Delhi Court October 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.
Singh Engineering Works Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC517Tri(Delhi)
1.1 During the scrutiny of the appellants accounts in the course of visit by the Central Preventive Officers on 9-5-1987 and 28-1-1987 it was revealed that the appellants had taken Modvat credit during the period 1-4-1986 to 5-6-1986 on 1731.900 M.Ts of waste & scrap to the tune of Rs. 6,29,332.27p while they had made declaration of said 'waste and scrap' as input only w.e.f. 6-6-1986. It was alleged that in terms of Rule 57-G the Modvat credit could be taken only after a manufacturer had filed declaration with the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise indicating the description of the final products manufactured in his factory and the inputs intended to be used in each of the said final product and such other information as the jurisdictional Asstt. Collector may require and obtain dated acknowledgement of the said declaration. 1.2. It was also observed that the aforesaid credit taken illegally by the appellants was utilised by them during the period 6-6-1986 to 6-1-1987. 1.3. Accor...
Tata Robins Fraser Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1989
Reported in: (1990)(25)ECC251
1. The appellants M/s. Tata Robins Fraser Ltd. manufacture machinery items falling under Tariff Item 68 in their factory at Jamshedpur. They undertake construction of projects on contract basis. These contracts include civil and structural work, supply of machinery and equipment, their erection and installation etc. Machinery and equipment required for the execution of their works are partly manufactured in their own factory at Jamshedpur and partly procured in the market. They also get certain items manufactured in other factories as per specifications raw material supplied by them.2. The appellants had undertaken 52 contract works between 1-3-1975 to 31-12-1981 of the total value of Rs. 17,43,00,149/-. For the execution of these contracts they had cleared machinery items from their factory at Jamshedpur on payment of duty. Total amount of duty paid on those items was Rs. 33,44,00,880/-. It was alleged in a show cause notice dated 16-1-1982 against the appellants as follows:- "M/s. T...
Solid Containers Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC64Tri(Delhi)
1. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants submitted a classification list No. 23/82 effective from 28-2-1982 which was approved by the Assistant Collector vide his No. V(17)17-13/CLVC/82, dated 23-3-1982. At page 7 against Item No. 2(ii) of the classification list the appellants described the product as "Solid Boxes-unprinted, made as packing container from solid fibre board and composite board charged at appropriate duty manufactured in our factory only without any printing" falling under Item 17(4) and claimed exemption from central excise duty under Notification No. 66/82-CE, dated 28-2-1982.On 29-7-1983 a show cause notice was issued to the appellants demanding duty of Rs. 66,328.00 for the period March, 1982 to December, 1982 on the ground that the appellants' product was not eligible to the exemption from duty under the aforesaid notification as the said product was printed boxes. Thereafter on different dates during the period from Octorer, 1983 to December, 198...
Jagprit Singh @ Damanjit Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1989
Reported in: 41(1990)DLT664
P.K. Babri, J.(1) This writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quotient of the detention order dated September 2, 1988 passed by Shri K.L. Verma, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India under Section 3(1) of the Cofeposa Act with a view to preventing the petitioner from smuggling of goods and the declaration issued under Section 9(1) of the Act dated October 4, 1988 passed by Additional Secretary, respondent No. 3. (2) The facts of the case, in brief, are that on August 2, 1988 the detenu arrived at I.G.I. Airport New Delhi on Flight No. EK-702 from Dubai. On some secret information the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence intercepted the detenu when he was leaving the Customs Arrival Hall through Green Channel but nothing was recovered from the baggage of the detenu. However, he was interrogated and be stated that he had brought 20 gold biscuits of 1...
Mysore Lac and Paint Works Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-19-1989
Reported in: (1990)(31)LC170Tri(Delhi)
1. As identical issues or rather similar issues arise in both these appeals we have heard both these appeals together on 9.10.1989 and disposed of them together by order "Appeals allowed". Hereunder we set out our reasons for the same.2. Appeal No. 1077/86-C arises out of order-in-appeal No. 148/85 and therein the facts are as under: The appellant company, which is a Government of Karnataka Undertaking, is mainly engaged in the manufacture of Paints and Varnishes. They also manufacture other items like Indelible Ink etc. falling under Tariff Item No. 68. For the purpose of manufacture of Paints and Varnishes, they procure duty-paid inputs i.e., Phthalic Anhydride and Pentaerythritol, coming under Tariff Item No. 68, From these inputs, they first manufacture an intermediate product called Alkyd Resin which is captively consumed by them in entirety in the manufacture of paints. As the output (paints) is dutiable and as the duty-paid inputs, falling under Tariff Item 68 are procured by t...
Century Iron and Steel Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-19-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD117(Delhi)
1. These two appeals filed by the assessee, arise out of the orders dated 4-8-1983 and 11-2-1985 of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XII, New Delhi for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82.2. They were heard by the Special Bench on account of conflicting views of different Division Benches of the Appellate Tribunal in the following cases, on the point whether the deduction under Section 80HH is to be allowed before or after setting off of the brought forward losses of the earlier years. (i) Yenpeyees Rubber (P.) Ltd. v. First ITO [1983] 5 ITD 605 (Mad.); and (ii) in the case of Premier Industrial Drives (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1984] 7 ITD 800 (Mad.) 3. The assessee is a limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of billets (steel ingots, etc.) out of iron scrap. It was incorporated on 30-7-1973 and commenced its business in 1977. The first ground common for both the years relates to the deduction claimed under Section 80HH. The relevant details of the claims etc...
issac Babu Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1989
Reported in: 1991CriLJ152; 1980(18)DRJ177
Santosh Duggal, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition, filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of habeas corpus or any other writ, order or direction, was detained on 23rd May, 1988, in execution of detention order passed on 7th October 1987 under the provisions of Sections 3(i)(iii) and 3(i)(iv) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act'), on the allegation that he had assisted one T. A. Sirajudeen @ Siraj in coming into possession of 60 gold biscuits, transporting and selling part of the said gold biscuits, for which the detenu had received remuneration from said Sirajudeen @ Siraj and having been associated with the said Sirajudeen @ Siraj in the matter of transportation, carriage and disposal of the smuggled gold. 2. The brief facts in so far as these are relevant to the disposal of the present writ petition and as gathered from the grounds of detention are that a search of ...
Kapri International (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1989
Reported in: 1990(47)ELT537(Del)
K.C. Agarwal, A.C.J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by M/s. Kapri International (Pvt.) Ltd., New Delhi for quashing the show cause notice dated 14-10-85, order dated 18-1-1988 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Meerut and the order of the CEGAT dated 22-7-1985. (Since reported in (Tribunal).2. M/s. Kapri International (Pvt.) Ltd. were licensed for manufacturing of excisable goods. They received processed fabrics from M/s. DIOR International Private Ltd., a sister concern of the petitioner, on payment of Central Excise Duty. Such fabrics used to be converted into various other items, namely, pillow covers, bed sheets, bed covers, table cloth etc. falling under T.I. 68. Cotton doubles bed sheets, cotton single bed sheets, cotton top covers and cotton table linen etc. were also manufactured by the petitioner company. The petitioner submitted a classification list dated 4-4-1984 desiring that the classification of pillow covers and Raj...
Parmod Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ68; 40(1990)DLT289
Malik Sharief-Ud-Din, J. (1) Five persons, namely, Padam Singh, Ram Avtar, Ramesh, Parmod Kumar appellant and Sri Kant were charged by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, for offences under sections 148, 302 read with section 149, section 307 read with section 149, section 324 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Parmod Kumar appellant was additionally charged under section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. All the accused excepting Parmod Kumar appellant, were acquitted. Parmod Kumar was convicted under section 302 Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and was also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 4000.00 , in default of payment of which the trial court imposed a further rigorous imprisonment for two years. This appeal has been preferred by Parmod Kumar making a grievance against his conviction and sentence. (2) Briefly stating, the facts are that on 18th of November 1982, one Balram along with Parshotam had gone to Amba Cinema to purchase adv...
Sunil Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ414; 40(1990)DLT158
R.L. Gupta, J.(1) This judgment will dispose of Crl.A. No. 23/89 and Crl.A. No. 166/88. The appellants in both these appeals were apprehended at the same time while traveling on a two wheeler scooter along with a third person. (2) Vide two separate judgments/orders sentence dated 29.1188/ 10 12.88 the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi convicted the appellants under Section 21 of the Narcotic Durgs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay a fine of Rs One lac or in default suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two years. (3) The story of the prosecution is that for some days superior to 23.12.86 the police bad information that some persons used to supply heroin to their known parties by coming near Shivaji Restaurant at Bhagat Singh Marg, New Delhi. On 23.12.86 Si Surinder Singh was present in office of the Crime Branch at Police Headquarters when he received secr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »