Delhi Court January 1989 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.
Har Parshad and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1989
Reported in: (1989)29ITD608(Delhi)
1. (In the open Court) - This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-VIII, New Delhi dated 11-1-1985 relating to assessment year 1981-82. The Memo, of Appeal indicates four grounds taken up in appeal by the assessee. However, at the time of hearing the learned counsel for the assessee specifically" sought our permission and it was granted for withdrawal of grounds serially numbered 1, 3 and 4. Therefore the ground which survives for our determination is that the Id. CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 3,69,824 paid to M/s. Niki Tasha (India) Pvt. Ltd. On this issue, we have heard, the parties. In order to appreciate the con-tentions and in this context the reasons recorded by the authorities below, we proceed to record them in the presence of the parties before us.2. The Income-tax Officer made the impugned assessment on 19-9-1984 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act. In this assessment he determined the total income of the a...
D. Ross Porter Vs. Pioneer Seed Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1989
Reported in: [1990]68CompCas145(Delhi)
1. I have heard arguments for deciding the application. The plaintiff, who is one of the directors of the defendant-company, has filed this suit seeking a decree for a declaration to the effect that the defendant-respondent has no power to reject and/or refuse the appointment of Mr. Brij Anand as an alternate director to the plaintiff and in the alternative a decree for a declaration that the rejection of Mr. Brij Anand as an alternate director to the plaintiff is wholly illegal, invalid, arbitrary and for a declaration that the resolution passed by the board of directors of the respondent in October, 1988 in this respect is illegal and invalid and a relief of mandatory injunction in sought requiring the respondent to appoint Mr. Brij Anand as alternate director to the plaintiff. Along with the suit, the plaintiff had moved an application under order XXXIX rules 1 and 1 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking an interim injunction restraining the respondent from im...
D. Ross Porter Vs. Pioneer Seed Company Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1989
Reported in: [1989]66CompCas363(Delhi); 1989(16)DRJ273
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) Have heard arguments for deciding the application. The plaintiff, who is one of the directors of the defendant/company, has filed this suit seeking decree for declaration to the effect that the defendant- respondent has no power to reject and/or refuse the appointment of Mr. Brij. Anand as an alternate director to the plaintiff and in the alternative a decree for declaration that the rejection of Mr. Brij Anand as an alternate director to the plaintiff is wholly, invalid, arbitrary and for declaration that the resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the respondent in October, 1988 in this respect is illegal and invalid and a relief of mandatory injunction is sought requiring the respondent to appoint Mr. Brij Anand alternate director to the plaintiff. Along with the suit the plaintiff bad moved an application under Order Xxxix Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking interim injunction restraining the respondent from implementing...
Gurdeep Singh Narula Vs. Mali Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1989
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC344
S.B. Wad, J.1. FAO 187/83 has been filed by the owner of Bus No. DLP--6619, the alleged offending vehicle which caused the accident on 26-8-1979 resulting in the death of Smt. Sarti Devi. FAO 140/83 is filed by the driver of the bus. The said bus was under contract with the D.T.C. and plying on route No. 740. The D.T.C. enters into the contract with private bus operators for providing additional transport facilities in Delhi. Under the contract the maintenance of the bus and the liability of accident rests with the private operator. In this case it was on the appellant.2. When the claim petition was filed by the heirs of the deceased in the Tribunal, the appellant put in his appearance but did not file the written statement and thereafter did not prosecute the proceedings. Even before me in this appeal neither the appellant nor his counsel is present. There is an urgency in the disposal of this appeal because in spite of the order of this Court the appellant did not deposit the amount ...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Hiper
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)(23)LC487Tri(Delhi)
1. Collector of Central Excise, Pune, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from order-in-appeal No. M-1437/PN-96/84, dated 25.6.1984 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondent is manufacturer of filters and filter elements falling under Tariff Itqm 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. In addition, the respondent is also carrying on job work. The respondent was availing of the benefit of notification No.105/80 dated 19th Jund, 1980 for the year 1981-82 on the ground that value of the clearances during the preceding financial year i.e. 1st April, 1980 to 31st March, 1981 were well below the limit of Rs. 30,00,000/- (rupees thirty lacs). The Superintendent of Central Excise, Pune Range I, Pune IV Division, observed that if the cost of raw material is added to job work charges charged by M/s. Hiper, from the customers and if this is added to the value of clearances of Tariff Item 68 goods manufactured and cleared by the ...
Safari Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1989
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT21TriDel
1. We have heard Shri Dushyant Dave, learned Advocate for the appellants and Mrs. V. Zutshi, learned S.D.R. for the Revenue. Shri Dave has argued that in this case show cause notice demanding duty was issued on 22-1-1987 and the period covered by the show cause notice was for 5-7-1986 to 10-9-1986. In the show cause notice, suppression and mis-statement of facts were alleged and proviso to Section 11A(1) of Central Excises and Salt Act was invoked for extending the period of limitation beyond six months. He has argued that according to proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Act as amended from 27-12-1985, a show cause notice issued after December, 1985 demanding duty for a longer period beyond six months under the proviso to Section 11A was to be issued by the Collector. In this case, the show cause notice was issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise. The show cause notice and the subsequent proceedings pursuant thereto are not according to law. As a result, the show cause notice and ...
Addl. Collector of Customs Vs. Visakhapatnam Steel Project
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)(23)LC81Tri(Delhi)
1. The Additional Collector of Customs, Visakhapatnam has filed an appeal being aggrieved from (he order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras. At the outset of the hearing Shri M.R.Srinivasan, the learned Consultant appearing on behalf of the Respondent, has raised a preliminary objection that in the present appeal the authorisation in terms of Section 129A(2) has been signed by the Additional Collector and he has got no authority to issue an authorisation for the filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. In the present matter the authorisation has been given by the Additional Collector and the appeal memo has also been signed by himself. He has argued that Additional Collector is inferior in rank to Collector and as such he is not authorised to issue the authorisation and also filing the appeal. He has pleaded that the appeal should be dismissed on this preliminary objection. Shri C.V. Durghayya, the learned JDR appearing on behalf of the Appellant has pleaded that in...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. (No. 2)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)77CTR(Del)87; [1990]183ITR0114(Delhi)
Mrs. Leila Seth, J.1. This is an application by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), praying that the Tribunal be directed to draw up a statement of case and refer for the opinion of this court the following questions of law: '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law on the holding that rule 6B is not applicable to the expenditure of Rs. 19,877? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of Rs. 19,877 is not disallowable under section 37(3)?' 2. Both counsel agree that the figure in the questions has wrongly been incorporated as Rs. 19,877 and it should, in fact, be Rs. 14,877. 3. The relevant assessment year is 1971-72. The total expenditure indicated under the head of miscellaneous expenses was Rs. 19,877. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the entire amount on the ground that it fell under rule 6B and the expendi...
Uma Shankar Alias Bunty Vs. Amrit Lal and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1989
Reported in: [1991]71CompCas530(Delhi)
S.B. Wad, J. 1. This is a most unfortunate appeal filed on behalf of Shri Uma Shankar.son of shri Sarup Chand,who suffered serious injuries on June 29,1973,caused by car No.DHA 4265,insured with respondent No.4.As a result of the injury,the appellant sustained a fracture of the right femur (the right bone).He was removed to Irwin Hospital,where he remained as an indoor patient till July 11,1973. 2. He was then admitted as an indoor patient in A.I.I.M.S.,where he remained till August 17,1973.As the appellant was only six years old,his father,Sarup Chand,was appointed by the Tribunal as the next friend and gurdian for purposes of the case.The said guardian did not take any interest in the prosecution of the application for compensation before the Tribunal in spite of a number of opportunities.Nothing was done by the next friend in the case.The Tribunal had,therefore,to dismiss the claim application on July 2,1979.After the dismissal of the application,Sarup Chand somehow field the appeal...
Mohd. Shafi Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1989
Reported in: 1989(3)Crimes210; 37(1989)DLT406
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) The appellant Mohd. Shafi was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi vide his judgment of 6th May, 1985 for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By a separate order of the same date, he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 100.00 . In default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to undergo further R.I. for one month. The prosecution case which bas been found to have been proved was that the appellant had murdered Sharmim Ara on 21st July, 1983 at about 10 A.M. by inflicting cut injuries with a razor (Ustra). The motive for this crime, however, bas not been established. (2) It is unnecessary to deal with the prosecution case in detail. We may at the outset notice that a number of infirmities have been brought to our notice by Mr. HR. Khan, learned counsel for the appellant, appointed at State expense. The First Information Report, it is apparent, was not recorded at the tim...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »