Delhi Court September 1990 Judgments
Babu Ram and ors. Vs. Sdm Shahdara and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-1990
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT514
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) In this petition under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code) prayer has been made by the petitioners for quashing the proceedings under Ss. 145/146 of the Code pending in the court of Sdm Shahdara in respect of land measuring about 1000 sq. yds out of Khasra No. 13/4 in village Kotla, Shahdara. (2) In brief the facts leading to the filing of this petition are that Bharat Singh respondent No. 4 on his own behalf arid on behalf of Harijans of Village Kotia moved an application to the S.H.O., Police Station Trilok Puri slating therein that the disputed land was given to the Harijans for construction of Panchalyatghar and Badle and others have been trying to take forcible possession of this land. request was made that Badle and others may be stopped from making any encroachment and to avoid any untoward incident. After enquiry a report was submitted by S.H.Q. P.S. Trilokpuri to the Sdm Shahdara. It was, inter alia, stated that land bearing khar...
Tag this Judgment!Sharad Chandra Bhandari Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC474Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Additional Collector, In-dore.2. The learned counsel stated that the appeal was filed by Shri Anil Kumar Bhandari, S/O. Shri Sharad Chandra Bhandari against whom the order-in-original was passed.3. Shri Sharad Chandra Bhandari had filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the order-in-original and the matter was remanded by the Tribunal vide its order No. A/264/87-NRB in appeal No.C/2139/85-NRB.Shri Sharad Chandra Bhandari expired on 3-8-1988 after the impugned order passed by way of remand had been issued but before he could file the appeal against the said order. The present appeal was, therefore, filed by his son Shri Anil Kumar Bhandari against the impugned order.4. The Tribunal allowed Shri Anil Kumar Bhandari to be taken on record as legal representative by its order dated 7-3-90. The department has also filed a cross objection on 26-10-1988 with reference to the impugned order.5. The learned counsel stated that in this case the Tr...
Tag this Judgment!Samatha Metal Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC765Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. 37-B dated 17-1-1980, passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi, against which a revision petition was filed and transferred to this.Tribunal.2. The appellants were manufacturing 'Copper and Bronze Ingots' from copper and bronze boring scraps supplied by the South Central Railways.The goods after manufacture were supplied back to the Railways. As per specification of their customers, they were adding lead, tin, white metal, gun metal etc. etc. in the scrap supplied by the Railways at the time of manufacture of the ingots. This fact was not reported in the classification list filed before the Assistant Collector. It has been held that since this extra material was added, the benefit of the Notification No. 119/66 dated 16-7-1966 would not be available to them and they would be liable to pay duty. The Central Board of Excise & Customs has upheld the findings of the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Vijay Metal Udyog Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC263Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Jai Vijay Metal Udyog Pvt. Ltd., Varanasi, have filed the above captioned four appeals being aggrieved from a common order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi, disposing of four appeals. The said appeals were presented in the Registry on 31st May, 1990. Thereafter, a stay application duly supported with an affidavit sworn belore a Notary Public was also presented.2. Shri V. Lakshmi Kumaran, the learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the applicants. He has reiterated the contentions made in the stay application. He has pleaded lor dispensing with the pre-deposit of the duty amount of R.s. 36,32,451.30. He pleaded that the period involved is 1st March, 1988 to 19th May, 1988 and the show cause-cum-dcmand notice is dated 9th August, 1988 and was issued by the Assistant Col-lector and there is an allegation of misdeclaration in the show cause notice. Shri Lakshmi Kumaran pleaded that the applicants are engaged in the manufacture of aluminium wire rod...
Tag this Judgment!Croygenics India Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: (1991)38ITD431(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee, a public limited company, against the ex parte order passed by the ITO in respect of assessment year 1983-84. The assessee had filed a return showing a loss of Rs. 40,47,800. Along with the return, the assessee had filed the details of the manufacturing and trading account and the details of various heads of expenditure. Altogether sixty-two enclosures were sent along with the return.2. On 25-7-1984, the ITO had raised certain queries. These requirements were also met by the assessee under the covering letter dated 2-8-1984.Thereafter, there was a lull in the proceedings and it was taken up again on 30-9-1985. Certain further details were asked for and the case was adjourned to 15-10-1985. It was further adjourned to 4-11-1985 and 15-11-1985. On 15-11-1985, the assessee sought further adjournment. The ITO was of opinion that this adjournment cannot be granted. He also found that the assessee had received some cylinders on rent from one Manjula Ran...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Dr. Yudhvir Singh Homeopathic
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: (1990)35ITD514(Delhi)
1. These two appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the consolidated order of AAC, Range-I, New Delhi for asst. years 1983-84 and 1984-85. Assessee is a charitable trust. Under Section 139(1) it was required to file the return of income for asst. year 1983-84 by 30th June, 1983 and for asst. year 1984-85 by 30th June, 1984. The return for asst. year 1983-84 was, however, filed on 22nd February,1985 and forasst. year 1984-85 it was filed on 30th September, 1985. In view of provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the income of the assessee was assessed at nil for both the asst. years.There being a default in not filing the return of income in time, assessing officer initiated penalty proceedings Under Section 271(1)(a) and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,080 for asst. year 1983-84 and Rs. 2,036 for asst. year 1984-85. The penalty has been calculated @ 1% of total receipts for each year of default for both the asst. years.2. In appeal, the default of late fili...
Tag this Judgment!Arvind Alias Pappu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1004
Jaspal Singh, J.1. Within the jurisdiction of police station Mangol Puri, there is a hamlet known as Sultanpur Majra. Within it was a tailoring firm in the name and style of Rajesh Enterprises. The appellant Arvind alias Pappu, Ram Parshad (PW-6) and Ram Parkash were the partners. On the intervening night of March 31, 1985 and April 1, 1985, the business premises of this firm were a witness to a murder. The prosecution alleged that the crime was committed by Arvind and that the victim was his co-villager Ajab Singh. The learned Additional Sessions Judge Mr. V. S. Aggarwal found himself in agreement with the case set up by the prosecution and consequently convicted and sentenced him under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Needless to say Arvind has found the judgment and order of sentence unpalatable. Hence this appeal. 2. It is a case built entirely upon circumstantial evidence. Here is a resume of its essentials. Arvind and Ajab Singh being co-villagers, were known to each other. ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Jyotsna Holdings (P.) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: 1992(38)ECC308
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.1. In this application seeking condensation of delay in filing the appeal, this court is not concerned with the merits of the case except for the limited purpose of deciding the plea of public interest put forth by the Government. Briefly, the facts are : The respondent Jyotsna Holdings Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'JH'), had been appointed to offer consultancy services to Somitomo Corporation, Japan (hereinafter refereed to as 'SC') in the matter of applies contemplated to be made by SC of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission/Gas Authority of India Ltd. Two agreements dated August 30, 1984, and November 5, 1984, were executed between JH and SC was entitled to receive consultancy fees from SC. The agreement dated August 30, 1984, inter alia, provided that the consultancy fees would be remitted in Japanese yen to the account of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (for short 'BCCI'), London, on account of Eljay Consultants Incorporated (for short 'Eljay...
Tag this Judgment!Parveen Arora Vs. Pushpa Arora
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: 1991RLR107
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) Parveen Arora and his mother Smt. Satya Kumari Arora by way of this petition u/S 482, Cr. P.C. prayed for quashing of the criminal proceedings in case Fir No. 88/88 State vs. Praveen Kumar u/S. 406 Ipc, P.S. Greater Kailash pending in the court of Shri D.S. Punia, Mm, New Delhi. (2) Briefly stated the facts are that Praveen Arora, petitioner No. 1, was married to Smt. Pushpa Arora, respondent No. 1, on 11.3.74 and there after been living together as husband and wife. They, however, could not pull on for a long time as a result of which they started living separately w.e.f. 8.12.78. There was no rapprochement between husband and wife and consequently a petition for divorce was filed by Smt. Pushpa Arora against her husband. On her complaint case u/S. 406 Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioners in Police Station Greater Kailash being Fir No. 88/88 which is now pending in the court of Shri D.S. Punia. The parties have now settled their disputes and have...
Tag this Judgment!Hukam Chand JaIn Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-1990
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT221; 1991RLR99
Usha Mehra, J.(1) Pursuant to a Notification dated November 13, 1959 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act'), the appellant's land was acquired by the respondent-Union of India. The land was situated in Village Nimiri admeasuring 16 bighas and 8 bids was bearing Khasra No. 128. Notification under Section 4 & 6 was issued in respect of the entire land falling in Khasra No. 128, measuring 258 bighas and 6 biswas. Land Acquisition Collector made the Award on 28th February, 1962. He awarded compensation @ Rs. 2,:)00.00 per bigha, for the land falling in Block 'A' which was in two parts, with garden, and without garden, the land with garden was awarded compensation @ Rs 3,000.00 per bigha, the land without garden @ Rs. 2,500.00 per bigha. For land falling in Block 'B' without garden it was @ Rs. 2.000.00 per bigha and the land with garden @ Rs. 2,500.00 per bigha. Besides this, the appellant had also represented before the Collector that he had got a house ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »