Delhi Court September 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.
P.K. Datta Chaudhary Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 42(1990)DLT404; 1990(19)DRJ229; 1990RLR469
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) Shri P.K. Datta Chaudhary petitioner has by way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred to as the Code) prayed for the quashing of the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, respondent No. 2 in respect of the premises bearing No. B-322, Chitranjan Park, New Delhi thereby proceedings under Section 145 of the Code were started and the permits were sealed.(2) It would be necessary to give some details of the facts leading to the filing of this petition.(3) On 8th August, 1983 Ranjit Bose respondent No. 3 herein filed an application under Sections 145/146 of the Code in the court of the Sdm New Delhi. It was, inter alias stated by him that be bad been in lawful possession of the entire ground floor of House No. B-322, Chitranjan Park, New Delhi as a tenant of the respondent-landlord. It was further stated that since January 1983 the landlord was putting pressure on him to vacate the premises or to face dir...
Hans Raj Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 42(1990)DLT416; 1990(19)DRJ237; 1991(31)ECC388; 1992(58)ELT50(Del); 1990RLR487
R.N. Pyne, J.(1) Rule D.B.(2) The matter is heard today with the consent of both the parties.(3) The petitioner, Shri Hans Raj, .who was an attaches and Private Secretary to Ambassador of India in Japan in the Embassy of India of Tokyo from 1985 to 1988, came back to India finally on 27th July, 1988, after more than three years. During his stay in Japan, he purchased a portable Honda' Generator and a Music System. On having returned to India,on 28th October, 1988, the petitioner claimed Transfer of Residence concession under Transfer of Residence Rules, 1978, and for that purpose vide Annexure P/i,. be gave a declaration in respect of personally household effects including Music System and portable Generator which arc mentioned at item Nos. 9 and 13 respectively. Both these items were disallowed by the Assistant Collector of Customs for the purpose of exemption from custom duty on the ground that the items, on appearance, found to be in absolutely brand new condition and further, altho...
Mundipharma Ag Vs. Wockhardt Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: ILR1991Delhi606
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) In this petition filed under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act') I am to decide by this order an application (I.A. 5010/90) of the petitioner filed under section 41 and Ii Schedule of' the Act read with Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937 and again read with the International Chamber of Commerce Rules of Arbitration.(2) When I first issued notices in the petition as well as in the application I had expressed my doubt if proceedings under section 20 of the Act were at all maintainable as it appeared to me that under the arbitration agreement between the parties the award given would be a foreign award and would be governed by the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961 for short 'the Foreign Awards Act'). It was, however, submitted at the time that if ultimately this court took the view that proceedings under the Act were not maintainable the petitioner would amend the petition to convert it into a one for suit for ...
Rexor India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-10-1990
Reported in: (1991)(52)ELT392TriDel
1. By the impugned order No. 70/89 dated 29-12-1989, the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi - (a) demanded from M/s Rexor India Ltd., Faridabad, duty amounting to Rs. 73,64,0707/- leviable on printed metallised/lacquered polyester film cleared by them during the period from 1-3-1986 to 28-9-1987, invoking the provisions of Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (the "Rules", for short) and the extended time limit provided in Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the "Act", for short), Aggrieved by this order, Rexor India Ltd. (the "appellants", for short) have filed the present appeal.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the appellants are engaged in the business of metallising and lacquering inter alia of polyester films. The present dispute concerns the appellants' activity of metallising printed polyester films supplied to them by other parties. These parties print the polyester films with pictures, motifs etc., as per customers' requirements...
Central Cables Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-1990
Reported in: (1991)(51)ELT385TriDel
1. The above captioned four appellants have filed four appeals being aggrieved by a common order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Nagpur. Simultaneously the stay applications duly supported with affidavits have also been filed. The particulars are as under :-_________________________________________________________________________________S. Name of the party Duty Amount Penalty AmountNo._________________________________________________________________________________1. E/Stay/2098/90-Bl in 16,44,436.00 1,50,000.00 appeal No. E/2852/90-B12. E/Stay/2096/90-Bl in 16,44,436.91 25,000.00 appeal No. E/2850/90-B13. E/Stay/2097/90-Bl in 16,44,436.91 25,000.00 appeal No. E/2851/90-B14. E/Stay/2099/90-Bl in 16,44,436.91 25,000.00 appeal No. E/2853/90-B1_________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Since the above captioned four appeals emerge from a common order and the stay applications emerge from four apeals, the same are being disposed of by ...
Goodwill Leathers (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC481Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal petition filed with reference to an "Interim order" passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Airport, New Delhi.2. The learned counsel stated that while passing this interim order the learned Additional Collector has confiscated the goods and allowed them to be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 80,000/-.3. They have deposited the amount but were unable to take the goods as being leather goods which were lying since 1987, they had in the meanwhile got spoiled.4. It was his contention that although it describes itself as an 'interim order' it is virtually a 'final order' which is not sustainable in law and is required to be set aside.5. In response to a query from the Bench he further stated that no final order has since been passed to their knowledge.The learned SDR stated that this is merely an 'interim order' and therefore does not record in detail any discussion or reason for decision and therefore he has no objection if the matter is remanded to enable...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. H.R. Sugar Factory
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC213Tri(Delhi)
1.1 The respondents filed a claim for sugar incentive rebate for Rs. 2,49,051.66p under notification No. 132/82 as amended by notification No. 183/82. The refund claim was filed by the respondents on 24-9-1982 to the Resident Inspector. There is no controversy that the claim as filed before the Resident Inspector was well within the time laid down in the law i.e. under Section 11-B of the Central Excises & Salt Act (CE&SA), 1944. The claim was, however, addressed to the Assistant Collector and it was filed with the Resident Inspector as per the practice. On 20th April, 1983, the Inspector desired some more documents to be filed by the respondents which were given to him on 15-7-1983. On 23-11-1983 he returned the claim to the respondents and advised them to file claim with the documents to the Assistant Collector. Within two months from that advise, the claim was filed by the respondents with the Assistant Collector. 1.2 The original authority, namely the Assistant Collector h...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dalmia Dairy Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: [1991]189ITR167(Delhi)
B. N. Kirpal, J.1. The petitioner seeks reference of the following two questions to 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 accrued sales tax liability of Rs. 4,84,040 is in allowable deduction during the year under consideration 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in allowing the assessed's contention that the interest on the fixed deposits should be taxed on maturity basis and not on accrual basis ?' 2. As regards question No. 2, vide order dated August 30, 1990, passed in ITC No. 74 of 1988 - CIT v. Dalmia Dairy Industries Ltd. : [1991]188ITR611(Delhi) , we have already declined to call for any reference. 3. As regards question, the assessment year in question is 1979-80. In respect of the assessment year 1978-79, it is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Tribunal itself, vi...
K.L. Aggarwal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: [1991]190ITR303(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. The Petitioner seeks reference of the following questions of this court : '1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 50,000, being the amount of gift made to the assessed by Smt. Shriomani Devi, in complete disregard of the fact that in the assessment year 1973-74 too, a similar gift was received by the assessed from the husband of the said donor, which had been accepted as genuine by the Revenue 2. Whether the adverse findings recorded in the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are sustainable in law, as the same are vitiated on account of non-consideration of relevant material and evidence on record and consideration of inadmissible evidence and extraneous material/ grounds 3. Whether there was any material with the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to disbelieve the source of the aforesaid receipt and to uphold the aforesaid addition, by recording a finding the capacity of the donor to make ...
Shakuntala Devi Vs. Jogdhian Tilok Chand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1990
Reported in: 1990RLR485
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) Under S. 20, Civil Procedure Code . the territorial jurisdiction of the court could be determined on the basis if each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain as per cl. (a) and as per cl. (c) on the basis of the cause of action, wholly or in part arising within the jurisdiction of the court. The plaintiff has no doubt set up the case that a part of cause of action has arisen at Delhi inasmuch as the payments have been made at Delhi and some acknowledgment has been sent on behalf of deft. No. 1 to the pff. at Delhi, that amount deposited by the pff. was also payable at Delhi. But these facts can only be decided after framing of issues. The pff. wants this court to have jurisdiction of this case also on the basis of cl. (b) of S. 20, which lays down that where in in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, any of the d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »