Delhi Court May 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 Customs Vs. Ajantha Offset Packaging Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-03-1991
Reported in: (1991)(36)LC549Tri(Delhi)
1. These appeals have been filed against the order Nos. 627-628-DLH/84 dated 16th May, 1984 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi. Since the issue in both these appeals is common, they are being disposed of by a common order.2. The facts of the case in brief are that on 17.12.1982 the respondents entered into a contract with the local agent of the German suppliers for the import of Chromograph C-399 colour scanner. The condition of the contract was that the equipment was to be initially imported on behalf of the supplier for display in Pamex TF '83 exhibition to be held in January, 1983 in New Delhi and after closure of the exhibition it was to be cleared for delivery to the respondents after completion of customs formalities. In pursuance of the contract the respondents established a letter of credit on 21st December, 1983 in favour of the suppliers. On arrival of the goods by air at New Delhi they were cleared free of duty for exhibition purposes against Bill of en...
Patel Metal Works Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-03-1991
Reported in: (1991)(55)ELT554TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 26-7-1988 at about 16.30 hours the Central Excise Officers in Surat while carrying out preventive checks detained a vehicle carrying 40 coils of copper wire weighing 4608.00 kgs. Apart from the Driver and conductor there was another person in the vehicle by the name Shri Ram Kumar Maurya who claimed that he was an employee of M/s. Patel Metal Works, Udhna. He informed the officers that the detained vehicle had arrived at the factory at about 15.00 hours to load 40 coils of copper wire and he had accompanied the vehicle under instructions from Shri Mauzambhai who was a partner of M/s. Patel Metal Works. He claimed that 20 coils bearing slips with markings "Z" were to be delivered to Shri Champakbhai, 10 coils marked 'ZX' to Shri Motichunni and the remaining 10 coils marked 'IO' to Shri Chandukanji.3. He produced challan No. 372 dated 26-7-1988 for 40 coi...
Singh Alloys and Steel Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-03-1991
Reported in: (1992)(40)LC51Tri(Delhi)
1A. The appellant has a scrap based factory and manufactured steel ingots under the erstwhile Tariff Item 26 CET with the aid of electric furnace out of duty paid unused steel melting scrap in admixture with other materials as laid down in Notification No. 144/75-CE, dated 7.6.1975. The other materials included, inter alia, bazar scrap, i.e. old and used iron and steel scrap. Apart from availing the benefit of this aforesaid Notification, he also availed of the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 237/75-CE, dated 9.12.1975. The appellant was accorded approval to manufacture steel ingots from steel melting scrap or steel scrap brought under Rule 56A subject to the observance of the procedure detailed in Rule 56A of Central Excise Rules, 1944.1.1 Later on after scrutiny of the records of the firm by the Central Excise Officers, it was alleged inter alia by the Department, which is in dispute now before the Tribunal, as follows: (i) The appellant has evaded duty on 1047.973 ...
Orwo Films Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-02-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC682Tri(Delhi)
1. Since a common issue is involved in all these appeals, a common order is being passed.2. The issue in all these appeals is whether in case of goods imported by air, in order to arrive at the value under Section 14 of the Customs Act for the purpose of assessment of Customs duty, freight to be included should be the air freight or the sea freight if such goods had been imported by sea instead of air.2.1 The Collector (Appeals), Madras in identically worded order has stated as follows :- "In this case actual air freight is Rs. ... whereas FOB is Rs. ... i.e. actual air freight is less than 20% of FOB. Actual air freight taken for assessment is in order. The appeal is rejected." 22 In appeal No. 1075/84-A Collector (Appeals), Bombay has observed as follows :- "It may be noticed that transportation of goods by air has now become normal mode of transport in the international trade. Moreover Section 14(1) refers to the price prevailing at the time and place of importation. In the present...
Projects and Equipment Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. H.C. Suri and Oth ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Delhi159
1. The plaintiff has instituted this suit for recovery of Rs. 1,59,740.73 paise under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On summons being served on the defendants, the defendants had put in appearance. Plaintiff moved an application, I.A. 426/90 for issuance of summons for judgment on the defendants. Sh. H C Suril defendant No. I was present in Court on January 19, 1990 and he accepted the copy of the said application along with Annexures. The directions were then issued for issuance of summons for judgment on defendants 2 and 3.2. Defendant No. I has not moved any application seeking to leave to defend but has put forward an application, I.A. 2138/90 praying that proper summons for judgment, as required under Form 4-A of Appendix Schedule B of Civil Procedure Code be directed to be served on defendant No. 1. This application, in my opinion, is totally misconceived, Defendant No. 1 was present in Court on January 19, 1990 when plaintiff's application, I.A. 426/90, had come up for...
R.K. Kawatra, Etc. Vs. D.S.i.D.C., Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Delhi28
ORDERArun Kumar, J.1. This judgment will dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 1064 and :3378/87. Both the petitions are being disposed of by this judgment as they raise common questions of law and fact. In C.W. 1064 / 87 there are 12 petitioners while in C.W. 3378/87 there are two petitioners who are jointly carrying on business in the firm name M/s. Kwatra Industries, 275. Kalyan Vihar, Delhi.2. The relevant facts as stated in the writ petition are that the respondent Delhi State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the DSIDC) is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and all its shares are owned by the Government of India. The main object of the DSIDC is development of industries in the Union Territory of Delhi. In pursuance of the said object the DSIDC has also taken up development of land to be ultimately made available to entrepreneurs for setting up industry.3. The appropriate authority acquired land in the Narela township within the Union Territory of...
Sher Singh Alias Shera, in Person (In Custody) Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2612
1. The charge against this appellant Sher Singh alias Shera is that on 20-5-84 at 4.30 a.m., in Janta Jayanti Express train, between Gandhi Dham and Delhi Railway Station, he in furtherance of common intention with the other co-accused robbed Alok Verma, the complainant, at the point of knife and took away his wrist watch, purse containing Rs. 400/-, railway ticket and one VIP bag containing his clothes and a personal diary by putting him in fear of instant death or instant hurt. He was charged with an offence punishable under section 392/34 read with S. 397, IPC. He pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed trial. 2. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses including the complainant Alok Verma in support of its version. The defense taken by the appellant in his statement under section 313, Cr.P.C. is that of denial. According to him he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. However, he did not lead any evidence in his defense. 3. ...
Sharma Timber Works Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ARBLR417(Delhi); 1991RLR447
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) Respondent No. 1, the sole arbitrator, on receiving the notice issued in this petition filed u/S, 14 of the Arbitration Act, had filed the award and the proceedings in Court. On notice being served of the filing of the award on the petitioner, the petitioner has filed the objections to the award which are opposed by the U.O.I. respondent and following issues were framed, (1) Is award liable to be set aside for reasons stated in objections filed (2) Relief.(2) It was directed that the matter shall be decided by way of affidavits and arbitration proceedings shall be read in evidence. Petitioner has filed the affidavit None has been filed on behalf of U.O.I.(3) Issue NO. 1. Although the award is a non-speaking one still counsel for the petitioner has urged that the arbitrator has committed judicial misconduct inasmuch as he did not pass any order on the application of the petitioner requiring the respondent to produce the railway receipts which could have shown that cons...
Dhruv Goyal Vs. Anand Perkesh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-1991
Reported in: 1991RLR410
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) Notice to show cause was issued to defendants 2 to 4 as to why the proceedings for Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated against them on their willfully not obeying the order of this Court dt. 29.5.84. Replies have been filed to this show cause notice. Smt. Neera Goyal, wife of late Shri Suresh Goyal and her two children Dhruv Goyal and Ritu Goyal had filed this suit for partition of properties, rendition of account and recovery of money. There exists a partnership firm M/s Anand Prakash Ravinder Kumar, which is not a party to the present suit. However, defendants 1 to 4 were partners of the said firm. Certain amounts belonging to the plaintiff stood deposited in the said firm and on 7.5.82 defendant No. 1 had given an undertaking to this court that interest accruing on the said deposits shall be paid to the pff. by deft. 1 regularly and he has been paying the said interest accruing on the said deposits to the pff. On 29.5.84, the Court had directed that deft...
Fransa Corporation Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-01-1991
Reported in: (1991)(56)ELT586TriDel
1. These two appeals arise from two separate orders - (1) dated 12-4-1989 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Import Air Cargo, IGI Airport, New Delhi; and (2) dated 4-10-1990 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Customs House, New Delhi. Both these orders relate to the adjudication proceedings against the same appellants and relate to the import of the same goods by the appellants - one at the Air Cargo, New Delhi and the other at the ICD, New Delhi of certain consignments of goods described as 'synthetic rubber products' (Erasers) in one case and as 'synthetic rubber' in the other case (ICD).Facts - The goods described as 'synthetic rubber products' (erasers) were imported for which Import Licence issued under paras 175 & 177 of Import Policy, 1988-91 under Appendix 3-A Sl. No. 396 was produced. The Customs House found that erasers were consumer goods capable of directly satisfying human beings and as such are covered by entry No.145 of Appendix 2-B of Impor...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »