Delhi Court December 1991 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.
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Shri Ram Fibres Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1991
Reported in: (1992)(42)LC365Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal has been filed against the orders of the Collector (Appeals) by which he has set aside the orders of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Madras III Division demanding a duty of Rs. 37,30,499.27 from the respondents on the ground that the denierage of nylon yarn manufactured by them was found, on chemical test, to be 226.4 as against the limit of 210 deniers with tolerance of 4% (210 + 4% works out to 210 + 8.4 = 218.4) for availing of the exemption under notification 188A/62-C.E. dated 3.11.1962 as amended. The operative portion of the impugned order which has been assailed is as under In the show cause notice, it is stated that since the notification 188A/62 extends concessional rate of duty to 210 deniers with 4% tolerance of nylon yarn meant for use in manufacture or repair or both of fishing nets, and as the sample of yarn, sent under Test Memo has been found to be in excess of 210 deniers applying tolerance, ihc concessional rate available under notification...
Shetkari S.S.K. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1991
Reported in: (1992)(43)LC288Tri(Delhi)
1. Before taking up the appeal for hearing we heard the miscellaneous application filed by the appellant for permission to raise additional grounds of appeal. The appellants seek to raise the ground that the order of the Superintendent dated 27.3.1982 granting partial rebate on excess sugar produced during a particular period is without jurisdiction as the competent officer to adjudicate the refund claims is the Assistant Collector of Central Excise under Section 1 IB of the Central Excises and Salt Act. 1944. The appellants contend that as the order of the Superintendent is a nullity no appeal was required to be filed against that order, and therefore, the appeal filed by the appellants cannot be dismissed as time-barred and cannot have the effect of clothing the order of 27.3.1982 with validity. We find that the additional ground sought to be raised is a question of law and we, therefore, permit it. The miscellaneous application is allowed.2. The appellants are a Co-operative Sugar ...
Cosmos Enterprises Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1991
Reported in: (1992)(40)ECC142
1. The issue for consideration in this appeal is whether "thermal printing paper" imported by the appellants is to be classified under Heading 4823.90 of the Customs Tariff as claimed by them or under Heading 4811.90 as ordered by the Departmental authorities.2. The appellants had imported a consignment of thermal printing paper in September 1988 and had claimed its clearance as "printing and writing paper" with benefit of Notification 55/86-Cus., dated 17-2-1986. The goods were examined and the test report stated that "the sample is a cut piece of one sheet of paper composed of chemical pulp.It is coated on one side with a heat sensitive preparation containing organic chemicals - GSM - 61.4". After issue of show cause notice and adjudication the adjudicating authority classified the goods under Heading 4811.90 of the Customs Tariff and the Central Excise Tariff, on the basis of the width of the imported paper. Classification under Heading 4823.90 was ruled out for the reason that tha...
Gobind Ram Vs. Gian Chand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1991
Reported in: 47(1992)DLT88
Dalveer Bhandari, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 6/10/1976 passed by the Sub-Judge, Delhi, decreeing the Suit of the plaintiff for specific performance of the contract.(2) The brief facts which are necessary to dispose of the present appeal are set out as under: ON24.1.1973, defendant agreed to sell and the plaintiff agreed to purchase the quarter no. 3/4, Double storey, Lajpat Nagar Iv, NewDelhi, for a consideration of Rs. 16,000.00. The defendant receivedRs. 1000.00at the time of signing of the agreement and the plaintiff agreed to give another sum of Rs. 14.000.00 to the defendant before 31/03/1973 and another sum of Rs. 1000.00 at the time of registration of the sale deed. It was agreed between the parties that the sale deed would be executed within 15 days of the receipt of the (3) The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of the contract on the ground that the defendant failed to execute the sale deed within the stipulated time. It w...
J.C.T. Limited Vs. State (Delhi Administration) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT237
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) This order is to dispose of an application by the petitioner with a prayer that exercising the powers under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code) the Court may set aside the order dated 8th November, 1990 passed by a Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi vide which instead of releasing the amount of Rs. 13,03,000.00 in favor of the petitioner the same has been ordered to be frozen. (2) Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of this petition are as under. (3) In June, 1989 the petitioner issued shares to be subscribed by the public to increase its capital base for which the terms and conditions were approved by the Controller of Capital Issues, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. There was overwhelming response from the public as a result of which the issue was over subscribed resulting in not making available shares at all or the requisite number of sh ires to numerous persons. The issue was of a magnitude of Rs. 50.40 crores and the petit...
Naresh Kumar Seth Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT452
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) Shri Amlesh Choudhary, Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, New Delhi has filed a complaint against Naresh Kumar Seth petitioner for trial for the offence under Sec. 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). (2) Briefly stated the allegations against the petitioner have been that there was a specific information with the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence that huge quantity of smuggled gold was stored in the residential premises of the accused being B-242, Derawala Nagar, New Delhi. Accordingly, a surveillance was kept on the said house. On 27th February, 1991 the petitioner was noticed throwing a packet from terrace of his house Into the gali on the back side of the premises. The said packet on examination was found to contain 10 foreign marked gold bars of 10 tolas each. A search was conducted of the said premises on which 12 packets were recovered from the store room of the top floor containing 120 gold ...
Panjikaran Paulose Joseph and ors. Vs. Kusum Vithal Patil and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1991
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC188
S.M. Daud, J.1. This appeal is by the driver, owner and insurer of a private motor bus bearing registration No. MTT 4383, the driving of which motor bus led to the death of Vithal Gopal Patil whose widow and children are arrayed as respondent No. 1 before us.2. Respondent No. 2 had hired the bus mentioned above and it was in the course of a task being executed for the second respondent that the bus on 16.11.1981 at about 6.00 a.m. dashed against Vithal leaving him dead instantaneously. At the time of his death Vithal was in the employ of Siemens (I) Ltd., his designation being that of a Draughtsman. Vithal was 45 years of age and was to retire on the attainment of age of 60 years. His sons Vinay, Prashant and Sandesh were 12,9 and 4 years old at the time of passing away of their father, while his widow Kusum must have been just out of her twenties for she gave out her age to be 31 years when she came to testify before the Tribunal on 14.10.1983. The Claim lodged by the widow and the so...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1991
Reported in: (1992)(38)ECC280
1. This is an appeal of the department against the decision of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune, changing the classification of the product 'SURJE', manufactured by the respondents, from Chapter Heading 2107.91 to Chapter Heading 04.04 of the Central Excise Tariff. The appellants have prayed for restoring the classification of the product under Chapter Heading 2107.91.2. The relevant facts briefly stated are that the respondents have been manufacturing the product as a job worker for M/s. Wander Ltd., Bombay.They filed Classification List No. 84/87 effective from 15 July, 1987 claiming the classification of the product under Chapter Heading 0404.00 but the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Kolhapur did not accept this and, after consulting the Chemical Examiner and issuing a show cause notice, and hearing them decided that it was correctly classifiable under Chapter Heading 2107.91. When the respondents herein went in appeal, Collector (Appeals) reversed the order and he...
O.N.G.C. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1991
Reported in: (1992)(59)ELT420TriDel
1. By the present Miscellaneous applications, the applicants have made a prayer for out of turn hearing. Shri B. Dutta, the learned senior Advocate, has appeared on behalf of the applicants and pleaded that similar appeals are listed for hearing in March 1992 and these matters also may be taken up for hearing on that day as they are all covered by the earlier decision of the Tribunal. He also stated that the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of O.N.G.C. v. Union of India where there is a direction that the matters are to be heard by a Committee constituted by the Cabinet Secretary and not to be heard by the Tribunal will not apply in these cases where a regular judicial order has been passed and the right of the filing of appeal is given by the statute. Shri S.K. Roy, the learned SDR, who appeared on behalf of the Revenue, has fairly stated that the issue appears to be covered by the earlier decisions and as such he has no objection if these matters are also taken up with the ...
Court of Its Own Motion Vs. B.D. Kaushik and ors.,
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1991
Reported in: 1993CriLJ336; 46(1992)DLT35; 1992(22)DRJ34; 1991(1)DRJ(Suppl)188
Gokal Chand Mital, Malik Sharief-Ud-Din, C.L. Chaudhry, P.N. Nag, V.B. Bansal, R.L. Gupta, Usha Mehra, S.C. Jain, J.K. Mehra, Sat Pal, D.K. Jain and Mohd. Shamim, JJ. (1) On 26th September, 1991 at about 10.30 A.M. the contemners S/Shri B.D.Kaushik, Rajinder Kumar Sharma, Rajiv Khosla, Jugal Wadhwa, R.N.Vats, Jatan Singh and P.S.Rathee, Advocates aided and abetted by others, in large number, stormed the various court rooms when Judges of this Court were discharging their judicial functions. They individually and collectively stood on the chairs, tables and the dias of the Court Masters and acted in a menacing manner, shouted abuses and slogans such as Chief Justice And Judges H Hai, MURDABAD. They also prevented various lawyers from discharging their judicial functions as Officers of the Court and also stopped the litigants from conducting their cases in the Court. They even prevented some of the lawyers from entering the court premises and the court rooms. In a threatening tone they a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »