Delhi Court July 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.
inspecting Assistant Vs. Escorts Electronics Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: (1991)39ITD30(Delhi)
1. and 2. [These paras are not reproduced here, as they involve minor issues.] 3. The asscsscc is a public limited company. It was incorporated for the purpose of the business of manufacture and sale of X-Ray equipment and spare parts to be manufactured in India in collaboration with a French company known as M/s C.G.R., France. The said business came to an end sometimes during the accounting period ending 31-12-1980 relevant to assessment year 1981 -82. Thereafter, the asscsscc is selling its properties from which some income taxable under Section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is earned. Apart from that, the assessee also has some income from "other sources". The assessee also has some unabsorbed depreciation and loss, for which it claimed adjustment against the income taxable under Section 41(2) as well as against the income from other sources. This claim of the assessee was negatived by the Assessing Officer in assessment year 1982-83 and the matter ultimately came to this Trib...
Sita Ram Singhania and Another Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-1991
Reported in: ILR1992Delhi285; [1991]192ITR361(Delhi)
Kirpal, J. 1. The grievance of the petitioners is that, in respect of built-up space in Nirmal Commercial Building, Bombay, the petitioners are being treated as owners by virtue of the provisions of section 27(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The contention of the petitioners is that a part of the building of which the petitioners are licensees, is owned by a separate juristic entity, viz., Nirmal Commercial Ltd., and that the petitioners are not the owners thereof but are merely licensees. Because income there from has been taxed in the hands of the petitioners by virtue of the assessment orders which have been passed by the assessing authority at Delhi, the petitioners have challenged the said assessment orders and have also challenged the virus of section 27(iii) of the Act. 2. As regards the assessment orders, the petitioners have already filed appeals against the same. In view of the fact that the petitioners have availed of the alternative remedy open to them under the Act, we d...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Essex Farms (P) Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-1991
Reported in: ILR1992Delhi290
B.N. Kirpal, J. 1. The Sales Tax Tribunal has referred, under section 45 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the following two questions of law to this Court : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the turnover of Rs. 27,80,122.34 was of sales inside Delhi and did not constitute inter-State trade and commerce as envisaged by the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right that the sales of Rs. 27,80,122.34 were exempt from tax under rule 29(iii) of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951 ?' 2. The aforesaid reference relates to the assessment year 1970-71 and the facts, as set out in the statement of the case, are as follows : 3. The assessed, namely, the Essex Farms (P) Ltd., carries on the business of breeding and purchase and sale of piggeries and other meat products. During the course of the same, it supplied meat, etc., worth Rs. 27,80,122.34 in that yea...
Sham Sunder Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT271
Santosh Daggal, J. (1) This revision petition and revision petition No. 692/89 arise out of the order passed by Shri V.S. Aggarwal, Additional District Judge, Delhi on 20th January, 1989, whereby the appeals filed by the petitioner Sham Sunder and two others separately were disposed of by a common order. (2) This order shall confine only to Sham Sunder who has come up in revision petition. He had pleaded in the suit that he was originally an allottee of an area of 150 sq. yds,, from Municipal Corporation of Delhi since the year 1965, but claimed to be in possession at the time of filing of the suit of an area measuring 333 sq. yds. While the trial Court has dismissed in toto the petitioner's application for temporary injunction, but in appeal the learned Additional District Judge thought it to be a fit case to protect the possession of the petitioner during the pendency of the suit in respect of 150 sq. yds, of land which was originally allotted to him by the Municipal Corporation in 1...
Balbir Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT13
C.M. Nayar, J.(1) The present Regular First Appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Additional District Judge dated 3.9.1971 on a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. The land in question was acquired vide notification dated 26.9.1964 issued under Section 4 of the Act and is situated in village Bagrola. The Land Acquisition Collector had divided land in two blocks, 'A' (Levelled) and Block 'B' (low lying) and awarded the compensation at the rate of Rs. 700.00 and Rs. 400.00 per bigha respectively vide Award No. 1835. The appellant felt aggrieved and sought reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Additional District Judge enhanced the compensation on consideration of material on record and awarded the same at the rate of Rs. 4,800.00 per bigha. The appellant in the present appeal has claimed enhancement at the rate of Rs. 5,350.00 per bigha instead of Rs. 4,800.00 per bigha as awarded. (2) The learned Counsel f...
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-17-1991
Reported in: (1992)(37)ECC46
1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on the basis of the description of the goods in the suppliers invoice, the appellants declared the imported goods in the bill of entry as "Pressure, Vaccum and Level Gauge/Indicators". On the basis of the examination of the goods prior to the clearance, they were assessed as 'tube and pipe fitting' under Heading 74.07/08 of the C.T.A., 1975.The appellants filed a refund claim on the grounds that goods being in the nature of instruments for checking or controlling the flow, and other variables of liquids were assessable under Heading 90.24(1) of the C.T.A., 75. In support of their claim the appellants filed the manufacturers' catalogue. However, the Assistant Collector rejected the claim for reassessment of the goods on the grounds that it was not possible to co-relate the catalogue with the imported goods since the catalogue did not list any specif...
India Packaging Products Pvt. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-17-1991
Reported in: (1992)(37)ECC128
1. Since a common question of classification of automatic plate processor is involved in both the cases, a common order is being passed. For the sake of convenience facts in the case of the 1st appellants namely M/s. India Packaging Products are being dealt with in the impugned order.2. Question involved in the first appeal is the classification of automatic flexographic plate processor with automatic "After exposure unit" and photopolymer plate and UV Lamp. The appellants herein have claimed classification under Tariff Heading (T.H.) 84.35 CTA whereas the department has assessed it under T.H. 90.10 CTA, 1975. The Assistant Collector, who examined the refund claim of the appellants and the classification contended by the appellants, observed as follows :- "The claimants have submitted the write-up and leaflet showing the function of the Automatic Flexographic plate processor with the accessories. The polymer plate is inserted into the machine with the required negative and is exposed ...
Roshan Dass and ors. Vs. Guranditta Mal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-17-1991
Reported in: II(1991)BC482; 45(1991)DLT403
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit filed under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, The application of the defendants for leave to defend was dismissed by the learned Commercial Sub Judge by order dated 20.8.1974 and suit of the plaintiff decreed for Rs. 24,440.00 with costs and with interest pendente lite at the rate of 12% per annum and future at the rate of 6% per annum on the principal amount of Rs. 18,000.00 . (2) The plaintiff filed this suit in October 1973 for Rs. 24,460.00 which included Rs. 18,000.00 towards principal and Rs. 6,440.00 towards interest calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on the basis of a cheque In the sum of Rs. 21,000.00 which was given by the defendants to him. The cheque number is 406425 and was dated 31.3.1971. The plaintiff said that out of this amount the defendants paid a sum of Rs. 3,000.00 in all out of which Rs. 2,000.00 was paid in cash and Rs. l,000.00 by means of a cheque. Since the defendants failed to pay t...
Jalanchand Mangilal Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-16-1991
Reported in: (1992)(41)LC71Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order No.SG/Misc/201/83A/S/10-12/84 LS 11B dated 13.1.1984 passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay.2. The appellants had imported a consignment declared to contain Brass Dross from U.K. and sought its clearance under the provisions of OGL, Appendix 10, Part-Ill, serial No. 2 of AM 84 Policy. Pursuant to certain intelligence received in the Custom House to the effect that trade is importing Brass Scrap under the guise of brass dross, a case was registered and the matter was taken up for detailed investigation by Special Investigation & Intelligence Department. The goods, on examination by the special investigation branch, were found to be 100% Brass Scrap in place of Brass dross declared in the relevant documents.Department observed that there was an attempt to evade duty amounting to Rs. 1,79,112.45 Paise, being difference between duty chargeable on Brass scrap weighing 18,676 M/T at the rate of Basic customs duty at 85% ...
Geep Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-16-1991
Reported in: (1992)(40)ECC25
1. The appellants are Dry battery cell manufacturer. They imported "Moanda High Grade Manganese Dioxide" which was assessed to duty under Tariff Heading 25.01/32(3) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. They filed refund claim seeking reclassification under Tariff Heading 26.01(1) CTA 1975 read with notification No. 125-Cus/76. This claim for reclassification was rejected by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Calcutta by his order-in-original. The Assistant Collector has examined their goods in the light of the literature produced by them and also in the light of Explanatory Notes of Heading 26.01 of CCCN and has rejected their claim for re-assessment under Tariff Heading 26.01(1) CTA. He has held on the basis of the literature produced by the importer that the imported goods are exclusively prepared and meant to be used for battery cell industry and not for metallurgical use. He has held that the same is classifiable under Heading 25.01/32(3) of CTA 1975.2. The Collector (Appeals) has al...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »