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.
Bilaspur Kisan Sahkari Chini Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-04-1987
Reported in: (1987)(12)LC655Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants' plea in the instant case is that bulk of the molasses stored in the open tanks related to the sugar year 1978-79.The molasses remained in storage in open kachha pits from May, 1979 to 1982 for a period of 32 months. The molasses therefore, received rain water during the three rainy seasons namely, 1979, 1980 & 1981. Being mixed with rain water, it could not detect easily the shortage and seepage that had occurred in molasses because the tanks more or less remained full.2. Due to the molasses having become unfit for distillation purpose, the molasses were not lifted by the distilleries despite the allotment orders made by the State Excise Commissioner. Accordingly, the assessee requested for permission to sell molasses in the open market. In September, 1979, the request was acceded to by the Excise Commissioner and accordingly, the appellants made sale of 18,879.65 quintals of molasses during October, 1979 to May, 1980. After May, 1980, the Excise Commissioner re...
Subhash Chand Vs. Om Prakash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-04-1987
Reported in: 32(1987)DLT182
Mahinder Narain, J.(1) This revision petition is filed by the tenant against the order of Shri Dinesh Dayal, 4th Additional Rent Controller, Delhi dated 18/08/1981, whereby the Rent Controller refused to grant leave to defend the eviction petition filed by the landlord, the respondent here, under Section 14(l)(e) and Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act.(2) It is not disputed that the subject matter of the tenancy is a room measuring 9' ft. X 8' ft. It is also not disputed that this room is located in houseNo. 7015, Gali Kumaharan, Pahari Dhiraj, Delhi.(3) In the application for leave to defend the tenant contended that the said room has been given to the tenant by the landlord for commercial purpose that from the very inception the tenant had been carrying on manufacturing from that room, and that he was manufacturing ''Kadchi', 'Palta', 'Chimta','Chaini' etc. It was also stated in the application for leave to defend that thelandlord had instituted a suit against the tenant to r...
Karnataka Implements and Vs. Collr. of Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-03-1987
Reported in: (1989)(41)ELT572TriDel
1. The appellants stated that the parts imported by them were meant for a special type of trailer which had 64 tyres, Tie-rod linkages and Hydraulic stearing. This special heavy duty trailer had to be pulled by a tractor which had the capacity to pull a load of 100 tons or more.Their trailer was, therefore, a mechanically propelled one, pleaded the appellants, and hence not covered by heading 87.13/14.2. The learned representative of the department stated that all trailers had to be pulled by another vehicle. Therefore, the condition in heading 87.13/14 "not mechanically propelled" had to be interpreted to mean that the vehicle falling in that heading should not have a prime mover installed on the vehicle itself. Otherwise, specific mention of "trailer" in that heading would become meaningless.3. On careful consideration of the matter, we agree with the view of the learned representative of the department. Heading 87.13/14 is a specific one for trailers and it makes no distinction bet...
Collector of Customs Vs. Photogravurs (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-03-1987
Reported in: (1987)(12)ECC90
1. Collector of Customs, Bombay has filed an appeal being aggrieved from order in appeal No. S/49-640/84CL dated 30-3-1985 passed by Collector of Customs, (Appeals), Bombay.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondents M/s Photo-gravurs (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bombay had imported Lu Cop II/M-Film Step and Repeat Machine vide Bill of Entry Cash No. 741 OC dated 29-1-82. The same was assessed to duty under heading 90.10 of the Customs Tariff Act 1975. The respondents had filed a refund application before the Assistant Collector of Customs and had claimed that the goods imported were correctly assessable under heading 84.35 of CTA 1975 as other printing machinery/machinery for uses ancillary to printing. The learned Assistant Collector had taken the view that the repeat machines imported by the respondents was designed for taking copies of the designs from photographic positive or negative to the sensitized materials like zinc, aluminium or photographic plates or films. He was of ...
Raghubir Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-03-1987
Reported in: 1987RLR286
M.K. Chawla, J.(1) On 9.3.1974, Sho of Pol. Stn. Kingsway Camp recommended the name of the petitioner for opening of the history sheet and an entry into the Surveillance Register on the averments that after leaving the school, the petitioner became vagabond and came in association with Rajpal and Joginder residents of village Sahipur and Dhani Ram resident of village Haiderpur. He started his criminal career in the year 1969. He has so far been arrested in four cases of P.S. Alipur and Kingsway Camp. He further observed that the petitioner was sentenced to three months R.I. in case F.I.R. No. 22 dated 23.1.1970 u/s 392 Indian Penal Code ., P.S. Alipur. His paternal uncle Ram Krishan is B.C. of Bundle 'A' of P.S. Kingsway Camp. The nefarious activities of Ram Krishan also attribute to the criminal career of this B.C. to a great extent. The history sheet of this B.C. is prepared. The orders may kindly be passed to keep the history sheet of this B.C. on bundle 'A' so that the activities o...
Raghubir Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-03-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1131
ORDERM.K. Chawla, J.1. On 9-3-1974, SHO of Police Station, Kingsway Camp recommended the name of the petitioner for opening of the history sheet and an entry into the Surveillance Register on the averments that after leaving the school, the petitioner became vagabond and came in association with Rajpal and Joginder residents of village Sahipur and Dhani Ram resident of village Haiderpur. He started his criminal career in the year 1969. He has so far been arrested in four cases of Police Station, Alipur and Kingsway Camp. He further observed that the petitioner was sentenced to three months R.I. in case F.I.R. No. 22 dt. 23-1-1970 under Section 392, I.P.C. Police Station, Alipur. His paternal uncle Ram Kishan is B.C. of Bundle 'A' of Police Station Kingsway Camp. The nefarious activities of Ram Kishan also attribute to the criminal career of this B.C. to a great extent. The history sheet of this B.C. is prepared The orders may kindly be passed to keep the history sheet of this B.C. on b...
Power Build Ltd. Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT129TriDel
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants, before this Tribunal, against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, dated 10-11-1982. Since the impugned order was with reference to the two Orders-in-Original, a single appeal was filed according to the practice then prevailing with the Board. On being pointed out that two appeals have to be filed. A supplementary appeal No. 412/87-B-I has been filed with an application for condonation of delay. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, the delay is condoned.2. The appellants manufacture (i) Weighbridges, and (ii) Electronic Control Panels which are component parts of Beltweigher. They also manufacture (i) Conveyor; (ii) Electronic Control Panels; (iii) Weighbridge which are components parts of Weigh Feeder. A complete Belt Weigher or a Weigh Feeder consists of the following parts: (i) Weigh Bridge (i) Weigh Bridge (ii) Control Panel (ii) Main Control Panel (iii) Belt (iii) Local Control Panel & Controllers (i...
Rattan Mechanical Works Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-1987
Reported in: (1989)(44)ELT390TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi dated 18-6-1982.2. Shri Bedi, the learned Counsel for the appellant, at the outset submitted that the question arising for consideration in the appeal, namely, whether the nuts and bolts manufactured by the appellants would be classifiable under Tariff Item 68 or under Item 52 of the Central Excise Tariff has been conclusively decided by the ratio of the ruling of the Special Bench in the case of Quality Sales Corporation, Ludhiana v. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh, reported in 1986 (23) E.L.T. 137 (Tribunal) to the effect that the items in question are classifiable under Tariff Item 52 of the Central Excise Tariff. The learned Counsel, therefore, submitted that he does not want to agitate the question once over before us and would not press his contention in that regard. Nevertheless, the learned Counsel submitted that the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ludhiana by orde...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Anil Starch Products Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-1987
Reported in: (1987)(30)ELT307TriDel
1. We have heard Shri Sundar Rajan, 3DR for the appellant-Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad and Shri C.S. Khambholja, Consultant for the respondents-non-applicant.2. The impugned order was communicated to the appellant on 18-3-1982.Memo. of Appeal dated 9-3-1983 was filed in the Tribunal on 4-3-1983.In application for condonation of delay dated 9-3-1983 signed by Shri N.V. Jotwani, Assistant Collector (Legal) it is urged that before commencement of Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal on 11-10-1982 the matter and implication of revenue was under study. This caused the delay and delay in filing appeal may be condoned. In another miscellaneous petition dated 7-10-1986 it is, inter alia, urged that after receipt of the impugned order dated 18-3-1982 by Collector of Central Excise, Baroda under whose charge the matter fell at the relevant time i.e. till 1-9-1983,' the Collector called for A.C's comments on 8-4-1982. The Assistant Collector was reminded and he had by his...
Smt. Somawanti Sethi Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-1987
Reported in: (1987)21ITD459(Delhi)
1. These are four appeals two each by the assessee and the department.The assessee in these cases did not file its wealth-tax return in the first instance. Accordingly, notices under Section 17 of the WT Act had to be issued to her. In response thereto she filed returns of wealth on 16-3-79 disclosing taxable figures of wealth. For not having filed the returns the IAC initiated penalty proceedings under Section 18(1)(c) of the WT Act and levied penalties of Rs. 4,04,100 and Rs. 2,75,100, respectively. On appeals the CWT (Appeals) has directed the IAC to modify the penalty orders by working out the quantum on the basis of wealth-tax sought to be evaded by the assessee. However, he held that the penalties were otherwise livable. The assessee has come up in second appeal before Tribunal. The department has filed appeals in relation to these very assessment years 1970-71 and 1972-73 challenging the order of the CWT (Appeals) directing the IAC to recompute the amount of penalty.2. We have ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »