Delhi Court November 1988 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.
S and S Power Switchgear Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-02-1988
Reported in: (1989)(39)ELT445TriDel
1. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras issued a notice to the appellants under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 in respect of duty amounting to Rs. 20,248.71 paise. The ground for the demand was that power fuse bodies imported by the appellants were correctly classifiable under Item 85.18/27(1) instead of Item 85.18/27(3), under which they were originally assessed. The Assistant Collector held that fuse bodies are correctly assessable to duty under sub-item (1) of Item 85.18/27 and confirmed a part of the demand amounting to Rs. 8,858.51 paise.2. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) rejected the appeal and upheld the Assistant Collector's order after considering the appellant's grounds in detail. Hence the present appeal.3. We heard Shri S. Subramanian, Consultant for the appellants, considered the written arguments filed by Shri Nair, the learned SDR and the counter arguments filed by Shri Subramanian on behalf of the appellants.4. When the fuse bodies were imported they were...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. P.S.i. Data Systems
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-02-1988
Reported in: (1989)(39)ELT692TriDel
1. The principal dispute in this appeal is whether certain amounts recovered by the respondents from their customers in the name of technical service charges should form a part of the assessable value of computers manufactured and sold by them.2. Relying on paragraph 49 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Mis. Bombay Tyres International Limited, 1983 ELT 18% (SC), in which it had been held that after-sale service charges were includible in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944, the Assistant Collector held that the technical service charges collected by the respondents enriched the marketability of the computers and they were, therefore, to be included in the assessable value of the computers. The Assistant Collector further held that the respondents had not disclosed to the department the amounts collected in the name of technical service charges and further that the charges on account of technical services were inflated s...
Jaggu Mal Ved Parkash Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-02-1988
Reported in: 36(1988)DLT430
Leila Seth, J. (1) Mr. Gupta says that he is pressing this petition only in respect of the order dated 4th January. 1988 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Licensing), Delhi. He further says that he will file a reply to the show cause notice dated 5th October, 1988 issued by the Controller of Explosives North Circle, Agra and agitate his grievances pertaining to that matter before the said authority. (2) Rule D.E. (3) Counsels are agreed that the matter be heard and disposed of here and now. (4) The petitioners are wholesale dealers of fire works. Admittedly, they obtained a license as far back as 1979 which was renewed from time to time. It is not disputed that the petitioner's license is in force. (5) On 7th December, 1987, a fire broke out in the petitioner's shop bearing No. 49A, Central Market, Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi. Police Station was informed about the fire. An intimation was also sent to the Deputy Chief Controller, Explosives, Agra and Controller of Explosives, Cha...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Harbhajan Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-02-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)Crimes76; 36(1988)DLT373
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) By this appeal, the state challenges the acquittal of Harbhajan Singh, the respondent herein for offences under Sections 186/353/506 of the Indian Penal Code. The impugned judgment was passed by Shri Dinesh Dayal, Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi on 1st May, 1978. (2) The prosecution case was that on 12th August, 1974, the respondent herein Harbhajan Singh who was working as a Sorter in the Railway Mail Service entered the office of Shri N.R. Mehta, who was then working as a Deputy Superintendent in the Sorting Division, without permission. The allegations are that he asked his superior officer has to how his duty had been changed and also gave him a slap while abusing him. On Shri Mehta's saying that be would call the Police, it is alleged that the respondent threatened him with dire consequences. Thereafter the accused (the respondent herein) left the office and Shri N R. Mehta lodged a report with the Police, which was exhibited as Ex. Public Witness .1/A. (3)...
S.M. Enterprises Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-1988
Reported in: (1989)(40)ELT429TriDel
On 17.8.82, the Central Excise Anti-Evasion officers visited the factory premises of the appellant firm herein. The factory was found engaged in the manufacture of chokes for fluorescent tubes falling under Tariff Item 61 of the CET. The appellant firm filed a declaration under Notification No. 2/81, dated 17-1-81 for exemption from licensing control but were not maintaining any simplified account as required under the rules.1.1 The officers recovered inter alia, two exercise note books and some duplicate challan books from the factory premises. It is to be noted here that the exact place from where these exercise books were recovered has not been given either in the seizure memo or anywhere else. These exercise note books contain entries of chokes and other goods despatched by the person concerned maintaining these exercise books.1.2 Based on the entries of despatches of chokes mentioned in these two exercise note books and on the basis of statement of Shri Vishwanath Agarwal, a part...
Baldev Raj Gandok Vs. Kishan Singh Pasricha
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-1988
Reported in: 37(1988)DLT67
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This regular second appeal has been brought against judgment dated July 14, 1986, of Shri R. K. Sain, Additional District Judge, Delhi, by which he had dismissed an appeal brought against order dated October 3, 1983 of Shri K. S. Paul, Sub-Judge, Delhi, by which he had dismissed an application brought by the appellant seeking setting aside of ex-parte judgment and decree dated May 26, 1981. made in Suit No. 1151/80. (2) At the outset, I may mention that the regular second appeal is not competent against the impugned appellate judgment. Under Order Xliii Rule 1 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code'), an order under Order Ix Rule 13 of the Code rejecting an application for an order to set aside a decree passed ex-parte is appealable. That is why the appeal against the order of the Sub-Judge dismissing the application moved under Order Ix Rule 13 of the Code was filed and was decided by the Additional District Judge. No second appeal has been provided ...
Giyarsi Ram Vs. State (Delhi Administration) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)Crimes136; 36(1988)DLT388
Malik, J. (1) The petitioner is aggrieved of a notice under section 47/50 of the Delhi Police Act dated nil calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be externed from the limits of the Union Territory of Delhi for a period of two years as also a history sheet opened against him consequent to which an entry was made in the surveillance register. (2) The notice under section 47/50, Delhi Police Act, was issued by Smt. Kiran Bedi, the then Deputy Commissioner of Police, North District. A number of grounds have been pressed in support of the challenge thrown to the impugned order. Smt. Kiran Bedi, the then Deputy Commissioner of Police, has submitted an affidavit in person. There is also an affidavit of the S.H.O. Police Station Subzi Mandi, on record. Broadly speaking, all the facts have been admitted. In my view, the whole controversy falls within a very narrow compass inasmuch as the basis for proceeding against the petitioner under section 47/50 of the Delhi Pol...
indu Arora Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-1988
Reported in: 1989(16)DRJ79
H.C. Goel, J. (1) This is a bail application of Indu Arora accused- petitioner in the case Fir No. 100 dated June 24, 1988 of Ps Inder Puri under Section 302 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case stated briefly is that Indu Arora was married to Harish Arora in the year 1980. They had two children-one son Sunny by name aged about 6 1/2 years and a daughter Shikha about 3 1/4 years old. Ajit Seth, co-accused of the petitioner, was an immediate neighbour of the petitioner. Indu Arora had developed extra marital relations with Ajit Seth, her co-accused. Sunny, the son of Indu Arora and Harish Arora, was getting tuition from one Mrs. Bali whose house was situated at some distance from the house of Indu Arora. Shikha was also made to join the nursery class at Mrs. Ball's school on June 24, 1988. It was done as per the wishes and insistence of Indu Arora who had represented that Shikha should be given tuition by Mrs. Bali by admitting her in regular nursery cla...
Hoshiar Singh Etc. Vs. Gaon Sabha,
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-1988
Reported in: 36(1988)DLT428
Sunanda Bbandare, J.(1) This petition is directed against the order of the Senior Sub Judge, Delhi dated 4th April 1987 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioners against the order of the trial court dated 20th January 1987 dismissing their applications under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed. (2) The petitioners claim to be in possession of Khasra No. 4 (4 bighas 9 biswas,) 7 (4 bighas 9 biswas), 8 (4 bighas 16 biswas), 13 (4 bighas 16 biswas) and 14 (4 bighas 9 biswas) of Rectangle No. 65 situated at Village Daryapur Kalan, Delhi as Bhumidars. It is the case of the petitioners that they are likely to be dispossessed by the respondents from this land because this land is going to be distributed to landless people by the respondents. (3) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners cannot be dispossessed from the land in question without due process of law and no notice regarding their removal from the land in question...
Surinder Kumar and ors. Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-1988
Reported in: 1989(16)DRJ90; 1989RLR322
N.N. Goswamy, J.(1) This petition by the employees of Food Corporation of India is directed against the Decision of Delhi Development Authority refusing to allot 47 flat? in Trilok Puri residential Scheme, which decision was finally conveyed to the Food Corporation of India by letter dated 31st March, 1987.(2) The facts of the case are not in dispute. The Delhi Development Authority constructed about 1392 middle income group and 697 low income group dwelling units in Trilok Puri across Yamuna. Vide. letter dated 4th July, 1979, Food Corporation of India requested for allotment of some flats and in response to the said letter, the respondent authority vide its letter dated 30th August, 1979 offered allotment of flats to such employees of Food Corporation of India who may fulfill the terms and conditions of allotment. After some correspondence, by letters dated 28th March, 1981 and 24th April, 1981, 47 specific flats 33 Mig and 14 Lig, were allotted to the Food Corporation of India for a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »