Delhi Court February 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.
Rellonge Dye-chem Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: (1992)(37)ECC95
1. Aggrieved with the order-in-appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay, M/s. Rellonge Dye-Chem have filed this appeal before the Tribunal.2. The appellant, during the material time, was engaged in the manufacture of Synthetic Organic Dyestuffs and Synthetic Organic Derivatives falling under Item 14D of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule (the "CET" for short) and Paints and Varnishes falling under Item 14 ibid.3. By his order dated 26-2-1983, the Assistant Collector confirmed the denial of the duty concession in terms of Central Excise Notification No. 44/82 dated 28-2-1982, as set out in the corrigendum dated 20-11-1982 to the approvals earlier conveyed to classification lists 1/82 and 2/82 of the claim. The appellant protested against this revision of the approval earlier accorded, without issue of a show cause notice in breach of the principles of natural justice. The appellant was heard by the Assistant Collector when again the aforesaid objection was pres...
Karkit Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC396Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants manufacture motor-vehicle parts. Some of the items were classified under Tariff Item 52, and demands were confirmed for the period from 22-10-1980 to 21-5-1981. The controversy was with regard to those parts which perform the function of fastening.2. The appellants contest the order of the Collector (Appeals) in respect of the shackle pin to Part No. KK-511, KK-205, and KK-250. They have given a write-up on each of the parts and their functions as under: "The component (Part No. KK 511) forms a part of the rear suspension of the engine in Leyland Comet Vehicle. The engine is mounted at the rear on cross member which in turn is connected to the long members of the chassis. The engine being a diesel engine with very high frequency of vibration will have to have a vibration dampening arrangement to protect the chassis from such heavy vibration. The above shackle pin (No. 8) mounted on the cross member through binocular bracket (No. 11) with 2 rubber grommets (No. 9) and...
Dimensional Plastiglas Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: (1991)(54)ELT443TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the order, dated 11-8-1988 passed by the Collector of Customs & Central Excise, Jaipur. The brief facts are that the appellants, herein, filed in 1974 a classification list describing the product, manufactured by them, as Acrylic sheets, Plastics, made out of artificial resins or plastic materials falling under sub-item No. (1) of T.I.15(A) C.E.T. on which the appropriate duty has already been paid Methyl-Methacrylate monomer. They sought classification of acrylic sheets under Tariff Item 15A(2) and claimed total exemption from central excise duty under Notification 38/73, dated 1-3-1973 as amended. This was approved by the Department on the basis of declaration made. Subsequently, they surrendered the Central Excise licence on the ground that their product was not chargeable to duty and in July, 1985, they filed a declaration seeking exemption from Central Excise licensing control in terms of Notification 111/78 issued under Rule 174A of Central...
Shriram Fibres Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: (1991)39ITD204(Delhi)
1. These are four appeals by the assessee against separate orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XIK, New Delhi, pertaining to the assessment years 1978-79 to 1982-83, upholding the rejection of application for rectification under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act claiming relief of Rs. 85,268 under Section 40A(5) of the Act.2. While making an assessment the IAC (Asst.) treated the cash allowances like house-rent and medical reimbursement to the extent of Rs. 5,268 as perquisite. The assessee moved an application under Section 154 for rectification of the assessment order with regard to these disallowances by not treating the same as perquisite by the IAC (Asst.) for the purpose of disallowance under Section 40A(5) basing on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Instalment Supply (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1984] 149 ITR 457. The IAC (Asst.) rejected the application observing as under: 2. Similar issue is involved in many other cases and the Departmental stand has bee...
Rohtas Financiers (P.) Ltd. Vs. Lakshmi Commercial Bank Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ARBLR392(Delhi); 1991(20)DRJ375
S.G. Jain, J. (1) Facts giving rise to this appeal are that M/s. Rohtas Financiers (P) Ltd. and its directors (hereinafter referred as the Appellants) on the one side and Lakshmi Commercial Bank Ltd , which has now merged into Canara Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent) on the other referred the disputes arising out of a cash credit limit allowed by the respondent bank to the appellants to the arbitration of Sh.Bikram Singh advocate as per the agreement dated 15th March, 1967. The arbitrator entered upon the reference and proceedings were filed in the court. Neither party filed any objections and rather a request had been made by the parties through their counsel to make the same a rule of the court. Consequently, the court made the award a rule of the court and a decree was awarded in its terms on 10th May, 1967.(2) The appellants challenged the award dated 15th March, 1967 and the decree passed thereon in suit No. 234 of 1967 by filing a suit No. 329 of 1968 in the court....
Meena and ors. Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT527; I(1991)DMC435
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) By way of this petition the petitioners have challenged the framing of the charge under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code against them by Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi vide order dated 17th October 1989. (2) The matter relates to an incident dated 6th June 1987 regarding which Fir No. 371 was recorded at Police Station Rajouri Garden, New Delhi on the basis of the rukka sent by Assistant Commissioner of Police, Moti Nagar. (3) Briefly stated the prosecution story has been that there was a secret information with Acp Moti Nagar that premises No. El 45, 185 and 186, Raghbir Nagar, New Delhi were being used as brothel by one Lajjo, her daughter, Smt. Meena and another person named, Rajiv. This information was verified by Acp to be correct and so after calling officials of the special staff, he organized a raiding party in which besides the police officials one person from the public named, Prem Prakash, was joined. He was briefed and three currency notes of Rs. ...
Ashwani Kumar and ors. Vs. Delhi Administration Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ446; 43(1991)DLT598; I(1991)DMC552
A.B. Saharya, J.(1) By this petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C' the petitioners have prayed for an order 'to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them vide F.I.R. No. 131/89 dt. 10-9-89 registered at P.S. Geeta Colony, East Delhi (Ann. B) and the process issued by Metropolitan Magistrate, Shahdara, East Delhi vide its summoning order dt. 21.11.89 (Ann. E)'. (2) The Fir was lodged by Suman Sharma against her husband Ashwani Kumar, father-in-law Ram Parkash, brothers-in-law Satish and Vijay, and mother-in-law Tara Wati, petitioners 1 to 5 respectively. On receipt of the Fir, the police registered a case under Section 406/498-A, Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. (3) Counsel for the petitioners has contended, on the basis of Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar and another, : 1985CriLJ817 , that the information given by Suman does not show entrustment of the dowry items by her to the petitioners nor the misappropriation thereof by them; and, thereforee, that the offence under...
Banwari Lal and Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)DRJ(Suppl)317
S.B. Wad, J.(1) The petitioners have challenged in this petition the Notifications issued by the Delhi Administration udder Sections 4, 6 & 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act on 6.3.1987 and 10.3,1987. They have also challenged the validity of the entire land acquisition proceedings pursuant to the said Notifications.'(2) The petitioners own properly No. 6, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj,New Delhi. It measures 5592 sq. yards with the built up area of about 47,000sq. ft. The property is situated on the main Ansari Road at the intersection of Ansari Road with Masjid Ghat abutting the said two main roads Apart from the main buildings on the property, known as Gopal Krishna Bhavan and Radha Krishna Bhavan, there are several godowns, garages, out-houses and allied structures for the proper utilisation of the building. The property is in the main commercial centre of Delhi and was all along being used for commercial purpose, first by the Bharat Bank and then by the American Embassy for running the U...
Lotika Vardarajan and ors. Vs. the Jawahar Lal Nehru University and or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1991
Reported in: ILR1991Delhi78
Anil Dev Singh, J.(1) This Civil Writ Petition calls in question the orders dated April 21, 1987 issued by Jawaharlal Nehru University terminating the services of Dr. Lotika Varadarajan (petitioner No. 1) and Dr. Lolita Nchni (petitioner No. 2) both Associate Professors in its school of Arts and Aesthetics, while they were still on probation.(2) The relevant facts giving rise to this writ petition are By letter dated February 3' 1986 the petitioner No. 1 was offered the post of Associate Professor in the School of Arts and Aesthetic's cf the University, respondent No. 1 which indicates that the petitioner was put on probation for a period of 12 months from the date of joining which could be extended up to a maximum period of 24 months. The petitioner was eligible for confirmation to the post after the satisfactory completion of the probationary period. The petitioner accepted the offer and joined the post on the same date viz February 3, 1986.(3) Similar offers were made to petitioner ...
Short Prints Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-1991
Reported in: (1992)(58)ELT351TriDel
1. This appeal concerns a film titled "Samasyasuli" produced in Kannada. The Assistant Collector classified the film under Item No.37II(iii) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the Schedule is referred to hereinafter as the 'CET') rejecting the appellants' claim for Item No. 37II(i). An appeal against this order was dismissed by the Collector (Appeals). Hence the present appeal.3. The Certificate issued on 1-10-1981 by the Central Board of Film Censors certifies the film (Samasyasuli) as a documentary and of gauge 35 mm and length 603.90 meters. We are concerned in the present appeal not with the 35 mm format but the film in the 16 mm format. The certificate has also a note to the following effect:- "In the event of a copy of the film being prepared in a guage other than that mentioned in the certificate, the certified length shall be deemed to be the corresponding length appropriate to that guage".It is a matter of common sense, and needs no argument, to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »