Delhi Court February 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.
Jackson Engineers (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD79(Delhi)
1. Since identical disputes are raised in appeal Nos. 5928 & 2928/Del/87, which are also raised in third appeal being ITA No.2385/Del/88, with other disputes, raises therein all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order, for the sake of convenience.2. ITA No. 2703/Del/87 pertains to assessment year 1985-86, whereas ITA No. 5928/Del/87 pertains to assessment year 1984-85. For the sake of convenience we first take up these two appeals, because the main dispute in both these appeals is, whether the assessee-company, which is a private limited company, is an industrial company or not. The three aspects projected in the ground are, in case the company is industrial company, it has to be subjected to concessional rate of tax ; it is to be allowed relief Under Section 80-1; and benefit of investment allowance is also to be granted. Regarding the last ground, which pertains to levy of interest Under Sections 217 and 139(8), the learned counsel ...
Bajaj Auto Limited Vs. the Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-20-1989
Reported in: (1989)(22)LC580Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited, Pune have filed a Misc. application being aggrieved by the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Pune vide his order dated 4th April, 1988 demanded a sum of Rs. 1,46,07,936.37 towards Central Excise duty. This order was appealed against before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. A stay application was also filed by the appellants under Section 35F of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944. While disposing of the stay application, the Collector (Appeals) directed the appellants to deposit half of the amount of duty demanded in cash and furnish Bank Guarantee for the remaining amount. The applicants have come before the Tribunal with the present Miscellaneous application against the said order.3. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the applicants. Shri B.K. Gupta, the learned SDR who has appeared on behalf of the Respondent opp...
Haryana State Electricity Board Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-20-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)LC168Tri(Delhi)
1. The applicants have proposed the following alleged questions of law said to have arisen out of Order No. 434/88-D dated 14.6.88 passed by this Tribunal in A. No. E/2265/83-D with a request that the same may be referred to the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi for consideration under Section 35G of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 - (a) Whether the Applicant Board is State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India only for the purposes of the said Constitution and not for the purposes of the other laws of the land? (b) Whether the Applicant Board is State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India only for the purposes of the Parts III and IV of the Constitution or for all purposes whatsoever? (c) Whether on true interpretation of the provisions of Sections 5, 9, 60, 61, 62 and 78A of Electricity Supply Act, 1948 the Applicant Board forms a part and parcel of the State of Haryana? (d) Whether on a true interpretation of the provisions of the No...
Smt. Munia Devi JaIn Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-1989
Reported in: (1989)29ITD36(Delhi)
1. All these appeals are by interrelated assessees and raise common points. They were, therefore, heard together and for the sake of convenience are disposed of by this common order, 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Departmental Representative and have perused the material placed before us. We will deal with the case of Smt. Munia Devi Jain first as similar facts and issues are involved in the other matters also and after having decided the issues in her case, we will proceed to the other cases mentioning their individual facts briefly, if necessary.3. The appeals relate to assessment years 1973-74, 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82 in respect of which assessments were originally made on 26-9-1973, 22-11-1977, 22-11-1978, 11-10-1979, 12-6-1980 and 30-11-1981, respectively. The assessee had owned certain lands which were acquired and by an Award dated 25-5-1981, the U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Tribunal enhanced the compensation award...
income-tax Officer Vs. Republic Electricals Co.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)29ITD449(Delhi)
1. These appeals by the revenue are directed against the orders of the AAC for the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80, 1981-82 and 1982-83 all dated 19-12-1985. For each year, a solitary ground taken up by the revenue projects the following grievance : On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the AAC was not justified in deleting the addition rightly made by the ITO on account of salary and interest paid to the partners of the firm treated as URF.These appeals were fixed for hearing after due notice to the parties.We find that the AD card is on record. However, when these appeals were called on for hearing, there was no representation either through the authorised representative or in person by any of the partners of the firm. The appeals, therefore, have been heard ex parte on merits, qua, the respondent and are being disposed of in accordance with law.2. We find that for the assessment year 1978-79 the original return was filed on 31-3-1979 and an ex parte assessment was ma...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Electric Construction and Equipment Co. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: [1990]183ITR666(Delhi)
Leila Seth, J.1. By this application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the petitioner prays that the Tribunal be directed to draw up a statement of case and refer the following two question of law pertaining to the assessment year 1973-74 for the opinion of this court: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the commission of Rs. 3,62,325 was eligible for deduction in the hands of the assessed, although the identity of the recipient could not be established? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in allowing bad debts of Rs. 17,390 for which the assessed could not furnish any details?' 2. The assessed is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of heavy electrical equipment which it supplies to the Electricity Boards. It claimed certain deductions as commission payable to one Mr. Madan Lal ...
Amarjit Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: 38(1989)DLT279; 1989(16)DRJ278
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) The appellant, Amarjeet Singh alias Laliya, has come up in this appeal against his conviction for offences under Sections 363/ 366 and 376 Indian Penal Code recorded by judgment dated 15th May, 1987 by Shri Padam Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. The appellant was sentenced to R.I. for three years and to fine of Rs. 1,000.00; sentence in default being R.I. for six months ; to R.I. for seven years and to fine of Rs. 2,000.00 in default the sentence being R.I. for one year and to R.I. for ten years and fine of Rs. 2,500.00, the sentence in default being R.I. for on year, on the three counts' respectively, by order passed on the same day. (2) The prosecution case, briefly stated, was that Kumari Sunita Mishra, daughter of Ram Dayal Mishra, resident of Pujari E Block Mandir, Tagore Garden Extension, New Delhi, then aged about 13 years of age, had been found missing from her house, since the night of 28th April, 1986 and the accused, who bad his tea shop opposi...
Tirath Dass Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi632; 1989RLR115
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) This criminal revision is directed against judgment dated October 4, 1985, of Shri V. S. Aggarwal, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, by which he had allowed the criminal revision filed by respondents-Joginder Lal and Smt. Taro Devi and had quashed the proceeding initiated under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for Short 'Cr. P.C.') and also the order by which the shop in question had been attached under Section 146 Criminal Procedure Code . (2) Facts leading to the filing of the present petition, in brier, are that the petitioner's father Atam Parkash was allottee of Shop No. 277, Old Lajpat Rai Market. Delhi mid was given possession of the same by the Rehabilitation Department on January 31, 1960. Atam Parkash had entered into a partnership with his son-in-law Pritam Dass on March 26, 1968 and a partnership business in the electronics and allied goods was carried on in the said shop. The said partnership was stated to be at will and the. name of the pa...
Collector of C. Ex Vs. Metrowood Engineering Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)ECC176
(i) M/s. Metro Wood & Engineering Works Ltd., (Respondent No. 1) are engaged in the manufacture of Industrial Laminates (Electrical Insulators) and Decorative Laminates. Prior to 1-3-1986, they were paying Central Excise duty on these two products under Item 15-A(2) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the old Tariff). It is stated in the impugned order-in-appeal dated 24-10-1986 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) that after introduction of the new Central Excise Tariff under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 w.e.f. 1-1-1986, they filed a classification list No. 1/85-86 effective from 1-3-1986 claiming classification of the Industrial Laminates (Electrical Insulators) under Heading 8546.00 chargeable to duty @ 15% ad valorem. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise classified the Industrial Laminates (Electrical Insulators) under Heading 3920.31 chargeable to duty @ 35% ad valorem and approved the aforesaid class...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. M.M. Rubber Co. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1989
Reported in: (1989)(22)ECC245
1. The question to be decided in this appeal is whether the respondents' rubber products bus seats, car seats, scooter seats and motor cycle seats are correctly classifiable under Item 16A(1) of C.E.T. as latex foam sponge or under Item 34-A as motor vehicle parts.2. The facts of the case, in brief, as stated in the order-in-original No. C.No. V/16A/3/22/80, dated 28.2.81 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore and also stated by the learned Advocate and the learned J.D.R. during the hearing before us, are that the respondents are manufacturers of latex foam sponge articles falling under Central Excise Tariff Item 16A(1). They manufacture rubber products, viz. pillows, cavity sheetings, sofa cushions, chair cushions, cinema seat cushions, scooter seats, motor cycle seats, bus seats, car seats etc. They were filing classification lists from time to time in respect of all the products manufactured by them under Item 16A(1) of the Central Excise Tariff and the same...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »