Delhi Court April 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.
Harnam Singh Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD561(Delhi)
Inspecting Assistant Commissioner's order in pursuance to proceedings under section 147(a) could not be quashed in revision as per the facts of the case.(i) In any case the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment's) order of 27-2-1984 cannot be termed as an order of reassessment and lifting the same could at best revive proceedings initiated under section 147(a) if these could be processed. But in the present case limitation for completion having expired that also could not be done under the garb of section 263. (ii) The order in revision of 27-2-1984 if it is termed as an order in pursuance to proceedings under section 147(a) could not be revised in view of complete prohibition contained in clause (a) of sub-section(2) of section 263, as it existed before 1-10-1984 because the assessee got a vested right on 27-2-1984 of immunity of proceedings under section 263 of the Act. (iii) If the intention and the tenor of the Commissioner(Appeal's)'s order was to seek revision of the ord...
Munshi Ram Vs. Lt. Governor, Union Territory of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1089; 32(1987)DLT243
R.N. Aggarwal, J.(1) This order be read in continuation of our orderdated 27/02/1987.(2) The petitioner has a long criminal history. He started his criminal career in June 1961 and continued it till 1983. During the aforesaid period the petitioner was involved in as many as 32 criminal cases, and they include cases of all kinds including one case under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.(3) Notice under section 47 read with section 50 of the Delhi Police Act was given to the petitioner to show cause why he be not externed from the Union Territory of Delhi. On 28/08/1985 an order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police requiring the petitioner to enter into a bond in the sum of Rs. 5000.00 with one surety in the like amount undertaking to maintain peace and good behavior. The operative portion of that order reads asfollows: 'NOW, thereforee, I order that Shri Munshi Ram s/o Holia Ram r/o 5445, Ladoo Ghati, P. Ganj, New Delhi shall so conduct himself as to prevent voilence and ...
Gurmauj Saran Baluja Vs. Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1987
Reported in: 32(1987)DLT206; 1987(13)DRJ195
Sunanda Bhandare, J. (1) In this petition under article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the bill/demand dated 16th August 1973 issued by the Delhi Municipal Corporation for the asst. year 1973-74 on the ground that no notice as required under Section 126(2) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act was issued to the petitioner though the rateable of the property in question was proposed to be enhanced.(2) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that previous to this asst. year 1973-74, for the asst. year 1967-68 the annual letting value of the property was fixed at Rs. 5400 and Rs. 675 was levied as tax for that assessment year, however for the asst. year 1973-74 i.e. the period in question the petitioner was being charged Rs. 929.40 as property tax because the annual letting value was fixed at Rs. 6480. Learned counsel submitted that no notice was issued to the petitioner and, thereforee, the petitioner was unable to bring to the notice of...
Ashok Kumar Vs. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1987
Reported in: 33(1987)DLT29
M.K. Chawla, J. (1) Shri Ashok Kumar Verma is the petitioner. He has challenged the order of his detention under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA Act), dated 11.2.1987. (2) In order to appreciate the contentions of the petitioner, it is relevant to keep in mind the few salient features leading to his arrest and the order of dentention. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Officers has a secret information that the petitioner is dealing in smuggled goods. They maintained a surveillance at his residential as well as business premises in Pragati Market Ashok Vihar, Delhi. On the morning of 7.11.1986, the officers spotted a red Maruti car parked near his residence. Later on this very car was again seen parked near the business premises of the petitioner. In the afternoon, of the same day, this car was intercepted near Alpana cinema. One Shri Ram Kishore Gupta was driving the car. In the presence of the independent witnesses, the c...
Paras Ram and anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1987
Reported in: 33(1987)DLT55
M.K. Chawla, J. 1. The learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the correctness of the finding of fact by which the appellants were convicted under Section 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced toundergo R I. for a period of 11/2 years and a fine of Rs. 200/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were further directed to undergo R.I. for 3 months The only submission is that a lenient view in the matter of sentence be taken inasmuch as the appellants have already suffered the agony of protracted trial of 2 years as well as the hearing of appeal after 11 years. 2. The submission of the learned counsel has much substance. PW-2 Laxmi Chand is the injured. He has given in minute details the part played by the accused persons in causing injuries to him, his wife and another person, with sharp-edged weapon. Originally, there were four accused charged with the commission of offences under Sections 307/326/324/452 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. As per the case of th...
Shish Ram and ors. Vs. Jai Chand and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1987
Reported in: I(1987)ACC566
S.B. Wad, J.1. This appeal is filed by the father of the deceased Shish Ram, mother Jaimala Devi and sister Km. Saraswati, as the Tribunal had dismissed their claim petition. While dismissing the petition the Tribunal had also worked out as to how much will be dependency of the claimants on the deceased. The Tribunal had come to the conclusion that Rs. 24,900/- would be the adequate compensation, in this case. For this purpose the Tribunal had assumed that the deceased would have earned Rs. 600/- per month after three years of this service. The Tribunal had also accepted ten as multiplier considering the fact that the father was 65 years and mother was 55 years of age. The Tribunal rejected the claim on the ground that it was not proved by the appellants 1 and 2 that they were the parents of the deceased, although no issue was claimed by the respondent or framed by the Tribunal.2. Since it is an accident case in which a person had died and in spite of the fact that there was no issue t...
Annapurna Glass Works (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-1987
Reported in: (1989)(41)ELT655aTriDel
1. These ten appeals involve identical issues, arise out of a common order-in-appeal and relate to the same appellants. There are, therefore, disposed of by this common order.2. The appellants are not represented today. In their letter dated 20.4.1987, they have sent written submissions for our consideration and have requested for disposal of their appeals on merits in their absence. Accordingly, we have heard the learned representative of the department and considered the record and the written submissions of the appellants.3. On careful consideration of the matter, we find that apart from the price of the goods stated in their regular invoices, the appellants recovered certain extra charges from their customers through separate bills. In the price lists submitted by the appellants for approval of the competent Central Excise Authority in advance, the appellants had not disclosed these extra charges. This was, therefore, clearly a case of suppression on their part and hence covered b...
Srinivasa Metal Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)ECC1
1. This appeal has been dismissed for default by order No. 322/86-B1 dated 5-6-1986, under Rule 20 of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 1982. The appellants have now applied for restoration of their appeal, submitting that there had been no wilful negligence by them when they did not appear on 5-6-1986. They say they are quite serious about the appeal but due to illness they were not able to engage an advocate in time and entrust the case to him to represent them. They also had difficulty in getting a train ticket, it being summer season.2. Considering all facts and circumstances, we restored the appeal to its original number and prolceeded to hear it.3. On behalf of M/s Srinivasa Metal Industries, Mr. Rao's main point was that the circles were cut from duty paid aluminium strips, and since circles and strips fell in the same sub-item, no duty would be leviable on the circles. Furthermore, the circles came into being only as intermediate forms...
Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-23-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD246(Delhi)
1. This appeal by the assessee-company is against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upholding penalty under Section 27l(l)(c) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1974-75. The brief facts are : That the assessee had filed a return showing an income of Rs. 13.38 lacs without adjustment of brought forward losses of earlier years. The assessment was made on an income of Rs. 61.25 lacs. After the appeal before the Tribunal the income for this year was assessed at Rs. 16.70 lacs but this was subject to the brought forward losses. If the brought forward losses were to be adjusted, it would result in a net loss of Rs. 11.66 lacs to be carried forward.2. The Income-tax Officer initiated proceedings under Section 271(l)(c) and the present penalty order has been passed imposing penalty of Rs. 1,06,670, which, according to the Income-tax Officer, was the tax sought to be evaded on the concealed income of Rs. 1,84,711. The particulars of the income held to be conceale...
Calcutta Steel Industries and Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)ECC46
1. The dispute in these cases is about the hot rolled products less than 3 mm in thickness and less than 75 mm in width assessed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Patiala as hoops under tariff item No. 26AA(ii); the manufacturers had asked for their classification as bars under Tariff Item No. 26AA(ia).2. The Collector (Appeals) wrote an excellent order in which all the points of dispute have been discussed thoroughly; it is hardly necessary to go anywhere else to understand the dispute. By his order No. 126 to H4-CE/CHG/85, dated 23-2-1985 he approved the assessment made by the Assistant Collector and ruled that the products were assessable as hoops. He was fair enough however, to record that at the relevant time there was no definition in the tariff for different iron and steel products and, therefore, the issue in question would have to be decided by taking into account the meaning of these terms as they were understood in the trade, although he said that it was clear f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »