Delhi Court March 1990 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.
J.S. Solanki Vs. Om Parkash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2119; 41(1990)DLT304; 1990(18)DRJ335; 1995(76)ELT37(Del)
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This petition has been filed under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure seeking setting aside of the order dated October 24, 1989 passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi by which he had rejected the application of the petitioner for disposal of the seized wrist watches and other parts of the wrist watches till the disposal of the criminal case.(2) Notice of this petition was given to the respondent but despite service, no appearance has been put in by respondent-accused.(3) The perusal of the impugned order shows that the accused had not opposed the prayer of the complainant for selling the seized goods even before the final decision of the case.(4) The complaint has been filed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act on the ground that about 520 wrist watches and 20,842 watch movements and other assorted goods of the value of Rs. 12,86,330/ have been seized as smuggled goods from the accused. The sai...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shanti Vijay and Co.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1990
Reported in: (1992)88CTR(Del)87; [1992]193ITR122(Delhi)
We have heard counsel for the parties. In this case, amongst other questions, one question which arose for consideration before the Income-tax Officer when he was making original assessment was whether loans of Rs. 8,15,000 shown in the books of account of the respondent were genuine or not. Out of this amount, a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 was standing in the name of one B. J. Mehta and Rs. 5,15,000 in the name of ten other parties. The Income-tax Officer disbelieved the contention of the assessed that the amounts were genuine and he treated them as the assesseds undisclosed income.The appeal filed by the assessed was successful before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but the Income-tax Officer filed second appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which, vide its order dated November 29, 1980, allowed the appeal and treated these credits as income of the respondent/assessed from undisclosed sources. Thereafter, an application moved under section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act met with ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Techno Chem Engineers
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: (1990)LC307Tri(Delhi)
1. The above appeal has been preferred against the order of the Central Excise (Appeals) New Delhi dated 16 7-84, holding inter alia that the assessees were covered by Notification 31/76 CE dated 28-2- 1976 and setting aside the duty demand and confiscation of the seized goods and the penalty imposed by the Assistant Collector. The respondent herein are manufacturers of Electrolytic Cells and parts thereof falling under T.I. 68 on their own account and also carrying out job work such as fabrication or undertaking repairs etc. either in the Factory itself or at the premises of their customers. It was found that the respondents had cleared goods valued at over Rs.15 lakhs during the financial year 1979-80 without having obtained a central excise licence and without paying Central Excise duty on the value of clearances immediately following the first clearance of Rs. 15 lakhs as per the provisions of Notification 89/79-CE dated 1-3-1979. The value of clearances was calculated inclusive o...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J. K. Synthetics Ltd. (No. 1).
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: [1992]193ITR182(Delhi)
This petition pertains to the assessment year 1975-76. Against the assessment order which had been passed, an appeal was filed to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by the assessed and thereafter before the Income-tax Tribunal. Before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the assessed, for the first time, sought to claim depreciation at 15% instead of 10% as claimed by him earlier. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal entertained the said additional ground and remanded the case to the Income-tax Officer for a fresh decision on the question whether the assessed was entitled to depreciation at 15% or not.Against the aforesaid decision, the Department filed a petition in this court being Income-tax Case No. 36 of 1987 under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act. Vide judgment dated July 14, 1987, CIT v. J. K. Synthetics Ltd. : [1988]172ITR390(Delhi) , this court directed the Tribunal to state the case and refer the question of law to this court to the effect whether the Tribunal was right ...
income-tax Officer Vs. Hakim Singh Grover.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: [1990]34ITD452(Delhi)
ORDERPer Shri M. A. Bakshi Judicial Member - Appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross-objection filed by the assessed directed against the order of CIT (A)-XII, New Delhi, are disposed of by this common order for the convenience.2. In this case original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 20th March, 1976 on an income of Rs. 84,263 as under :Rs.Income from house property 12,146 Lease income from Soda-water machine 1,200 Income from unexplained investment expenditure etc. 73,425 86,771 Less : Deduction for LIP Rs. 2,508 Net income 84,263 3. This assessment order was subject matter of an appeal before CIT (A) and the ITAT and the income assessed by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 84,263 was confirmed by the Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 15th April, 1981.4. On 18th March, 1978 a notice u/s. 148 had been issued by the Assessing Officer, as in this opinion, the income in receipt of deposits amounting to Rs. 31,000 in the name of assesseds son in Punjab National Bank, Karol Bagh, New ...
Avtar Singh and Saran Singh Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: (1992)(40)LC426Tri(Delhi)
1. Both these cases arise out of the same order in original and therefore they arc being disposal off by this common order.2. The learned Counsel states that in these cases a consignment of cigarette lighters was booked at Bangkok for Kabul and was being transhipped through Delhi when it was detained, examined and seized by the Delhi Customs on 11.11.1985.3. A show cause notice was issued in May 1986 asking the appellants to show cause as to why the goods should not be confiscated under Section 111(d) and they should not be penalised under Section 112.4. The appellant Shri Avtar Singh of Bangkok was the consigner and the appellant Shri Saran Singh of Kabul was the consignee. It was their contention that the show cause notice merely shows the month of issue as May 1986 and docs not indicate the date of issue. It appears to have been despatched on 12.5.1986 to the consignee (at his Kabul address).Presumably it was issued on the same day to the consigner (at Bangkok address). It was howe...
Western India Plywood Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: (1990)(27)ECC160
1. This is an appeal against the order of Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras dated 26-4-1982 confirming the lower authority's rejection of the appellants request for registering the subject consignment under Project Import.2. The appellants imported a Klockner Drum Chipper under Bill of Entry No. 82/5-2-81-HD. No. 49/12-2-81. Before clearing the goods under the Bill of Entry, the Appellants had filed an application dated 17-1-1981 to the Asstt. Collector of Customs, Import Department, Cochin requesting that the application filed by the Appellants may be registered for Project Imports and a Project Import Number allotted, so that the benefit of the lower rate of duty applicable to Project Imports would be available to the import of the machine at the time of clearance. The appellants also wrote a letter to the Assistant Collector on 4-2-1981 explaining the circumstances in which the Chipper machine was imported and requesting for registration and the benefit of Project Importation ...
Parveen Malhotra Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1977; II(1990)DMC191; ILR1990Delhi599
ORDER1. Sentiments and emotions have no part to play, in the judicial pronouncements. The judicial discretion cannot be allowed to be swayed by emotions and indignation even in cases where it is alleged that the accused has committed a grave offence. 2. Bride burning is undoubtedly a very grave and heinous crime. In bride burning cases even death sentence may not be improper. Undoubtedly, persons who perpetuate such barbaric crimes without any human consideration, on proof of guilt, deserve the extreme penalty so that it may operate as a deterrent to other persons from committing such anti-social crimes. This, in brief, is the ratio of various decisions relied on behalf of woman organisation while vehemently opposing the grant of bail to the petitioner. Facts : 3. Petitioner named Parveen, his father, mother and sister are being prosecuted for offences under Sections 498A, 302 and 120B IPC. Parveen and deceased Shalini were married on 4th December 1987. Shalini received burn injuries a...
Engineering Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. Ishwari Parsad Ganeriwala
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: 40(1990)DLT567
Santosh Duggal, J.(1) By this application moved under sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner seeks initiation of contempt of court proceedings against the respondent I.P. Ganeriwala alleging willful disobedience on his part of this Court's order as also abuse of the process of law. (2) The facts which have occasioned filing of this petition are that the petitioner herein had filed a petition under section 11 of the Arbitration Act seeking removal of the arbitrator to whom the disputes between the parties were referred. After the respondent put in appearance and sought time to file the reply to that petition, he moved and interim application (I.A. 2919/82) on 13th August 1982 praying, inter alia, that appropriate injunction be issued against the petitioners restraining them from encashing the bank guarantees which he had furnished, as per details given in the body of the interim application, which accor...
State of Haryana and ors. Vs. K. Vimala Raghavachari and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ255; 41(1990)DLT332
N.N. Goswamy, J.(1) This judgment will dispose of F.A.O. 47 of 1980 filed by the State of Haryana as also the Cross-appeal being F.A.O. 89/80 filed by the claimants. Both these appeals are directed against the award dated 30th October, 1979 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi. (2) Dr. K..V. Raghavachari was employed as Lecturer in Chemistry Department of the University of Delhi. He was knocked down by the bus owned by the State of Haryana and being driven by Shri Amarjit Singh driver at the relevant time. (3) The widow and three children of the deceased, hereinafter called the claimants, filed the petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi. It was alleged that on 23.3.1972 at about 5.35 p.m. the deceased was going home on bicycle from the University of Delhi to his residence at Model Town, Delhi. He was traveling on a bicycle on G.T. Road and when he reached near the second bus stop of Model Town, he slowed down a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »