Delhi Court March 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.
Director, Central Bureu Investication Vs. Ram Jethmalani
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT34; 1988(15)DRJ19
S.S. Chadha, J. (1) Shri Ram Jethmalani, the respondent in this appeal (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) is the plaintiff in a libel action instituted by him in the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice in England, being No. 1983-J No. 6467, against one Shri Swraj Paul of London. The cause of action is alleged to have arisen out of statements made by said Shri Swraj Paul in London to the correspondents of 'The Hindustan Times' and 'The Daily' which appeared in August 28,1983 issue of the former and September 1, 1983 issue of the latter. Shri Swraj Paul has made a counter-claim arising out of respondent's statement appearing in the August 30, 1983 issue of 'Indian Express'. During the course of the said litigation in England, the respondent was called upon to furnish particulars of certain allegations made by the respondent. According to the respondent the detailed particulars are available in the statements and documents forming part of the record of an investig...
National Dyeing Centre and ors. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: (1988)(35)ELT551TriDel
1. All these appeals are being disposed of under this common order since the issues involved in the main are common, though there are certain factual differences which will be noticed at the appropriate stage. For purpose of convenience the appellants, though in different appeals, shall be referred to in this order as appellants 1 to 5 respectively.2. All the appellants were engaged during the relevant period in the processing of either cotton fabrics or man-made fabrics or both. To be very specific, appellants 2 and 4 were processing man-made fabrics, appellant 5 cotton fabrics only and appellants 1 and 3 both types of fabrics. In about the middle of June 1984 the Central Excise officers visited these factories and subsequently show cause notices were issued to all the appellants charging them that they had processed and removed the fabrics abovesaid without obtaining licence and without payment of duty though they were not entitled to do so on and after 24-11-1979.The reason was tha...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)LC299Tri(Delhi)
1. By the impugned order the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay disposed of 8 appeals filed before him. As the issue involved in all these appeals is the same, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. Shri N.V. Raghavan Iyer has argued for the respondents Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Shri K.V. Kunhikrishnan has argued for M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. None has appeared for M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited.3. We have heard Shri Sunder Rajan, learned 3.D.R. for the appellant-Collector and S/Shri Raghavan Iyer and Kunhikrishnan for M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Limited and M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited respectively.4. The issue involved in these appeals is whether unrebated rate of duty as prescribed in the Notification issued under Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was payable in respect of Aviation Turbine Fuel supplied by the respondents to the foreign bound aircrafts in bond under Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules, 1...
Lucky Stainless Steel Works Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: (1990)(46)ELT269TriDel
1. Lucky Stainless Steel Works, Bombay had filed one revision application to the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi being aggrieved from order No. 615 of 1981 dated 10-12-81 passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi.After coming into existence of the Tribunal the said revision application stands transferred to the Tribunal in terms of the provisions of Sec. 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962 to be disposed of as an appeal. The Collector of Customs, Bombay had disposed of 3 matters by a consolidated order. Thereafter the appellant filed two more supplementary appeals. By a separate order the delay in the filing of the supplementary appeals has been condoned. Since the facts of the 3 appeals are similar, the same are disposed of by this consolidated order.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant had imported 3 consignments declared to contain stainless steel scrap covered by Bill of Entry No. 1909/4 of 22-12-1979 and 1821/57 ...
Perfect Electric (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC36Tri(Delhi)
1. We have heard Shri B.B. Gujaral, Advocate for the applicants and Smt. Zutshi for the Department. The products in issue are all automobile switches. Under the impugned order they have been classified under Item 61 Central Excise Tariff instead of Item 68 Central Excise Tariff as claimed by the applicants. Shri Gujaral points out that this Tribunal has held in its decision reported in 1987 (14) ECC 211T following the decision of the Bombay High Court reported in 1987 (31) ELT 369 that such automobile switches would be properly classifiable under Item 68 Central Excise Tariff. Since thus the applicants have a prima-facie goods case on merits, the pre-deposit of the duty demanded is waived and recovery thereof is stayed pending disposal of the appeal....
income-tax Officer Vs. Janak Steel Tubes (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: (1988)27ITD323(Delhi)
1. These appeals preferred by the revenue have relation to assessment against Janak Steel Tubes (P.) Limited for years 1982-83 and 1983-84.2. We shall first deal with the common point for both the appeals which has reference to a claim for deduction under Section 35CC(1).3. The assessee participated, in a programme of rural development sponsored by the Haryana Government. In the village Daya, Hissar District, Haryana, a middle school was being run by the State Government. This was in a backward area. The upgrada-tion of this institution was in the offing. The building was on the Government land.Adjoining thereto, there was 6-acre of open plot of land belonging to Gram Panohayat. The Gram Panchayat was willing to hand over the plot to the middle school, the upgradation of which was under consideration. It is at that stage the assessee proposed not only to renovate the existing building but to put up extension and provide all furniture, fittings, etc., as per the approved plan of the St...
P.S. Sarine Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: (1988)25ITD345(Delhi)
1. Assessee by the present appeal challenges order dated 22-10-1984 of the learned AAC of Wealth-tax, New Delhi for the assessment year 1978-79, inter alia, on the following grounds : 1. That the learned Wealth-tax Officer erred in valuing the Hauz Khas property at Rs. 7,49,602 in place of Rs. 2,37,400 declared by me. The learned Wealth-tax Officer should have applied Rule 1BB of the W.T. Rules for determination of the value of the property. Without prejudice to the abovementioned ground, it is further submitted that the WTO erred in capitalising the rental income at 14 times in place of 10 times and in not deducting the unearned interest payable to DDA at the time of sale of the property. 2. That the learned Wealth-tax Officer erred in valuing the 1/2 share of the assessee in Panchsheel property at Rs. 7,64,829 in place of Rs. 1,10,273 declared by me. The learned WTO erred in not applying Rule 1BB of the WT Rules. Without prejudice to the above, it is further stated that the officer ...
Sis Ram Sharma and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1988
Reported in: (1988)25ITD410(Delhi)
1. This is an assessee's second appeal arising out of its assessment for asstt. year 1978-79. We have heard the learned counsel for the assessee and the learned Departmental Representative and have perused the material placed before us. The assessee runs brick kilns and for the year ending 30-9-1977 which was the accounting year relevant to asstt. year 1978-79 it had shown sales of Rs. 10,60,921 and a gross profit of Rs. 1,68,357 giving a rate of 17 per cent as against GP rate of 22 per cent on sales of Rs. 7,92,000 in the immediately preceding year. The learned ITO considered the gross profit very low. The assessee's explanation was that the fall was due to increase in turnover and competition in the market and the rise in the cost of inputs. The ITO also noticed that the difference between the kuchcha bricks moulded and the bricks loaded in the brick kilns was of the order of 6.5 per cent which he considered to be excessive. According to the assesses, damage of bricks between the pe...
Mahendra Radio and Tv (P) Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)LC755Tri(Delhi)
1. The facts alleged in this case are that appellants informed the Central Excise Department on 7th July, 1984 that they were suspending production of V.C.Rs. with immediate effect and that they would intimate the department whenever the production was resumed. The department alleges that on 17th October, 1984, when a surprise check was made at the Unit, it was found that during the month of September, 1984, appellants had produced 50 sets of V.C.Rs. These V.C.Rs were removed at a price lower than approved, allegedly resulting in a short levy of the order of Rs. 29,830.38 in respect of the differential value of Rs. 1,13,641/-.2. According to the department, appellants were issued a Show Cause Notice on 27-12-1984, but they failed to submit any reply. The matter was, therefore, adjudicated by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Meerut ex-parte.3. We have heard Shri J.S. Aggarwal,Adv. and Ms. Renuka Mann, SDR for the department.4. The learned Adv. submits that there was no inten...
Radhey Shyam Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT112
M.K. Chawla, J.(1) On 1st February, 1982, Jai Parkash was posted as Duty Constable at Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. At about 4.20 P.M., he gave an information, on telephone, to the Police Post, Malviya Nagar, that one Smt. Kela wife of Ramesh Chand, has been admitted with burn injuries. This information was duly recorded at 4.29 P.M. in the daily diary by Cons- table Ram Tirath. Its correct copy is Ex. Public Witness -19/A. A copy of the report was immediately handed over to A.S.I. Ram Kishan, for investigation. Without losing any time, Ram Kishan Along with Constable Bhagwan Singh went to Safdarjung Hospital. On enquiry, he was informed that the patient was in Ward No. 22. On reaching there, he gave an application Ex. Public Witness -9/A to the doctor on duty for permission to record the statement of Smt. Kela. Dr. Akhil Saxena made the endorsement 'Patient is coherent and conscious to give statement'. Underneath his signature, he mentioned the date and time as 5.10 P.M. on 1-2-1982...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »