Delhi Court November 1986 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1986 Page 2 of about 90 results (0.021 seconds)Collector of Central Excise Vs. Triveni Engineering Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1987)(10)LC365Tri(Delhi)
1. Initially Appeal No. ED/Del/2891/84 NRB was filed by the appellant against the single Order in Appeal No. 549 to 551/CE/MRT/84, dated 18.8.1984 passed by the Collector (Appeal), Central Excise, New Delhi, disposing of three separate appeals which were filed against the Order in Original No. viz., (1) V(68)/2/80/1217, dated 6.2.82 of the Asstt.Collector, Central Excise, Meerut, (2) No. V(15)(l)Off/Adj 103/81/6521, dated 26.2.82 of the Dy. Collector, Central Excise, Meerut and (3) No.V(15) 239 Off/81/ 900, dated 29.9.1981 of the Superintendent, Central Excise, Mawana. The said appeal was received in the Registry on 20.12.1984. Subsequently the appellant submitted separate Appeal No.E/1617/85 NRB and Appeal No. E/1618/85 NRB along with the applications for condonations of delay under his letter dt. 1.8.85 which was received in the Registry on 5.8.85. The respondents have also filed their Cross Objections in all the 3 captioned appeals.2. Factual backdrops : Three offence cases were bo...
Tag this Judgment!Zaibunnisa Begum, Bangalore Vs. Chief Controller of Imports and Export ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1988(16)ECC189; 1988(33)ELT66(Del)
ORDER1. This matter is at the show cause stage but with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, since we have heard it at great length, the petition is being Admitted D.B. and is being disposed of. 2. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 1st August, 1986 passed by the respondents whereby the application of the petitioner. Mrs. Zaibunissa Begum Ali has been dismissed. 3. The case of the petitioner inter alias is that the petitioner's husband was an officer in the Customs Department. The petitioner is an orthodox muslim lady and widow of late Mr. S.A. Ali, Retired Superintendent of Customs. In 1974 after the death of her husband she went to London where her daughter and son-in-law, Dr. M.A. Hassan are settled. Throughout her stay from 1974 till September, 1985 she was living with her daughter and son-in-law and did not have to incur and expenditure for rent, food or other expenses. During most of the time when she resided with her son-in-law, she was employed by ...
Tag this Judgment!V.W. Bagga Vs. Janak Raj Sharma
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1987(12)DRJ1
G.C. Jain, J. (1) This second appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act'), by the landlady, is directed against the order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 4/5/1985. (2) The dispute is in respect of ground floor of property No. 145, Block M, Greater Kailash Part Ii New Delhi. Ms. V.W. Bagga, the appellant, is owner of the said premises. Janak Raj Sharma, the respondent approached her for letting out the same to him for residential purposes for a period of two years on a monthly rent of Rs. 1,450.00. Ms. Bagga accepted the offer. On 3/1/1977 they moved a joint application under Section 21 of 'the -Act' for permitting the appellant to let out the said accommodation to the respondent for a period of two years. The reason indicated in the application was that because of family circumstances she did not require the said premises presently and she had accepted the offer of the respondent for letting out the same to him for two years from the date of the...
Tag this Judgment!Sudershan Kumar Teri Vs. Rajinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1987(12)DRJ250
N.N. Goswanay, J.(1) This revision petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act by the owner-landlord is directed against the order dated 15/2/1983 passed by the Rent Controller, Delhi whereby his petition for eviction under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, was dismissed. (2) The petitioner has failed a petition for eviction on the ground of bonafide personal requirement. In paragraph 18 (a) of the petition, it was stated that the premises in dispute had been let to the respondent for residential purpose and are required by the petitioner for bona fide personal requirement. It is further alleged that the petitioners is serving with the Indian Army and was posted outside, Delhi. He had besides himself, his wife and a grown up son. At the time of filing of the petition, the petitioner was posted in Eastern Sector in Assam which is not a family station and the petitioner could not keep his family with him. However, by a special permissio...
Tag this Judgment!Qamr-ud-dIn and anr. Vs. Delhi Development Authority and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 31(1987)DLT220
N.N. Goswamy, J. (1) The short question that arises in this second appeal is whether the property in dispute is a part of graveyard and vested in the Union of India or whether the Wakf Board is the owner of the property. The Courts below have recorded a concurrent finding of fact that the property namely field No. 319 was never a graveyard though it was a part of khasra No. 386. Consequently the suit of the plaintiff-appellant stood dismissed with costs, and the appeal was also dismissed with costs. (2) The brief facts leading to the second appeal are that the appellants had filed a suit in 1954 against Delhi Improvement Trust for permanent injunction restraining the Delhi Improvement Trust from disturbing and ousting the appellant from the disputed plot and from dismantling and demolishing the Dhobi Ghat and other structures existing on the disputed plot. At that time, the suit was instituted by appellant No. 2 and at a later stage Delhi Wakf Board was substituted and was transposed s...
Tag this Judgment!S. Sohan Singh Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1986)16ITD272(Delhi)
1. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of the AAC dated 11-5-1984 relating to the assessment year 1983-84.2. The issue before us is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, lease rent received by the assessee for the terrace floor of house No. 1/5B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi is assessable as income from house property or 'income from other sources' as done by the ITO.3. Parties have been heard. We find that the assessee Shri Sohan Singh son of Shri Ram Singh owns property No. 1/5B, situated at Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi. The ground floor and second floor of this house were in occupation of various tenants but the terrace floor was lying vacant and was in physical possession of the assessee. The assessee entered into an agreement with one Vinod Kumar Bansal son of Puranmal Bansal resident of 12-E, Kamla Nagar, New Delhi for lease of the terrace floor on the terms and conditions mentioned in lease deed made on 8-4-1984 appearing at pages 9 to 12 of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Saurashtra Cement and Chemicals Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1987)(10)LC572Tri(Delhi)
1. By these two applications filed under Section 1295(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, the applicants require this Tribunal to rectify, what they call, mistakes apparent from the record in the aforesaid order of the Tribunal.2. We have heard both sides and have carefully considered all their submissions. The applicants do not say that the Tribunal has committed any error in regard to the facts on record. Their quarrel is with the reasoning and interpretation of, and legal conclusions arrived at by, the Tribunal in its aforesaid order. They plead that the Tribunal arrived at its conclusions in disregard of certain well settled principles of interpretation of taxing statutes, viz.; - (1) no weightage should be given to punctuation marks in the legislative provision; (2) interpretation should be based on the express language of the provision, irrespective of the consequences it would entail (such as rendering a substantial portion of the other provisions nugatory) and irrespective of the int...
Tag this Judgment!Megha Nand Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1988)24ITD276(Delhi)
1. The captioned ITA Nos. 737 and 724/Del/85 filed by Shri Megha Nand and ITA Nos. 3506 and 3507/Del/84 filed by Vijay Prakash S/o Megha Nand raising common contentions against the identical orders passed by the AAC upholding the validity of the assessments reopened and framed Under Section 143(3)/148 in the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, may be conveniently consolidated and disposed of by a common order.2. Before we proceed to state and adjudicate upon the rival stand points of the assessees and the revenue, the facts leading up to the controversy may be briefly stated.3. The two assessee appellants had jointly constructed a house property at a plot of land bearing No. A-35, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. The construction of the property was commenced in 1972 and completed by June, 1974. Total investment in the property was shown at Rs. 3,79,476 (Rs. 1,89,738 by each of two joint owners) but after the house had been surveyed in August 1975 by the Government Valuation Officer, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Syndicate Bank Vs. Swaika Chemical Works and Another
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1987]61CompCas752(Delhi); 1987(12)DRJ227; 1987RLR119
Goswamy, J.1. This revision petition by the plaintiff-bank has arisen in the following circumstances : The plaintiff-bank instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 851.64. It was alleged that the defendant had presented a cheque for Rs. 2,500 for encashment at the counter while the credit to the plaintiff was short by Rs. 436.49. One the request of the defendant, the cheque was encased and Rs. 437.49 was debited to the account of the defendant. The defendant never paid that amount in spite of repeated reminders and notice thereby compelling the plaintiff-bank to institute the present suit. The suit amount includes principal and the interest at the usual rate. The suit was contested by the defendant. It was pleaded that the defendants had not taken any overdraft in as much as he had deposited a cheque for Rs. 500 in his account in August, 1972, which had neither been credited to the account of the defendant nor had been returned to the defendant. 2. On the pleadings of the parties, the fol...
Tag this Judgment!Gulab Singh Vs. Lt. Governor and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1987(12)DRJ90; 1987RLR95
R.N. Aggarwal, J. (1) Rule D. B. (2) The challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the Additional District Magistrate-cum-director by which the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was conveyed the order of the Lt. Governor, Delhi appointing Shri Surjan Singh, a member of Panchayatas Acting Pradhan of Gaon Panchayat Kakrola, Najafgarh Block, Delhi. The sub-Divisional Magistrate was further ordered to deliver charge of the office of the Pradhan of Gaon Panchayat Kakrola to Shri Surjan Singh. (3) The challenge to the above order is by Shri Gulab Singh who is the Up Pradhan of the Gaon Panchayat, Kakrola. Shri Chander Singh was the Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha. Shri Chander Singh died on 15/10/1986. According to the respondents a resolution was passed by the Gaon Panchayat expressing no confidence in the Up-Pradhan and the Gaon Panchayat had further passed a resolution to the effect that Shri Surjan Singh be appointed as acting Pradhan of the Gaon Panchayat, the im...
Tag this Judgment!