Delhi Court September 1991 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1991 Page 7 of about 93 results (0.022 seconds)Collector of Central Excise Vs. Standard Electrical Appliances
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1993)(67)ELT204TriDel
1. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of electrical water heaters. Whereas the heaters sold in Tuticorin and nearby places were packed in the polythene or corrugated paper, the heaters supplied to dealers located at other places were packed in deal-wood cases in order to avoid damage to the goods during transportation. During the period July to November, 1987 the respondents filed 4 price lists and claimed deduction on account of dealwood packing. The Assistant Collector disallowed the claim for deduction on account of the cost of dealwood packing on the ground that it was essential for the delivery of the goods in question. The appeal filed by the respondents was allowed by the Collector (Appeals) on the grounds that cost of dealwood packing was deductible from the sale price since such packing was Used only to provide protection when the goods were transported to other centres and such packing was not used for goods sold locally or to dealers in nearby places. Being aggr...
Tag this Judgment!Bakson Laboratories Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1992)(39)LC205Tri(Delhi)
1. Bakson Industries, 121, DSIDC Sheds, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi. The said appeal was received in the Registry on 6th August, 1991. Simultaneously, a stay application duly supported with an affidavit was also filed. Shri V.Lakshmi Kumaran, the learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the applicant and pleaded that the applicant is manufacturer of Arnica hair shampoo under the brand name of "Sunny" for M/s. Bakson Homoeo Pharmacy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Shri Lakshmi Kumaran, the learned advocate has pleaded that there is no finding to the effect that the seller as well as buyer are related persons and pleaded that the Collector while re-adjudicating the mailer has demanded duty at Rs. 10,88,440.70 and penalty of Rs. 50,000.00 has been imposed. He argued that the mailer was adjudicated by the Principal Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi and a demand of Rs. 6,76,6...
Tag this Judgment!Meters and Instruments (P.) Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1991)39ITD269(Delhi)
1. This appeal by the assessee for assessment year 1982-83 is directed against the order dated 18-4-1988, passed by CIT (Appeals)-XI, New Delhi and challenges the confirmation of penalty of Rs. 3,13,340, levied under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee was obliged to file its return of income on or before 30-6-1982. The return was, however, filed on 17-5-1983 and was late by 10 completed months. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings for late submission of return, and after hearing the assessee, imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,13,340. This penalty was confirmed in appeal.3. Before us, Shri Pradeep Dinodia, the Learned Counsel for the assessee made twofold submissions. The first submission was that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not filing the return in time inasmuch as because of financial stringency the advance tax and self-assessment tax could not be paid and consequently the assessee could not at...
Tag this Judgment!P.B. Ghayalod Vs. M/S. Maruti Udyog Ltd. and Others
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1992Delhi145; [1994]79CompCas96(Delhi); ILR1992Delhi469
ORDERMOHD. SHAMIM, J. 1. The petitioner through the present writ petition wants this Court to quash the termination order dated 14-9-1990 whereby his services were terminated by the respondents.2. The submissions of the petitioner are that Maruti udyog Ltd., respondent No. I (hereinafter referred to as respondent) is a Government company as defined in Seetioni517 of the Companies Act, 1956. It was incorporated on 24th November, 1981 and became a 'deemed public company' under Section 43A(i) of the Companies Act, 1956 w.e.f. 24th January, 1983. The Joint Venture agreement and the license agreement were signed with Suzuki Motor Company oil 2-10082. The Equity participation in between Government of India (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 2 for the sake of brevity) and the Suzuki Motor Company is in the ratio of 60 : 40. Respondent No.. I is completely under the control of respondent No. 2 under the Ministry of Industry which is managed by a Chairman, under the superintendence and ...
Tag this Judgment!S.P. Punj and Others Vs. Registrar of Companies
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1991]71CompCas509(Delhi)
Sapra, J.1. The petitioners have filed this petition, under section 633(2) oof the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), for being relieved from prosecution for their alleged liability for non-filing of returns under rule 10 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975, hereinafter called 'the Rules'. 2. Briefly the facts, as stated in the petition, are that M/s Punjsons Private Limited, hereinafter referred to as 'the company', is a family cooncern, which was incorporated in the year 1954. Petitioners Nos. 1,2 and 3 became directors in the year 1954. Petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 became directors of the company in the years 1980 and 1982, respectively. Petitioners Nos. 1 to 4, along with the company and Shri Satya Narain Prakash Punj, are being prosecuted in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, on a complaint filed by the Registrar of Companies, Delhi, under rule 11 of the Rules, read with section 58A of the Act, for non-filing of returns under rule...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Mattur and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1991(21)DRJ249
Usha Mehira, J.(1) Plaintiffs, Shri M. P. Matfaur & Others are stated to be allottees of quarters constructed at Hari Nagar, bearing No. 1 to 27 &staff; quarters at G. T. Road, Delhi bearing Nos. 28-.072 and 74 to 104.These quarters are in Delhi Transport Corporation Staff Colonies mentionedabove. Municipal Corporation of Delhi under the GOVT. of India SubsidisedHousing Scheme for Industrial Workers constructed 300 houses known as' Integrated Subsidised Housing Scheme for Industrial Workers and Economically Weaker Sections of the Community.' The construction was started in the year 1962-63 and completed in the car 1965-66. Total costs incurred workedout to Rs. 3504 Lacs, out of which, a sum of Rs. 6.25 Lacs andR', 156 Lacs were provided by the Central Government as loan and subsidy to cover the cost of construction.(2) The houses consisted of small two rooms and regular two roomsquarters. There were about 100 small two rooms quarters and 200 regular rooms quarters. The allotment was to...
Tag this Judgment!Mahla Ram Vs. Faquir Chand and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT508
S.C.Jain J. (1) This second appeal is filed against the judgment passed by the Rent Control Tribunal on 12-5-1978, whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-tenant and allowed the appeal filed by the respondent- landlords and passed an eviction order with respect to the premises in dispute on the ground covered by clause (d) of proviso to sub-Section (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act. (2) In brief, the facts of the case are that Faquir Chand and others, hereinafter referred to as the respondents, filed an eviction petition on 8-11-1971 with respect to the suit premises consisting of one room and 'dalan' in building bearing No. 7595, Sui Walan against Mahla Ram, hereinafter referred to as the appellant, on the ground of non-payment of rent non residence for continuous period of six months and on account of his having built or acquired another house in Kucha Neel Kanth. The Rent Controller Delhi vide his order dated 7-1-1974 directed the appellant to deposit i ...
Tag this Judgment!Vikrant Tyres Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1991)LC558Tri(Delhi)
1. The short question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of Polypropylene Liner Cloth imported by the appellants from Japan in July, 1981. The cloth had a width of 160 cms. and was imported in 30 bales measuring 8400 metres. It was declared and assessed to duty under Heading 51.04 of the Customs Tariff.Subsequently, a refund claim was submitted on the ground that the goods were classifiable as a component part of 4 roll Calender Machinery Unit - the Fabric Bias Cutter Machinery Unit as a liner fabric for treated tyre fabric under Chapter 84.40(1) read with Note 2 of Notes to Section XVI of the Customs Tariff. An alternative classification as fabric suited specially for industrial use under Heading 59.16/17 was also claimed. On rejection of the refund claim; and the appeal, the appellants have come upto the Tribunal in this appeal.2. Among the grounds of appeal taken is that Polypropylene liner cloth is a closely woven fabric and it is used as separator (Processed T...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kaushish Vs. D.C. Kaushish and Others
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1992Delhi118; 1992(1)ARBLR242(Delhi); 48(1992)DLT414
ORDER1. Vide this Order I shall decide the aforesaid two applications moved by the defendants seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule I I of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. Elaborate oral arguments have been addressed by counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the applicants had addressed very brief oral arguments, however, both the parties have filed written arguments. I have gone through them thoroughly.3. Facts of the case as averred by the plaintiff, in brief, are that his late grandfather Pt. Lakshmi Chandra constituted a Joint Hindu Family with his two sons, namely, Pratap Chand and D. C. Kaushish defendant No. I and owned and possessed moveable and immoveable properties. The immoveable properties are described in Schedule A to the plaint. Pratap Chand is stated to have died issueless in 1916. Pt. Lakshmi Chand had died on February 10, 1934. D. C. Kaushish defendant No. I then became Karta of the Joint Hindu Undivided Family comprising of himself, his wife defendant No...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. M/S. Belganga Sahakari Sakhar ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1992Delhi601
ORDER1. This is a plaintiff's application under 0. 39 Rules I and 2, CPC wherein inter alia, it is prayed that the defendant No. I be restrained from encashing bank guarantees Nos. 316/ 89/41 and 316 / 89/42 for a sum of Rs. 18.20 lakhs each issued by Standard Chartered Bank defendant No. 2 in favor of defendant No. I on behalf of the plaintiff. It is an admitted case of the parties that defendant No. I is running a sugar plant and in order to increase the capacity of the plant from 1250 TCD to 2500 TCD it entered into an agreement dt. July 4, 1988 with the plaintiff whereunder the plaintiff undertook to erect and supply additional plant and machinery and also agreed to render various other services for raising the capacity of the plant for which the plaintiff was to be paid a sum of Rs. 364 lacs by defendant No. 1. Under the contract, the plaintiff was required to furnish two bank guarantees in terms of the agreement; one in respect of timely delivery, erection and commission of the e...
Tag this Judgment!