Delhi Court September 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.
Eastern Coils Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC68Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Eastern Coils Pvt. Ltd., 113, Park Street, Calcutta, have filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta. The said appeal was presented in the Registry on the 4th day of July, 1989. Simultaneously a stay application duly supported with an affidavit sworn before a Notary Public was filed.Shri N. Mookherjee, the learned Advocate who has appeared on behalf of the Applicants, has reiterated the contentions made in the stay application. He has pleaded that the duty amount of Rs. 53,99,058.60 and penalty amount of Rs. 10/- lacs may be dispensed with. The period pertains to the years 1984-85 to 1987-88 and the show cause notice is dated 29th April, 1988. A search was conducted on 3rd November, 1987 and it was contended by the applicants that they were carrying on only repairs of armature and armature so repaired could not be sold in the market and were also making insulating material. The Mica segments so repaired could not be sold ...
Union of India Vs. S.P. Ahluwalia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-1989
Reported in: [1990]67CompCas348(Delhi); 40(1990)DLT328; 1990(19)DRJ251
Malik, J. 1. Two petitions Nos.58 of 1980 and 59 of 1980 title S P Ahluwalia v. Udham Singh and another and Mrs. S P Ahluwalia v Udham Singh and another were disposed of by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal by its order dated September 23, 1980 allowing Rs.4,000 and Rs.6,000 respectively as compensation for the inquires sustained by the aforesaid two persons who were involved in an accident with jeep NO.DLI 3864 belonging to the Union of India and driven by respondent No.1 in the claim petition on the date of the incident that is on February 18, 1972. The injuries sustained were simple in nature but the award was made after taking into consideration the status of Mr.S P Ahulwalia who was a public prosecutor in the Delhi Administration and the anxiety he had to undergo. In the case of Mrs. S P Ahluwalia, the Tribunal felt that, on the date of the incident, she was pregnant and the accident caused her a lot of agony and anxiety. 2. Before I deal with the matter, I must take notice of t...
Kewal Krishan and ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC466; 1990ACJ995; 41(1990)DLT282; 1989RLR467
Malik, J.(1) The appellants are aggrieved of the adequacy of the amount awarded to them as compensation by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by its order dated 15th of December 1980. The total award made was for a sum of Rs. 16,200 for the payment of which 60 days' time was given failing which the appellants were made entitled to 6% interest per annum from the date of the award till realisation. There is no cross-appeal by the respondents. Hence the findings on other issues have become final and it is not open to the respondents to challenge the findings that this accident occurred as a result of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by respondent No. 2. The victim of the accident is one Brijinder Kumar and the date of the accident is 29th of April 1976 at 6 p.m. at Vinay Nagar, New Delhi. The offending bus No. Dhp 2083 belonged to the D.T.C. The age of the deceased on the date of the incident was 24 years and he was unmarried. (2) The appellants had led evidence of Publ...
State Vs. Ram Sarup Sabharwal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-1989
Reported in: ILR1991Delhi199
R.L. Gupta, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred 'as the Code') has been filed on behalf of the State against two orders dated 18th July, 1989 and 3rd August, 1989 passed by Shri P.R. Thakur, Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi summoning Shri Ved Marwaha, former Commissioner of Police and Shri Vijay Karan, present Commissioner of Police as defense witnesses at the request of the respondent accused. The accused-respondent is facing trial under Sections 3, 5 and 9 of Official Secrets Act (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined 44 witnesses. Thereafter the statement of the accused-respondent was recorded under Section 313 of the Code. Then he filed a list of 22 witnesses on 15th July, 1989 whom he wanted to examine in defense. On 17th July, 1989 he suggested the names of the witnesses Mr. Ved Marwaha and Mr. Vijay Karan to be added in the list of defense witnesses.2. ...
Archana Chelawat Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-1989
Reported in: 1990(26)LC288(Delhi)
H.C. Goel, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Kumari Archana Chelawat, the petitioner, prays for quashing of the order of detention dated October 11, 1988 passed by Shri K.L. Verma, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, in respect of the petitioner's brother, Shri Dharmendra Suganchand Chelawat. Shri Verma passed the order of detention under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 with a view to prevent said Dharmendra Suganchand Chelawat from engaging in the transportation and abetting in the interstate export of psychotropic substances. It is stated in the grounds of detention mat on September 21, 1988, a godown of one Siddharth Trotters Pvt. Ltd., Kothari Mansion, at 357, S.V.P. Road, Bombay, was searched. Fine card board cartons containing in all 2,51,000 mandrax tablets weighing 125.5 kgs. and valued at Rs. 7,53,000/- were seized from there. During the foll...
Silver Enterprises Vs. Collector of Customs and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC377Tri(Delhi)
1. These two appeals arise out of two orders of the Collector of Customs & Central Excise, Rajkot dated 2-6-1989, in order-in-original No. 17/Collr/1989 and No. 25/Collr/1989. The appeals involve common issues and have been filed by the same appellants. In appeal No.C/2082/89-A, the facts are that the appellants, claiming to be agents of M/s. Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd., Gujarat filed 4 Bills of Entry all dated 15-3-1985, seeking clearance of 1513 cases of ball bearings with declared C.I.F. value of Rs. 8,90,026.10. They produced an Import Licence dated 30-9-1983 issued in favour of M/s. Elecon Engineering Co.Ltd. for the clearance .of the goods. The licence had an endorsement "Spares needed for the purpose of providing warranty coverage of after sales service, whether free of cost or at a price for their customers which shall be permitted as were/are used by them as components of the said items at the time of manufacture as per para 60 of April-March 1984 Policy, subject to condi...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC92Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal arising out of the Order-in-Revision No. 32(11E)82 of 3/83 dated 6-2-1983 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta.2. We have heard Shri L.C. Chakraborty, DR, for the appellant-Collector and Shri N. Mookherjee, Advocate, for the respondents.3. In the course of his reply to Shri Chakraborty's submissions, Shri Mookherjee, Counsel, for the respondents raised an important legal objection to the maintainability of the present appeal. We have, therefore, considered it proper to dispose of this objection first.4. In order to appreciate the objection raised by Shri Mookherjee, a few facts require to be stated. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, by his order dated 3173-1982 on classification list No. 1/82 dated 31-3-1982, permitted the respondents to avail themselves of duty exemption in terms of Central Excise Notification Nos. 51/78, dated 1-3-1978, 52/78 dated 1-3-1978 and 105/78, dated 27-4-1978 in respect of electricity generated by their...
Lohia Machines Ltd. Division: Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1989
Reported in: (1992)(41)LC674Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants have filed this appeal for setting aside the impugned order-in-original No. 3/Collector/MP/86 dated 20.8.1986 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur.2. The facts as stated in the order-in-original are that the Central Excise officers visited M/s. Industrial Electronics, 72-A, Cooperative Industrial Estate, Dada Nagar, Kanpur on 9,5.1985, 13.5.1985 and 16.7.1985 and detected that the appellants had cleared goods namely Voltage Regulators 28814 pieces and blinkers 28887 pieces during the period 1984-85 (4/84 to 3/85 and from 4/85 to 16.7.1985). As a result of this raid, two show cause notices were issued against the appellants one dated 27.6.1985 and the other dated 14.3.1986 and demanded duty of Rs. 6,49,239.82 P. under Rule 9(2) of the Act and also sought to know why penalty should not be imposed under Rule 173-Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The charges in both the show cause notices had been-- (a) that they had failed to obtain Central Excise licence fo...
indure Malleable and Alloy Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD466(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal, preferred by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 1983-84, against the order of CIT (Appeals)-I, New Delhi. The three grounds raised are that, income from hiring of commercial assets is 'business income' and not income from 'other sources', as held by the two lower authorities and assessee's claim in respect of set off of unabsorbed losses of earlier years and unabsorbed depreciation brought forward from earlier years is admissible to be set off.2. Briefly to state the facts the assessee is a private limited company. It was incorporated in December 1971 for carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of castings. The said business was carried on till 31-3-1980. However, w.e.f. 1-4-1980 the entire business assets were leased out on rent including the cars owned by the appellant company to a sister concern styled as M/s Indure (P.) Ltd. The claim of the assessee in respect of hire charges from, the commercial assets was that 'income from business' and a...
Collector of Customs Vs. Motor Industries Company Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC82Tri(Delhi)
1. The present appeal is a review show cause notice in terms of the provisions of erstwhile Section 131(3) of the Customs Act, 1962. The said review application stands transferred to the Tribunal in terms of the provisions of Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962 to be disposed of as an appeal.2. The notice of hearing was sent to the parties. Shri C. V. Durghyya, the learned JDR has appeared on behalf of the appellant. The respondents vide their letter dated 22nd August, 1989, have intimated that the matter may be decided on merits. Para No. 2 from the said letter is reproduced below :- "In this connection, we wish to bring to your kind notice that the appeal filed by the department merits being set aside since the same has been filed after a lapse of 1 (one) year and 9 (nine) months. Otherwise, we request the Hon'ble Tribunal to decide the matter on merits dispensing with our personal appearance." 3. It appears that the respondents are having a belief that the present revenue's appe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »