Delhi Court May 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.
industrial Finance Corporation of India and Another Vs. Century Metals ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Delhi186; II(1992)BC546; [1992]73CompCas630(Delhi)
ORDER1. Industrial Finance Corporation of India, (IFCI for short), a statutory body established under the Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), advances medium and long term credits, amongst others, to industrial concerns in India, particularly in circumstances where normal banking accommodation is inappropriate or recourse to capital issue methods is impracticable. It is empowered under the Act, inter alia, to grant loans or advances to industrial concerns on the security of mortgage, pledge, hypothecation etc. of moveable and immoveable properties of such industrial concerns.2. The IFCI, as petitioner 1, sets out following facts, which have necessitated a petition to this Court, invoking provisions of S. 30 of the Act:M/s. Century Metals Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Company), with its registered office at 86/ 87, Model Basti New Delhi, respondent I herein, is an industrial concern w...
Nalla Thamby Sritharan Vs. Uma Shanker
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-1989
Reported in: 1992(61)ELT423(Del)
R.L. Gupta, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of Code Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing an order dated 24-4-1989 passed by J. D. Kapur, Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi, staying the operation of the order of grant of bail by the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi at the time of admission of a revision petition filed by the complainant Sh. Uma Shanker, Air Customs Officer, New Delhi, Indira Gandhi International Air Port.2. I have heard Mr. R. D. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sh. J. S. Arora, learned counsel for the respondent and have given my careful consideration to the points involved. The main thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no revision is maintainable against an order granting bail by the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. Since revision itself is not maintainable, thereforee, the order granting stay of the operation of the order of bail in itself was liable to be quashe...
Friends Central Government Employees Co-operative House Building Socie ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-1989
Reported in: 38(1989)DLT467
S.S. Chadha, J.(1) Soon after the filing of Writ petition a question arose as to the list of members of the Society. The matter was discussed at several hearings and ultimately a list of members Annexure P-23 to the affidavit filed by the petitioner, was sent to the Register of Co-operative Societies for verification of the membership. The Registrar was directed in the Court's order dated November 26, 1980 to hear all the parties in respect of this list and to submit his report. The report on the verification of the list of members filed by the petitioner, Annexure P-23, was made on January 20, 1981 and filed in this Court on January 21, 1981. (2) A final list of the members, verified by the Registrar, was filed and copies of the same were given to the counsel appearing. Ultimately, this Court issued Rule D.B. in this Court's order dated March 29, 1981. A number of applications were pending for the grant of interim relief and the case was discussed regarding settlement of the matter on...
Punjab National Bank Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-1989
Reported in: [1989]30ITD245(Delhi); (1989)34TTJ(Del)359
ORDERPer Ch. G. Krishnamurthy, President - The assessed is a Nationalised Bank and in this appeal it objects to the disallowance of certain bad debts and to the refusal of allowance under section 35B in respect of expenses incurred at the branch of the Bank in London.2. We shall first take up the issue concerning the disallowance of the claim made under section 35B. The assessed Bank has a branch in London and on the maintenance of that branch, it incurred an expenditure of Rs. 64,16,686 and claimed that on the whole of that expenditure it was entitled to weighted deduction under the provisions of section 35B of the Income-tax Act. On the refusal of the Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner to allow the assesseds claim, the matter came up before the Commissioner (A), who also upheld the disallowance. The Commissioner (A) observed that under clause (iv) of section 35B (1) (b) weighted deduction was permissible only on 'maintenance outside India of a branch, office or agency for the promotion o...
Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-22-1989
Reported in: (1989)(25)LC121Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellant M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd., Rajpura has preferred this appeal against the Order-in-Original No. 14/CE/ADE/87 dated 4-12-1987 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh imposing a penalty of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) for alleged charges of committing irregularities in not maintaining of Central Excise records properly and non-accountal or rejected goods in RG-I as per procedure provided for in the Central Excise Rules.2. The brief facts of the case as Set out in the Show Cause notice dated 30-8-1986 issued by the Assistant Collector are that on 20-8-1986, the Customs and Central Excise Preventive staff, Patiala under the supervision of Superintendent (Preventive), Central Excise, Patiala paid a surprise visit to the factory premises of M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Rajpura and found the Central Excise records written upto date. During the course of verification of stocks, quantity of 571 CB Boxes of 'Rexona' soap (sub-head ing 3401/12 of Central Excis...
Bansal Plastic Industries Vs. Neeraj Toys Industries and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-22-1989
Reported in: 39(1989)DLT418; 1989(17)DRJ47
G.C. Jain, J. (1) In an action for infringement of its registered design, M/s. Bansal Plastic Industries, the plaintiff, has filed this application under Order 39 Rules I and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking an order restraining the respondents, their servants, agents, stockists, dealers and all other persons on their behalf from manufacturing and selling the 'Toy Horse' of the design in suit till the final disposal of the suit. (2) According to the averments in the plaint, the plaintiff was carrying on business, inter alia, of manufacturing and marketing children's tricycles and toys. One of its products was a 'Toy Horse'. The plaintiff prepared its design in August, 1983 It was a distinctive design with unique features and configuration. The design was new and original and had not been previously published. In order to protect its right in that design the plaintiff made an application for registration of the said design under No. 153343 dated 7th August,...
Goodlass Nerolac Paints Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-20-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)LC296Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Goodlass Nerolac Paints Limited, Bombay have tiled an appeal being aggrieved from order-in-appeal No. PPN-660/B-1-379/86 dated 17th February, 1987 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that M/s. Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd had filed the claim for refund of Rs. 52,519.89 being the amount of duty paid by them on the portion of various types of discounts which were allowed by them on their products falling under Tariff Item 14 and cleared during the month of June, 1977. The refund claim was filed on 21st July, 84. The duty was paid by them during the month of June, 1977 and the duty was also not paid under protest. A Show Cause Notice was issued to them on 13th August 1984 asking them to show cause as to why their claim for refund should not be rejected as time barred under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. In reply to the said show cause notice vide their letter dt. 21st Sept., 1984 the appellants st...
A.N. Shervani and anr. Vs. Lt. Governor and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-1989
Reported in: 38(1989)DLT357; 1989RLR296
S.B. Wad, J.(1) These Writ Petitions challenge the validity of the Regulations issued by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, under Delhi Police Act to regulate Guest Houses through licensing. The petitioners are mostly owners of the Guest Houses in Delhi and they have also challenged the licensing policy of the Commissioner of Police as being arbitrary and discriminatory. (2) The places of public accommodation and entertainment have undergone a sea change in the last hundred years. The changes are dictated by the new set of economic relations, fast means of communication, and individual needs of better living amenities and at times the luxuries. On the one hand the laws and public regulations of such places were found necessary for the protection, safety and hygiene of the travellers/dwellers. On the other hand, it was also necessary to regulate the social and public aspect of these new institutions infringing public peace and order. (3) The first regulatory enactment so far as applicab...
Suwa Ram Through Baghu Ram Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-1989
Reported in: 1989(25)LC142(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. The challenge in this petition is to the order of detention passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'COFEPOSA Act') against the petitioner with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods into India and also engaging in transporting, concealing and keeping smuggled goods viz. gold.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the petitioner arrived from Dubai at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi on 9th December, 1987. The petitioner went to the red channel and declared goods worth Rs. 2650/-. Some duty was paid and thereafter his suitcase was examined and it was found that it, inter alia, contained two cast iron locks and one electric iron. On breaking open the locks it was found that gold in the form of one cylindrical solid shape was present and one piece of gold in the shape of 'V was recovered from the electric iron. Special cavities are alleged to hav...
Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)LC293Tri(Delhi)
1. The issue here is correct classification of spirally welded steel pipes which have been subjected to the process of lining and coating with cement mortar. Appellants have claimed the benefit of Notification No. 208/83, dated 1-8-1983, as amended, on grounds that the goods are manufactured out of duty-paid steel pipes received from their customers on returnable basis and that the process carried out in their factory does not change the basic character of the steel pipes as such. It is contended that the object of the process is only to make the products rust and corrosion free and suitable for underground laying.The lower authorities, however, have denied the exemption claimed on the ground that as a result of the lining and coating of steel pipes with cement mortar, the steel pipes are converted into a new product.It is against these orders that appellants are now before us.2. We have heard S/Shri A.K. Jain and Moti Ajwani, on behalf of the appellants and Shri J.N. Nigam, SDR, for ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »