Delhi Court September 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.
J.M. Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1988
Reported in: (1989)(19)ECC107
1. The dispute in this appeal is on the assessable value of a ship, purchased by the appellants in a public auction, for breaking up.2. The ship, M.V. 'NIONIO', built in 1969 and having Light displacement tonnage (LDT) of 6,245 tons, came to India on 28.3.1985 with cargo of 23,995.782 M.T. of D.A.P. in bulk. The ship defaulted in payment of Admiralty charges It was arrested by the Sheriff of Bombay around 30.4.1985. The crew and Master of the ship signed off on 7.7.1985 and abandoned the ship. The ship remained laid up near Navlakhi Port in Gujarat. In course of time, the ship got partially submerged in water.In pursuance of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's order dated 30.7.1985 and decree dated 20.9.1985 in Admiralty Suit No. 9 of 1985, the Sheriff of Bombay sold the ship by a public auction on 6.12.1985 on 'as is where is' basis. The Sheriff had fixed Rs. 50 lakhs as the minimum reserve price for the auction. The appellants offered the highest bid of Rs. 50 lakhs. Their offer was acc...
Sri Gopal Stores Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)ECC108
1. The department's case is that appellants have been undertaking production of hessian bags out of hessian cloth with the aid of power, without taking out a Central Excise Licence for manufacturing goods falling under Central Excise Tariff Item 22A(2) and that they failed to pay duty amounting to Rs. 11,550/- (Rs. 10,500 Basic Excise duty plus Rs. 1050/- Special Excise duty). As a result of adjudication of the matter, the demand for the above said duty amount was confirmed. The concerned goods, which had been seized were confiscated allowing the appellant the option to redeem the goods on payment of Rs. 500/- only.No penalty was imposed on the ground that appellants were new to the manufacturing business. When appellants went up in appeal, the Collector (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assistant Collector. It is against this order that the appellants are now before us.2. We have heard Shri J.S. Agarwal, advocate for the appellants and Shri L.C. Chakraborti, JDR for the department.3....
Delhi Electric Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1988
Reported in: (1989)(24)LC195Tri(Delhi)
1. In this matter the department alleges that on a piece of intelligence, the Central Excise (Anti-Evasion) Officers of Delhi Collectorate visited the premises of the appellants on 26.2.1983. The sale bills issued by the appellants during 1982-83 were checked and it was found that the total value of clearances from 1.4.1982 to 26.2.1983 amounted to Rs. 3,39,111.00. Thereafter, the stock was also verified and 17,300 bulbs were found in excess of the recorded balance.2. It is further alleged that the departmental officers checked other records, namely, (i) issue of material production and wastage (ii) daily report and (iii) Godown register (stock of finished goods). As per the Show Cause Notice, a private ledger was also recovered. This shows that substantial quantity of goods had not been accounted for in the simplified stock register. Adding this quantity to the quantity accounted for in the regular records, the department alleged that the exemption limit of Rs. 7.5 lakhs being availe...
Hari Chand Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1988
Reported in: 1989(16)DRJ131
H.C. Goel, J.(1) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. directed against the impugned orders of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dated July 6, 1982 dismissing the application of the accused petitioner seeking his discharge in the case on the ground that the sanction for prosecuting the accused/petitioner was illegal as also against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated August 19, 1986 dismissing the revision petition of the petitioner against the said order of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Besides challenging these two orders of the courts below the petitioner has also taken an independent ground for quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioner in case No. 532-A/3 of 1979, Customs v. Zafar Mohd, that there has been undue and inordinate delay in the conclusion of the trial of the case. (2) Mr. Harjinder Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, confines himself to the challenge made to the proceedings in t...
Raj Pal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1988
Reported in: 1989(16)DRJ193
Charanjit Talwar, J.(1) The prosecution case that Raj Pal (the appellant herein) sprinkled kerosene oil on his wife Nirmala during the night 25th-26th August, 1983 and burnt her, has been found to be established by the Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi vide his judgment of 8th May, 1985. Nirmala expired on 27th August, 1983. The appellant who has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, challenges the findings of the trial court in this appeal. (2) As per the prosecution case, Nirmala made as many as six declarations which have to be considered as 'dying declarations'. These six declarations can be divided into two sets ; one set of declarations exonerates the appellant herein and the other set, completely implicates him. The learned trial court after noticing the facts of the case in detail, has rejected those declarations which exonerated Raj Pal, the appellant herein. (3) We may notice that one of ...
Sachindranath Audya @ Sachi Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)Crimes308; 37(1989)DLT180; 1989(16)DRJ37
Malik Sharief-nd-din, J. (1) The petitioner has challenged the validity of the detention order dated 26/11/1987 passed by Shri K.L. Verma, Joint Secretary to the Government of India under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The order was passed with a view to preventing the detenu from dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in transporting or concealing or keeping smuggled goods. (2) The detention itself is based on an incident dated 17/9/1987 when on an information the customs officers of Divisional Preventive Unit, Barasat Customs Division, Calcutta intercepted the detenu and one more person and recovered three foreign marked gold biscuits valued at Rs. 1,06,385.00 . This recovery was made pursuant to a secret information and the detenu on being given an opportunity to show the legal possession of the recovered gold failed to show any evidence in support of the same. (3) The detention order is assailed o...
Kela Devi and anr. Vs. Delhi Kashmir Goods Transport Company
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1988
Reported in: I(1989)ACC78
S.B. Wad, J.1. This is an appeal filed by mother, father and the grand mother of the deceased Udai Singh for enhancement of compensation. The claimants had claimed Rs. 40,000/- but the Tribunal had awarded Rs. 8740/- towards compensation.2. Udai Singh died in an accident caused by truck number DIG 4785. The fact of the accident or the negligence of the truck Driver resulting into death of Udai Singh is not challenged in this appeal.3. There is a cross appeal filed by the Insurance Company, originally M/s. Northern India General Insurance Company Ltd., now New India Assurance Company Ltd. It is contended in the cross-appeal that on the date of accident, namely, 7-3-1965 the vehicle was already sold by the original owners M/s. Delhi Kashmir Goods Transport Company to one Purshottam Singh. The policy had, thereforee, come to an end. It is further stated that the sale took place on 2-1-1964. The policy in this case was taken out on 3-2-1965 by M/s. Delhi Kashmir Goods Transport Company (P)...
Kusum Products Ltd. Vs. Collector of C.E
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: (1988)(19)LC574Tri(Delhi)
1. The common issue involved in these 3 appeals is whether the cost of card board cartons, in which the appellants marketed their soap and detergent powder, should be included in the assessable value of the goods or not. The appellants claim exclusion of the cost of carton on the authority of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in [1985 (22) ELT 306(SC)] - Godfrey Phillips (I) Ltd. The Ld. Representative of the department disputes their claim and, in turn, relies on the later judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of . MRF Limited [1987 (27) ELT 553 (SC)], paragraph-19.2. On careful consideration, we find that even according to the ratio of the Godfrey Phillips (I) Ltd. judgment, on which the appellants rely, the carton was essential for bringing soap and detergent powder to the wholesale market. Besides the carton, the only other packing for soap was the primary piece of thin card board and paper in which the soap cake is wrapped and in which it is retailed to the ul...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Kusum Products Limited
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: (1989)(39)ELT132TriDel
1. The proceedings initiated with the aforesaid Revision Show Cause Notice of the Central Government issued under the then Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 have on transfer to this Tribunal been taken up as if they were an appeal filed by the department before this Tribunal.2. The facts in brief are that the goods manufactured by the respondents were charged to duty by including the value of the can) board cartons, in which the goods were packed, in the assessable value of the goods. The respondents filed a refund claim before the Assistant Collector claiming that the cost pf cartons ought not to be Included in the assessable value. The Assistant Collector held that such value was correctly ineligible and, accordingly, he rejected the refund claim. In appeal, the Appellate Collector held that the card board cartons were durable and returnable containers and hence their cost was deductible from the assessable value in terms of Section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Act.The Ce...
Brij Pal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: 36(1988)DLT335; 1988(15)DRJ411
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) This second appeal is by the owner landlady of certain premises in Chawri Bazar, Delhi.(2) The landlady filed a suit for possession against legal representatives of her tenant. Kedar Nath was the tenant. He died leaving behind his daughter-in-law and grand children (some of them minors), who are the defendants, as his legal heirs. The wife of Kedar Nath and his son Nathu Ram pre-deceased him. He had no other legal heir. The suit was filed on the basis that the defendants could not inherit the tenancy as Kedar Nath was a statutory tenant. The suit which was filed on 2-3-1976 was dismissed on 8-10-1982. First appeal against the judgment and decree was filed on 2-6-1973, almost two months after the period of limitation. The appeal was dismissed being barred by limitation by the impugned order. I will note that earlier also the petitioner had filed a suit against the respondents which was dismissed as far back as in 1975 wherein the court held that the respondents were t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »