Delhi Court August 1991 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1991 Page 8 of about 120 results (0.020 seconds)Joginder Nath Maini and ors. Vs. Manawar Khan and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: II(1991)ACC566; 1992ACJ561; 45(1991)DLT444; 1992(22)DRJ110; 1991RLR479
Anin Kumar, J.(1) This is an appeal against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal)dated 8th November 1980 whereby a sum of Rs. l6,200.00 with costs was awarded in favor of the petitioners appelllants besides interest at the rate of six per cent per annum from the date of award till realisation in the event of the respondents failing to make payment of the awarded amoimt within sixty days. (2) In the appeal the appellants have 'prayed that they should be awarded compensation in the sum to Rs. five lacs and the award of the Tribunal be modified to that extent. (3) The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that one Mr. Harmohan Kumar Maini was driving a motorcycle on 29th April 1978 when at about 7.45 p.m. at the crossing ofAnand Niketan and Shanti Niketan roads an accident took place involving the said Mr. Maini and truck No.DHL 1049 belonging to respondents 2 and 3 and driven by respondent No. 1. The accident resulted in the death...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak Bhagnani @ Dipu Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Etc.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1992(37)ECC84
Arun B. Saharya, J.1. By this petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of habeas corpus for quashing his detention in pursuance of an order dated 29th of January 1991 issued under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Regulation Act, 1974 (sic) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by Shri Mahendra Prasad, an officer specially empowered by the Central Government.2. The detention order was served on the petitioner, while he was already in custody in connection with his prosecution under the Customs Act, on 31st of January 1991. The grounds of detention and some relied upon documents were given to him on 4th of February 1991. Later, by a memorandum dated 7th of February 1991, some additional documents relied upon by the Detaining Authority were also supplied to him.3. In the writ petition, the impugned order has been challenged on various grounds. At the time of hearing, however, learned Counsel for the petitioner has pressed only one of them and as s...
Tag this Judgment!Berger Paints India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1991)LC204Tri(Delhi)
1. This application for Rectification of Mistake apparent from record in Order No. 110/91-A, dated 8-2-1991 has been filed under Section 129B(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the grounds that the Tribunal had not traversed the following arguments/pleas :- "(a) Plea against loading of invoice in absence of evidence merely on the basis of surmises. (b) Plea against enhancement of invoice value there being no whisper of allegation of illegal remittance of Foreign Exchange, over and above the L.C. value. (c) Plea against not giving the same standard of credence to the foreign suppliers' two certificates dated 17-3-1975 and 28-8-1981 by the learned Collector (Appeal) thereby prejudicing the appellants' case. (d) Plea that the appellants having no truck with the manufacturers, it was not possible for them to submit the manufacturers invoice. (e) Mistakenly held that "39.5% share holding of the U.K. Company in the equity capital of appellants shows mutual interest in the business of each other...
Tag this Judgment!Murari Fine Art Works Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT122TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay ordering confiscation of the goods on the ground that the importation has been made without a valid ITC Licence and giving an option to the appellants to clear the goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) in lieu. The short question to be decided is whether a second hand offset machine could be imported under the OGL, shipped in March 1984 against a Letter of Credit opened in February, 1983 against Import Policy for 1982-83.While the adjudicating authority has held that it cannot be said that there was a firm commitment in view of a condition in the Letter of Credit that the machinery would be shipped only after its inspection by the proprietor of the appellant firm, the appellants have placed reliance on paragraph 7 of OGL (Appendix 10) of the Import Policy which is as under : "(7) In the case of Capital Goods, equipment and permissible spares covered under Open Gene...
Tag this Judgment!Coromandal Agro Products Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1991)LC614Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants herein have challenged the levy of cess on cotton seed oils produced by them by the solvent extraction and expeller methods. As all the appeals involve a common issue they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. The dispute regarding levy of cess on oil extracted by solvent extraction process is no longer alive in view of the judgment of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Bhasir Oil Mills v. Union of India reported in 1990 (47) ELT 305 wherein the Court has held that oil extracted from oil cakes only by solvent extraction process is not "vegetable oil" but a distinct commercial commodity and, therefore, no cess can be levied upon the same under Section 3 of the Cess Act as it is not covered by the definition of the expresion "Vegetable Oil" given in Section 3(h) of the Board Act. Therefore, the only issue which survives for determination is whether cotton seed oils extracted by expeller method is a "vegetable oil".2. The appellants' comp...
Tag this Judgment!AshwIn Vanaspati Industries Pvt. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1992)(59)ELT175TriDel
1. This appeal is fifed against the Order-in-Original passed by the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara confirming the demand raised in the show cause notice dt. 28-1-1985 to the extent of Rs. 3,39,463.35 Ps. on 32636 tins of "Vegetable Products" falling under erstwhile Tariff Item 13 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 valued at Rs. 67,89,267 and Rs. 16,588.70 Ps. on 3338 cases of 'Soap' falling under erstwhile Tariff Item 15(1) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 valued at Rs. 3,15,975.00 alleged to have been illicitly manufactured and removed by them without payment of duty during the period from July, 1983 to January, 1984, as mentioned in para 10 above, under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Collector has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 7 lakhs under sub-rule (1) of Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rul...
Tag this Judgment!Allen Bradley India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1991)LC405Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 62/90 dated 16-5-1990 passed by the Collector of Customs, New Delhi.2. The appellants had filed a Bill of Entry dated 5-8-1988 for clearance of electronics components. The goods were assessed on the basis of documents produced by the Importers and, accordingly, duty was paid, but on physical examination of the goods on 4-10-1988, the goods were not found as per Bill of Entry and invoice and in place of individual components, mounted PCB's were found for which the party did not have a valid licence. The Additional Collector who adjudicated the proceedings as per Order No. 329/89 ordered for confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act for mis-declaration. However, he allowed the goods for re-export on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. This order was challenged by the appellants before the Tribunal contending that there was no mis-declaration and this was due to wrong shipment eff...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Darshan Singh and Others
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1992Delhi392
ORDERD. P. Wadhwa, J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment dated 13th February, 1989 of the learned single Judge whereby he held that the appellant Insurance Company was liable to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,35,000/- to the widow and minor son of deceased Rakesh Mohan Solan who died in motor accident on 28th June, 1979. Solan was driving his two-wheeler scooter and his minor daughter was a pillion rider. Both died in the accident caused by the truck bearing registration No. DHG 3315. His widow Saroj and his minor son Neeraj and his aged parents survive solan. They are respondents 3 to 6. Respondent No. I Is the driver of the offending truck and respondent No. 2 is the owner thereof.2. Learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal found that the deceased Solan was having an income of Rs. 1,000/- p.m. out of which he was spending Rs. 250/- per month on his personal expenses and dependency of his heirs is Rs. 750/ - per month. At the time of his death, Solan was aged 39 years. T...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mohinder Jaspal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Reported in: (1991)99CTR(Del)133; [1992]194ITR186(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal the following two question to this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of the section 144B of the Income tax Act, 1961, pertained to the branch of procedural law and the same applied to the all Income tax proceedings pending on January 1, 1976, irrespective of the assessment year to which those proceedings related 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment orders made by the Income tax Officer were beyond the period of limitation prescribed by the section 153 of the Act and so void in law ?' 2. In respect of the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76, the assessed did not return any capital gain in respect of the property known as 'Narinder Place', parliament Street, New Delhi, which had been sold by her. According to her, there was no capital gain involved but the Income tax Officer did not accept her contention and levied capital gains tax. Appeal were ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohinder Jaspal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT317
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) The Income Tax Tribunal has referred the following two questions to this Court : '1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertained to the branch of procedural law and the same applied to all income-tax proceedings pending on 1.1.1976 irrespective of the assessment year to which those proceedings. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment orders made by the Income-tax Officer were beyond the period of limitation prescribed by Section 153 of the Act and so void in law?'(2) In respect to the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76, the assessed did not return any capital gain in respect of the property known as 'Narinder place', Parliament Street, New Delhi which had been sold by her. According to her there was no capital gain involved but the Income Tax Officer did not accept her contention and levied capital gain tax. Appeals were filed before the Commissio...
Tag this Judgment!