Delhi Court July 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.
R.N. Shingal Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1988
Reported in: 1988RLR559
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) In this writ petition the petitioner has sought directions that he be given the same pay which he was drawing on 21.9.70. the date on which he was removed from service and he should be given increment which have become due after three years of the re-instatement falling due after 21.9.70 and he should be given his seniority which he was holding prior to his services being terminated and directions be given to respondent No. 2 to decide the appeal of the petitioner which he had filed on 7th May, 1975 against the order dated 18.1.71. (2) Facts giving rise to the present writ petition are-that the petitioner was employed with Desu as a Work Charge Store Mate on 29.12.60 and was confirmed as Asstt. Time Keeper in the pay scale of Rs. 110-180 vide office order dated 19.1.70. The petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceedings and he was charge-sheeted and an inquiry was held and the Inquiry Officer in his report dated 7.7.69 found him guilty of one of the charges. Vid...
Mohd. Usman Vs. Shahzad Begum and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1988
Reported in: 36(1988)DLT92; 1988(15)DRJ290; 1988RLR534
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) The petitioner-landlord has come up in revision under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') challenging the judgment dated May 27, 1986, of Shri R.K. Sharma, Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, by which he had dismissed the eviction petition brought by the landlord on the ground of eviction. (2) Admittedly, Khalil Raza was a tenant in the demised premises, which is house No. 867, Lane Madrsa Hussain Bux, Tokriwalan, Delhi, at the rental of Rs. 10.00 per mensem and had become tenant of the petitioner by operation of law on petitioner purchasing this property from the previous owner vide sale deed dated November 28, 1960. Khalil Raza also executed a rent note in favor of the petitioner on January 20, 1961, in which it was shown that the premises had been let out only for residential purpose. On the death of Khalil Raza on October 2, 1970, respondents 1 to 9 (his legal heirs) became tenants under the petitioner. Respondent No...
Collector of C.E. Vs. Supreme Rubber and Allied
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC603Tri(Delhi)
1. This isa matterwhere the respondents who were manufacturing Rubber sheets, falling under Central Excise Tariff item No. 16A(2) and Rubber Hose pipes falling under Central Excise Tariff Item No. 16A(3) filed a classification list bearing No. 13/78 on 12.4.1978, and claimed exemption in respect of the hose pipes under Notification No.71/78-C-E., dated 1.3.1978. This exemption was approved. Later on the department realised that the value of the clearances including Rubber sheets exceeded the ceiling limit prescribed In Notification No. 71/78 and therefore demanded differential duty from the respondents 2. In the Order-in-Appeal, the Collector (Appeals) concluded that since the classification list which had been duly approved by the proper Officer Included the declaration that the respondents (Appellants before him) were manufacturing Rubber sheets, which were exempted from payment of duty, and also forwarded to the Department a statement showing value of the clearances during the peri...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Titanium Equipment and Anode Mfg.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: (1989)(22)LC249Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed by Collector of Central' Excise. Madras against the order of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Madras. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents manufacture AB coolers and preheaters out of the raw materials sup-plied by their buyers M/s.Tata Chemicals Ltd., Bombay and cleared the Roods availing of the benefit of notification No. 119/75 and paid duty on the job charges without taking into reckoning the value of raw materials supplied to them by their buyers. It was alleged in the show cause notice that the respondents had suppressed the information regarding the value of raw materials used in the manufacture of the products mentioned above. The respondents while pleading that they were eligible to the notification No. 119/75, stated that they had not suppressed any information and had filed the necessary RT 12 returns and that the Department was well aware of their paying duty on the job charges and that there was no question of suppression of...
Orient Cement Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: (1989)(23)LC605Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad. The point involved in this appeal is classification of ANFO. This product is formed by mixing ammonium nitrate of explosive grade with small quantities of fuel oil and is used for the purpose of the blasting the rocks.2. The show cause notice dated 5.1.1987 was issued to the appellants by the Collector demanding duty for the period 1.3.1986 to 31.10.1986 and the duty was demanded under Rule 9(2) read with Rule 11A of the Central Excise Rules invoking the longer time limit of 5 years and he also invoked Rule 9(2) and Rule 173Q for levy of penalty.3. The appellants pleaded before the Collector that goods were not leviable to Central Excise duty as prepared explosives. The appellants stated that there was no suppression of fact on their part as there was no question of levy of duty on the mixture of ammonium nitrate and furnace oil. The Collector however, confirmed the demand of duty as raised in the sh...
Collector of Customs Vs. Mishra Dhatu Nigam Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)ECC73
1. These two appeals have been filed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay against the order of Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. The impugned order of Collector (Appeals) disposed off two appeals filed by the respondents against the order, in original in respect of goods Imported by them. The respondents imported electro slag which was assessed to duty under heading 38431 /19(1) and also pre-fused base slag which was assessed to duty under Tariff Heading 31.02/05(1).2. The respondents claim the assessment of both these under Tariff Heading 26.02/04 of the C.T.A.3. The original authority in its order No. S/6-C-530/84-R, dated 19.7.1984 In respect of electro slag held as under while rejecting the appellants' claim: "The Heading 26.02/04 covers 'slag ash, and residues containing metals or metallic compounds' partly vide their letter dated 7.2.1984 has stated that the basic constituents of the subject material are Ca F2, A12O3 and Ca. The imported Electro slag is certainly other than...
Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC404Tri(Delhi)
1. These appeals are against the orders of Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad. The point involved in these appeals is classification of ANFO. This product is formed by mixing ammonium nitrate of explosive grade with small quantities of fuel oil and is used for the purpose of the blasting the rocks.2. The learned Advocate for the appellants, Shri D.N. Mehta, stated that he is aware that this Tribunal in the order No. 103/88, has in the case of Kesoram Cement v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, held that ANFO was chargeable to duty under Chapter 36 of Central Excise Tariff. He pleaded that he had some fresh arguments to adduce and which were not put forth by the appellants in that case and also stated that in that case, the appellants were more anxious to get MODVAT under Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules. In the opening arguments, he drew our attention to the Write Up on ANFO submitted by the appellants. The said Write Up is annexed to this order as Annexure I.2A. He reiterat...
Talbros Automative Components Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)(19)LC224Tri(Delhi)
1. In this matter appellants have been held in the order-in-original to have "cleared dies and tools falling under Central Excise Tariff Item 51 -A of the value of Rs. 5,80,385.87 without payment of appropriate duty and without a Central Excise Licence and without observing any other provisions of Central Excise Law. ft is also held that despite an intimation from the Range Superintendent of Central Excise, Appellants had failed to comply with the statutory requirements of recording production and removal of the goods. Accordingly, duty amounting to Rs. 91,406.53 has been demanded and penalty of Rs. 20,000/- has been imposed on the appellants.2. None appears on behalf of the appellants who have requested to be excused from personal hearing and prayed that their appeal may be decided on the basis of merits and as per records.3. Shri L.C. Chakrabarti, JDR has argued on behalf of the Department, The learned Departmental Representative has reiterated the view taken in the order-in-origina...
Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Smt. Kaushalya Rani
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1988
Reported in: (1989)28ITD435(Delhi)
1. The interesting question raised in these 4 appeals is whether the assessee, who has only a life interest in the residential property in question, could claim the deduction under Section 5(l)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.2. The undisputed facts relevant to this controversy are as follows.The house property No.29, Golf Links was owned by the assessee's husband late Shri Prem Nath Khanna. The said Shri Khanna had no male issue but only a daughter Mrs. Nirmal Sarin married to Shri Harish Chandra Sarin. Shri Prem Nath Khanna left a will dated 23-6-1971 and the life interest in the house property in question bequeathed to his wife Smt. Kaushalya Rani-the assessee, was described in the following manner in paras 5 and 6 of the said will which are relevant for this purpose : 5. I hereby bequeath my property situated at 29, Gold Links, New Delhi-3 to my only daughter, Mrs. Nirmal Sarin wife of Shri Harish Chander Sarin, to the exclusion of everybody else, subject, however, to the conditio...
Uma Laminated Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-1988
Reported in: (1989)(40)ELT152TriDel
1. The appellants M/s. Uma Laminated Products Private Limited filed a refund claim following the order-in-appeal No. 881 dated 9.2.81 of the Appellate Collector. The Assistant Collector having rejected the said claims an appeal was filed. Under order dated 22.10.83 the Appellate Collector remanded matter to the Assistant Collector. No copy of the said order is available. It is mentioned in the grounds of appeal that under the said order the Collector (Appeals) directed the Assistant Collector to consider the claim de novo in the light of the decisions of this Tribunal in the case reported in 1983 ECR 799 and 1983 ECR 1349. After such readjudication the Assistant Collector again rejected the refund claim under his order dated 26.7.84. The appeal against the same was dismissed by the Collector (Appeals) under his order dated 21.12.84. This appeal is against the said order.2. The appellants have intimated under their letter dated 2.5.88 that they will not be attending the hearing. They h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »