Delhi Court October 1987 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.
Garg Glass Works (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT75TriDel
1. The appellants are not represented today. By their letter dated 12-10-1987, they have requested us to decide their appeal on the basis of their written submissions and without their personal presence. We have perused their written submissions and have heard the Ld.Representative of the Department.2. The appellants seek benefit of lower rale of customs duty under Heading 84.57 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 in respect of Selecting and Stacking Unit imported by them. We find that an identical issue in the appellants' own case was dealt with by this Tribunal by their order No. 179/85/B2, dated 7-10-1985 in Appeal No. 6/115/82-B2. The contention of the appellants' was rejected in that case. It was an order passed by a three Member Bench of this Tribunal.3. We respectfully follow the ratio of the said order and dismiss the present appeal....
Bhagat Singh Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Delhi174
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) This writ petition has been brought for quashing the eviction order passed by the Estate Officer on July 17, 1972 under Section 5 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 and also the appellate order passed on February 11, 1974 by Shri D. C. Aggarwal, Additional District Judge, under Section 9 of the said Act.(2) One of the grounds raised in challenging the said orders is that a notice issued under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was not a valid notice inasmuch as it did not describe the premises to which this notice related. Annexure 'D' is the copy of the said notice which shows that the property to which it pertained is Nazul land measuring 64 sq. yards Commercial and 133 sq. yards residential located at Bagichi Allaudin, Delhi. No details have been given as to whether the said land is part of any khasra number or the said land has any municipal numb...
Kartar Nath Vs. Inder Nath and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-1987
Reported in: 34(1988)DLT324; 1988(14)DRJ184; 1988RLR62
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This appeal has been brought against order dated November 21, 1979 of Shri M.K.Chawla, Additional District Judge (as His Lordship then was), vide which he held that shop No. 573B is not in possession of the appellants as tenant and the appellant was liable to give physical actual possession uF the said shop to respondent No. 1-Inder Nath to whose share the said shop had fallen in the partition decree.(2) Briefly the facts giving rise to this appeal are that two and a half storeyed property bearing municipal Nos. 573, 574, 575 and 576, G.B. Road, Delhi, had been purchased by Inder Nath, Pishori Lal and the appellant Kartar Nath. The ground floor of the property comprised of three shops bearing municipal Nos. 573,574 and 575 while the first and second floor bearing the common municipal No 576 Before the purchase of this property by the said three persons, shop No. 573 was in the tenancy of M/s. Dhingra Brothers, a partnership firm, at a rental of Rs. 30.00 per mensem. I...
Gift-tax Officer Vs. Parma Nand Aggarwal, Huf.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-1987
Reported in: [1988]24ITD151(Delhi)
ORDERPer Shri. S. P. Kapur, Judicial Member - The revenue is aggrieved and following specific ground has been raised before us :'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the AAC erred in holding that the amount of Rs. 37,188 was a provision for marriage and not liable to gift-tax.'2. At the assessment stage, although a return declaring nil taxable gift was filed, assessment was framed on a gross gift of the valuation of Rs. 37,188 resulting in taxable gift of Rs. 32,188 with the reasoning that the assessed-HUF made a gift of Rs. 37,188 to Miss. Veena Aggarwal, unmarried daughter of Shri. P. N. Aggarwal, by assigning the amount received on the maturity of LIC policy. The stand of the assessed was that gift is not taxable as it was made as provision for the marriage of the daughter. The assessed also contended that Miss Veena Aggarwal got married on 7-12-1975 and took with her along with other assets, the amount received by her against Policy No. 6070852, i.e. Rs. 37,181. the G...
Continental Films Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-1987
Reported in: (1988)24ITR316(Delhi)
1. Appellant assessee by its present appeal, challenges order dated 21-11-1984 of the learned CIT(A), New Delhi for the assessment year 1978-79, inter alia, on the following grounds : 1. That keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (Appeals) had erred in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 1,25,000 on account of compensation paid by the appellant to the firm M/s. Kapoor Sons & Co. 2. That the amount of Rs. 1,25,000 represented the genuine business expenses of the partnership. There was no justification with the authorities below to disallow the same specially in view of the award of the arbitrator and other related circumstances obtaining in the case.2. By status the assessee is a registered firm and its accounting period was the year ending 31-3-1978. The assessee obtained lease of cinema from M/s. Kapoor & Sons, sister concern, by an agreement dated 16-5-1977. The assessee claimed during the assessment proceedings that it paid a sum of Rs. 1,25...
Ajanta Tubes Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-1987
Reported in: 34(1988)DLT110; 1988(15)ECC83; 1987(32)ELT470(Del); 1988RLR103
N.N. Goswamy, J.(1) This judgment will also dispose of C.W.P. No. 1537 of 1985 and C.W.P. No. 2169 of 1985 as the common question involved in all these petitions is regarding the application of clause 6 of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955, hereinafter called the Order. The challenge in these petitions is to the debarring order dated 17.2.1985 read with debarring circular dated 2.3.1984 and the consequential letters issued by the respondents. (2) M/S. Jain Sudh Vanaspati Company Limited imported certain amount of Beef Tallow. A show cause notice dated 14.11.1983 was issued to the said company. The operative portion of the show cause notice is contained in paragraph 3, Which is to the following effect:- 'Therefore, in exercise of the powers vested in me, under clause 8(g) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955. as amended, I hereby direct you in terms of clause 10 of the said Order to show cause by 30th November, 1983, why action should not be taken against you/ your directors under claus...
Bine Chand JaIn Vs. Keshav Chander Chadha and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-1987
Reported in: 34(1988)DLT127
H.C. Goel, J. (1) This is an appeal by Shri Bine Chand Jain, appellant, against the order of the Rent Control Tribunal affirming the order of the Additional Rent Controller by which he dismissed the application of the appellant under O.1 R. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure with the prayer that he may be allowed to be joined as one of the respondents in the eviction petition as filed by Keshav Chandel; Chadha, respondent No. I, against RC. Jain and others, respondents 2 to 7-lRespondent No. I had filed a petition for eviction of respondents 2 to 7 from the demised premises on the ground of non-payment of rent/ personal bona fide requirement and on the ground that respondents 2 to 7 had acquired vacant possession of a suitable alternate accommodation The case of respondent NoJ is that the premises had been let out to Chetan Lal Jain, predecessor-in-interest of respondents 2 to 71 some time in the year 1955. Chetan Lal Jain died in April, 1977 and/ on his death respondents No.2to7 became...
Green Roadways (Regd) Vs. Nirmal Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-1987
Reported in: I(1988)ACC16; (1995)IIILLJ657Del
S.B. Wad, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Delhi, dated 1-4-1985. The appellants M/s Green Roadways are a firm carrying on business of goods transportation. In May 1980, the Election Commissioner and the Union of India needed trucks for transportation of Presiding Officers, Polling Officers and other staff, furniture, ballot boxes etc., to different polling stations. They engaged M/s. Green Roadways, the appellants for this purpose. M/s. Green Roadways hired truck No. RST 7719 from the owner Moti Ram. Nirmal Sing claimant is a Driver. He was in the employment of M/s. Green Roadways. The said truck No. RST 7719 together with the service of Driver Nirmal Singh were entrusted to the Election Commissioner and the Government of India under the said contract. The said truck left the office of the Election Commissioner, Delhi for Udaipur on 23-5-1980 for the purpose of elections under the directions and order of the Union of India and t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ashok Kumar.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-1987
Reported in: [1988]24ITD79(Delhi)
ORDERPer Dr. S. Narayanan, Vice President (WZ) - The CIT, Agra requires the Tribunal to draw up a Statement of the Case and refer certain questions of law said to arise out of the consolidated order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos 1322, 1591 and 1757/85 dated 31-12-86. In our view, no question of law arises in the matter. We decline to state the case. We record our reasons thereforee below in this consolidated order.R. A. No 583/87, A. Y. 1981-822. The assessed is a HUF. It made a claim for partial partition supported by a Memorandum of Partial Partition, executed on 21-10-1979. The assessed-HUF consisted of the following members :(1) Smt. Shanti Devi W/o Late Manik Chand (2) Shri Ashok Kumar S/o Late Manik Chand (3) Master Arun} (4) Master Sanjeev Kumar} Minors (5) Master Dinesh Kumar} (6) Master Bharat Bhushan}3. The assessed family was a partner in the firm of M/s Ladu Mal Kewal Chand, Shamli, Disstt. Muzfarnagar. It effected a partial partition of its capital in the said firm and its ri...
Rana Rubber Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-26-1987
Reported in: (1987)(32)ELT433TriDel
M/s. Rana Rubber Industries (RR) was a partnership concern of the Brothers and their mother. It was having a Central Excise licence for Rubber Conveyor belting and transmission since 1967 under Licence No. L-4/1/67-SRE. The same partnership was having another factory under the name and style of M/s. Rana Rubber and Plastic Mills (RR&PM) at village Kumhar Khera near Saharanpur. Later on, it is claimed by the appellant that the new Partnership Deed was executed in respect of their factory at Kumhar Khera w.e.f. 1-12-1978. The partners in this new partnership were the wives of the three brothers who were the partners alongwith their mother in respect of the other unit i.e. RRI. However, the new partnership deed effected from 1-12-1978 was not intimated to the Central Excise authorities on dissolution of old partnership deed in respect of the other unit RR± it continued to work under the old L-4/1/SRE/75. The other unit Rana Rubber & Plastic Mills (RR&PM) is also manufa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »