claimed that his income was exempt from Indian income-tax, on account of the fact that he was in receipt of salary from the United States of America Agency for International Development, America Embassy. It was further stated that his salary was being paid in connection with a Technical Co-operation Assistance Programme and Project. The accompanying certificate from the employer showed that he was assigned duties from April, 1969, to March, 1970, in India in connection with a Technical Co-operation Assistance Programme and Project as per the agreement between the Government of India and the Government of the United States of America. 2. The Income-tax Officer on an interpretation of the agreement thought that as the assessed was an Indian national, he was to be taxed and hence his prayer was disallowed. And this decision was affirmed by the Appellate Assistance Commissioner on the basis of a...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Shree Pratap Commercial Company
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-1984
Reported in: (1987)(31)ELT603TriDel
1. Under letter dated 20-3-1978, the Superintendent of Central Excise, Bhilwara-1, intimated the Respondents, M/s Shree Pratap Commercial Company Private Limited, that the product manufactured by them falls under Central Excise Tariff Item No. 22F, and duty on the said basis has to be paid on the removals already made during the period 16-3-1976 to 11-5-1977 and particulars regarding clearances subsequent to 12-7-1977 to 28-2-1978 may be furnished and also from 1-3-1978 and future clearances may not be taken without obtaining an appropriate license. This was followed by a demand in form D.D. 2 dated 24-5-1978.The respondent protested by letter dated 2-6-1978 to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, pointing out that there had been no regular show cause notice and hearing and also been denied. The Assistant Collector thereafter adjudicated and the Chemical Examiner, on the basis of whose report the Superintendent had sent his letter, was also cross-examined during the adjudication...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »