Delhi Court April 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.
Associated Cement Companies Ltd. Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-1988
Reported in: (1989)(41)ELT337TriDel
1. The question for decision in this appeal by manufacturer hereinafter called assessee is eligibility to benefit of exemption in respect of inputs falling under Tariff Item 68 to benefit of exemption under Notification No. 201/79, dated 4-6-1979, as amended by Notification No.5/81, dated 21-1-1981 for the period 4-6-1979 to 28-2-1980. From 1-3-1980, the appellants have been availing of benefit of exemption under the notification.2. At the hearing of the appeal, Shri P.G. Gokhale, Advocate for the appellants and Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, Departmental Representative for the respondents, were heard and the papers perused. It appears that earlier the Assistant Collector (Technical) acting on behalf of the Collector of Central Excise, Indore by order No.V(23)30-6/80/CX/160323, dated 6-12-1980 rejected the appellants request for proforma credit on the ground that prescribed declaration as required under the notification had not been filed. In appeal against this order by the assessee, the Ce...
Dalmia Agencies Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-1988
Reported in: (1988)27ITD427(Delhi)
1.The controversy in this appeal is whether the assessee-company can be termed or can be regarded as a company engaged in the manufacture or processing of goods or as an investment company. On its answer the applicability of Section 104 of the Income-tax Act would depend. The Income-tax Officer treated the assessee-company as an investment company while the assessee contended that it was a company engaged in the manufacture or processing of goods or in mining notwithstanding the fact that the income from that source of manufacture or processing of goods was reduced to nil on account of set off of brought forward losses of the earlier years. The Income-tax Officer says that as a consequence of set off of brought forward losses, the income from manufacture or processing of goods having been reduced to nil, the assessee could not be termed as a manufacturing company and as the income from other sources was the only source on which tax was levied, the assessee-company should be termed as ...
Associated Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: (1990)(46)ELT124TriDel
1. M/s. Associated Industries, Calcutta has filed this appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs, Calcutta dated 11-6-86.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that M/s. Associated Industries, Calcutta, had imported 7.029 M.Ts. of Stainless Steel Tubes/Pipes non-magnetic quality valued at 5060.88 @ 720 per M.T. per s.s.Bengal Progress Rot No. 295/85, Line No. 54. The Bill of Entry was filed on the 4th November, 1985. On receipt of the Bill of Entry, query slip was issued to the appellants for submission of certificates etc., and the appellants were asked to get the goods examined at the docks.After the examination of the goods at the docks, the Bill of Entry was re-submitted alongwith the query slip. On scrutiny of documents and Bill of Entry, it was found that there was under valuation of the goods as per packing list filed by the appellants. Out of 9 packages containing 7.029 M.Ts. of pipes, 3.270 M.Ts. packed in 7 cases were stated to be W/No. 1.4876 t...
Eagle Mineral Products Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)LC538Tri(Delhi)
1. By the impugned order the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) has disposed of five Orders-in-original in which Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Nadiad confirmed demands for differential duty of Central Excise. The dates of the show cause notices, periods covered by the show cause notices, Tariff Item under which the goods were cleared, Tariff Items under which the differential duty was demanded in the show cause notices and the Tariff Items under which the demands were confirmed by the Assistant Collector are given in the following table :-------------------------------------------------------------------------PERIOD DATE OF GOODS CLEARED DUTY DEMANDED DEMANDS FOR S.C.N. UNDER TARIFF IN S.C.N. UNDER DUTY CON- ITEM TARIFF ITEM FIRMED UNDER TARIFF ITEM-------------------------------------------------------------------------(1)15.9.72 14.2.1974 Inferior Motor Spirit Tl Refined Dieselto 5.10.72 Kerosene Tl No. 7 No. 6 Oil T.I. 8.(2)12.12.72 14.2.1974 -do- -do- Diesel Oil T.I.to...
J.K. Synthetics Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)ECC149
1. This order disposes of the respondent-applicants application under Rule 41 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for recalling the order dated 31-8-1987 passed ex-parte in absence of the applicant.2. For proper appreciation of the facts and issues involved, a brief history leading to the present application appears necessary. Revenue's Appeal No. 590/84-C, parties Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur v.J.K. Synthetics Ltd. was on respondent's request, adjourned from 24-8-1987 to 31-8-1987. On 31-8-1987 when the appeal was called for hearing, none was present for the respondents. The Tribunal proceeded ex-parte against the respondent and heard Smt. J.K. Chander, Departmental Representative for the appellant-Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur.3. Relying on a Five Member Bench decision of the Tribunal, the order of the Collector (Appeals) challenged before the Tribunal, was set aside in so far as it related to refund; in respect of cartons. In respect of cones, it was confirmed. As res...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Paper Packing Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)ECC137
1. The question for decision in these appeals by the Revenue is whether for judging the respondents eligibility to benefit of exemption under Notification 105/80, dated 19.6.1980, the value of clearances of the two respondents should be clubbed.2. After following the usual procedure the Assistant Collector of Central Excise Division Srinagar by order dated 7.10.1983 held that the clearances of the two respondents should be clubbed and that they are not eligible to separate exemption. He confirmed the demand of duty Rs. 73719.75 raised in the show cause notice. In appeal, however, by the respondents (appellants before him) the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) New Delhi by order dated 8.3.1984 following the decision of this Tribunal in G.D. Industrial Engineers Faridabad v. Collector of Custom & Central Excise. Chandigarh 1983 ELT 1994 (CEGAT) held that even though the two partners of the two respondent firms were common the units were separate and their clearances could not be...
Motilal Chhadami Lal JaIn (Huf) Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: (1988)25ITD532(Delhi)
1. As both these appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 1975-76 & 1976-77 raise common issues and contentions for consideration, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.2. We first take up the appeal filed for assessment year 1975-76. One of the issues raised in this appeal relates to the valuation of a property known as Hirangaon Factory. Hirangaon Factory comprised of two parts-Hirangaon quarters and factory. The appellant who is a joint Hindu family returned the composite value of the two-the quarters and the factory at Rs. 4,27,029. The ITO felt this value to be low and, therefore, referred the valuation to the Valuation Officer and adopting the valuation made by the Valuation Officer determined the value at Rs. 26 lakhs. The CWT(A) scaled down the valuation to Rs. 11,23,750.Hirangaon quarters were evaluated at Rs. 1,39,920 by the assessee by capitalising the annual rental income of Rs. 13,992 at ten times thereof. The value of the quarter...
Pushpa Kapa Vs. Sfflv Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT187; 1988RLR434
Jagdish Chandra, J. (1) In this suit for possession and damages for use and occupation of the property in suit the entire evidence was recorded and concluded and the suit was set for final hearing. Instead of hearing the arguments of parties counsel on all the issues, arguments were heard only on issue No. 1 which dealt with the correctness of the valuation put in the plaint and vide order dated 11th January 1988 it was held that the market value of the property in suit was less then Rs. 100.000 on the date of the filling of .the suit and consequently the High Court was not empowered to entertain and decide this suit. This fact was conceded by the learned counsel for both the parties. The plaint was, thereforee, ordered to be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the District Judge and for this purpose the plaintiff was directed to appear before the Deputy Registrar on 14th January 1988. On that day i.e. 14th January 1988 the plaintiff filed this application under section 24 re...
Nisha Sharma Vs. Vinod Kumar Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)Crimes578; 35(1988)DLT149
H.C. Goel, J. (1) -THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the Court of Shri Z.S. Solanki, Metropolitan Magistrate, dated June 1,1987 by which he dismissed the complaint of Smt. Nisha Sharma, petitioner, as pending in his court for the offence punishable under S. 406 of the Indian Penal Code. A police challan for the same offence punishable under S. 406 Indian Penal Code was already pending in the court of Shri Solanki against the same three accused persons relating to the same matter. The complaint case was earlier pending in the court of Mrs. Kanwal Inder, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi. By an order of the Additional Sessions Judge in a revision the complaint case was directed to be tried by the same learned Magistrate before whom the police challan was pending trial. The record of the complaint case of Smt. Nisha Sharma bad accordingly been directed to be transferred from the court of Mrs. Kanwal Inder to the court of Shri Solanki on March 17, 1987. ...
New India Traders and ors. Vs. Satish Swarup Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT229
Sunanda Bhandare, J. (1) The respondent-landlord filed a petition for eviction on 27th March 1981 in the court of Additional Rent Controller, Delhi against the appellants under Section 14(l)(b) and (k) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in respect of one garage in property owned by the respondent bearing no 7B, Netaji Subash Marg, Darya Ganj, New Delhi let out to M/s New India Traders in the year 1946-47. (2) It was alleged in the petition that appellants 1 & 2 herein parted with possession, sub-let and assigned the premises to Shri Subhash Chander appellant no. 3 herein, in the year 1978-79 without any authority and permission of the respondent-landlord and used the premises for nonresidential purpose which is contrary to the conditions imposed on the landlord by Delhi Improvement Trust. Before filing the petition, a notice was sent by the respondent to appellants 1 & 2 on 7th January 1979 terminating the tenancy. The appellants contested the petition a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »