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.
Ashok Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-09-1987
Reported in: ILR1987Delhi159
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) By this petition the petitioner seeks to have a writ issued calling upon the respondents to set him at liberty and to quash the order of detention dated 16-12-1987 issued by respondent No. 2 Mr. Tarun Roy, Joint Secretary to the Government of India. The petitioner was detained on 21-3-1987 and is presently confined in the District Jail. Bharatpur (Rajasthan). He was detained in pursuance of the order dated 16-2-1987 of respondent No. 2 made under S. 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act 1974 (for short 'the Act') with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange and with a view to prevent him from engaging in keeping smuggled gold. The petitioner was communicated the grounds on the basis of which the detention order was made against him. (2) The grounds of detention are in the narrative frrm. It is stated that on the basis of secret information resi...
Rakesh Nanda Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-09-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)Crimes733; 33(1987)DLT288
Malik Sharief-Ud-Din, J. (1) A dispute in respect of the possession of property No. 5229-31, consisting of a big hall, two rooms on the ground floor inside Sarai Hafiz Banna, Gandhi Market, Sadar Bazar, Delhi, between the parties was taken to the court of Shrimati Nutan Guba Biswas, S.D.M. Kotwali, Delhi under Sections 145 and 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The application was moved on 8th August 1985 and on 9th August 1985 the property was sealed in pursuance of an order of attachment which was passed by the learned Magistrate on the ground that there is grave apprehension of breach of peace and an emergent situation was in existence. (2) Against this order a revision was preferred before the High Court on 20th August 1985 by the respondent herein and the order was quashed by this court on 30-10-1985 primarily on the point that the learned Magistrate had not expressed any satisfaction about the breach of peace and the civil court was seized of the matter. Thereafter, on 4-11-1...
Walia Enterprises Vs. Collector of Customs and Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC356
1. In this case the facts are that the appellants imported 15,000 pcs.of Miniature Ball Bearings below 10 mm diameter, 608zz Italy from Singapore. In the relevant Bill of Entry filed by them they quoted the invoice price as being Singapore Dollar 3000 C.I.F. The bearings were of SKF make. According to the department the assessable value of the goods was not available with the Customs at Amritsar where the goods had been imported and they sought the information from Delhi Customs who intimated that the C.LF. value was Rs. 9.25 per piece based on the list price available with them for the years 1982 and 1985.Accordingly, the total C.I.F. value of the goods worked out to Rs. 1,38,750.00 as against Rs. 17,128.20 declared in the Bill of Entry. The matter was adjudicated by the Additional Collector of Customs, who, on further information obtained from Central Warehousing Corporation, New Delhi, held that the value of the bearings was Rs. 18.40 per piece bringing the total assessable value t...
Cothas K. Prakash and ors. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC387
1. These four appeals arise out of a common order and were therefore heard together. For purpose of convenience the appellants in these four appeals respectively shall be referred to as appellant Nos. 1 to k. The case for the Department stated in short is that the appellants, either under the name of 4th appellant, or in the name of the Trust of which the major beneficiaries were the partners of the 4th appellant firm or the members of their families, carried out the manufacturing activity of manufacture of blended coffee-chicory mixture but that no licence had been taken therefor and that the manufactured product was being removed and sold without payment of Central Excise duty and that no exemption benefit was available in respect of such a manufacturing activity, the show cause notice dated 17-6-1986 demanding from the appellants, in respect of such activity, duty amounting to Rs. 67,38,881.70p. Under the notice they were further called upon to show cause why the plant and machiner...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Fertilizer Corporation of India
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT713TriDel
1. The facts of the case in this appeal are that the respondents submitted A.L-6 application for procurement of Furnace Oil Heavy Stock under Chapter-X of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 in 1 No. 147/74-C.E., dated 30-4-1974 to be used in the manufacture of I ammonium sulphate and Ammonium Nitrate Melt. The Superintend Exise granted L-6 licence for procuring F.O./LSHS for use as feed stock of urea and Ammonium Sulphate, but not Ammonium Nitrate Melt the same is not fertilizer. On appeal, the Collector of Central Excise, IH |W/Pitas held that Ammonium Nitrate Melt is fertilizer and hence the respondents were eligible to procure F.O./L.S.H.S. for use in the manufacture of Ammonium Nitrate Melt. The Revenue has hallenged the Ordcr-in-appeal by this appeal.3. Shri Shishir Kumar, S.D.R. appearing for the Collector of Central Excise, Patna has stated that the issue involved in this appeal is covered by the Tribunal's earlier decisions in orders No. 322/87-C dated 30-4-1987 and 356/87-C dated...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Shyam Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)Crimes638; 33(1987)DLT265
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) This case has a chequered history ; a sample of Laddoos, was purchased on 6th December, 1979 by the Food Inspector of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. That sample was found to be adulterated. After trial, the respondent was convicted and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000.00 . On appeal, the case was remanded for re-trial by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi vide order dated 6th September, 1983. Thereafter, Shri V.K. Shali, Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi by his judgment dated 22nd January, 1985 found the respondent guilty of the offence punishable under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short 'the Act'). By a separate order dated 28th January, 1985, two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 was imposed on the respondent. In default of payment of fine, he has to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The appeal against the orders of conviction and sen...
Collector of Customs and Central Vs. Ajit Singh and anr.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-07-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC360
1. These are two appeals, one filed by the department and the other by Importer Ajit Singh against the order passed by the Additional Collector of Customs & Central Excise, Chandigarh. Since both the appeals are against the same order, they are being disposed of by a single judgment.2. Briefly, the facts are that Ajit Singh imported a Mercedes Benz 240-D car made in West Germany, Four cylinders, 1979 Model and this was released without duty and fine subject to re-export on or before 26th January, 1984. As per the order appealed against, the car remained in customs custody for 28 days and was due for re-export out of India on or before 23rd February, 1984. On 25th February, 1985, in pursuance of secret information, officers of the Department of Revenue Intelligence at Amritsar detected the vehicle at the residence of Ajit Singh in his village Takhar in Goraya Distt. Jalandhar. Since Ajit Singh failed to produce any evidence, documentary or otherwise, in support of legal retention o...
Telco Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-07-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC331
1. These two appeals involve common issues and were, therefore, taken up together for hearing.2. In Appeal No. 1628/81, the facts, briefly put, are that the appellants, hereinafter referred to as "TELCO", manufacture Power Packs at their Chinchwad Jactory and clear the same under exemption Notification No. 118/75-Central Excise, dated 30.4.1975 to their Pimpri factory where they manufacture, inter alia, Hydraulic Rivetting Guns.The power packs supply the requisite power to the guns. The Assistant Collector, by his order dated 31.3.1980, held that the composite equipment consisting of the power pack, pipeline and the rivetting gun was a complete machinery excisable under Item No. 68 (GET, i.e., the Central Excise Tariff Schedule) and ineligible for exemption under Notification No. 118/75, dated 30.4.1975. In appeal, the Appellate Collector, by his order, upheld the Assistant Collector's order. Appeal No. 1628/81 is against this order.3. Turning to appeal No. 200/82, the facts, briefly ...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. JaIn Marbles
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT716TriDel
1. Under order dated 19-11-1982 the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ajmer denied to the respondents M/s. Jam Marbles benefit of exemption under Notification No. 105/80 dt. 19-6-1980 and held them liable to pay central excise duty from 1-4-1981 on the full value of the goods. An appeal against the same was allowed by the Collector (Appeals) under his order dt. 8-4-1983. This appeal is against the said order.2. We have heard Smt. Saxena for the Deptt. and Shri Gopal Prasad, Consultant for the respondents.3. The order of the Collector (Appeals) was on the basis that mere sawing of rough marble blocks into rough marble slabs would not be a process of manufacture and hence no liability for payment of excise duty arose. This finding is disputed in the grounds of appeal. It is further mentioned in the grounds of appeal that this question whether or not sawing of marble blocks into marble slabs amounts to manufacture was not the subject matter of the Assistant Collector's order and hen...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Subham Cements
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC385
1. Question for decision in this appeal by Revenue is eligibility of the respondents to benefit of concession available to mini cement plant under Notification No. 194/79-C.E., dated 30-5-1979 as amended.2. We have heard Smt. Chander, JDR for the appellant and Shri K.G.Sooji, Consultant for the respondent and have perused the papers placed before us. There is no dispute that the respondents total installed capacity does not exceed 200 tonnes per day and thus fulfils the requirement under explanation (a) to the Notification. There is also no dispute that the unit has no kilns. Smt. Chander stated that because the unit has no kilns it does not fulfil the requirement of definition of mini cement plant contained in the explanation to the Notification.Shri Sooji however submitted that the kilns requirement is also there with reference to large cement plant defined in Clause (b) of explanation to the notification and therefore the capacity of cement plant would alone be material for definit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »