Delhi Court January 1992 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.
income-tax Officer Vs. Hazari Lal Marwah and Sons
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1992
Reported in: (1992)41ITD1(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal by the revenue against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-IV, New Delhi dated 8-12-1987 deleting an addition of Rs. 7,71,560.2. The assessee is a registered firm engaged in the business of executing contracts. Under a contract Agreement dated 17-3-1961/28-4-1961 the assessee-firm had executed a work contract of construction of the provisions for Main & Branch (Zonal) Sewers, Manholes, Flushing Tanks, Vent Shafts, etc. etc. at Ferozepur Cantt., Ferozepur (Punjab). Execution of the said contract work had been started in the year 1961 but the same could be completed in July 1965.During that period the assessee-firm received payments of its interim bills but dispute arose with regard to the payment of the Final Bill.As per clause 70 of the Contract Agreement the dispute was referred for adjudication to Brig. S.R. Bagga, the sole Arbitrator. Both the parties preferred their cross-claims before the Arbitrator. The claims preferred by the assessee firm included demand of ...
Roshan Lal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1992
Reported in: 1992(46)DRJ554
V.B. Banaal, J. (1) His order is to dispose of an application moved by Roshan Lal Petitioner for bail for the offences under Section 302/397/3 read with Sec 34TPC. Police Station Nangloi. (2) Briefly slated the case of the prosecution has been that Lala Harkishan Dass complainant has been carrying on business at Nangloi though he has been a resident of Bahadurgarh. S/Shri Sham Sunder, Hans Raj, Raju and Krishan sons of Mohan Lal have been working as property dealers at Bahadurgarh. Some time before 4th March, 1991 they got a deal settled in respect of a property of Suresh Singhal r/o 34/56, West Punjabi Bagh in favor of Tilak Raj, Tarsem and Sarover r/o Gurdaspur, Some differences, however, arose between them in respect of the aforesaid deal. In these circumstances, Suresh Singhal and Sham Sunder and others made a request to Lala Harkishan Dass to get their disputes settled and with this aim both the parties agreed to come to the office of the complainant Lala Harkishan Dass at about 4...
Gas Authority of India Vs. Presiding Officer Tis Hazari and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1992
Reported in: 47(1992)DLT133
P.N. Nag, J.(1) This is an application on behalf of respondent No. 2 workman filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for recalling of the order dated 7th August, 1990, whereby the interim order made on 28th November, 1989, granting stay of the operation of the impugned award, was confirmed, and for further directions. (2) The writ petition was filed in this Court on 27th November, 1989 challenging the award of the Labour Court dated 21.7.1989. The Labour Court vide this order directed the management to reinstate the claimant-respondent No. 2 with continuity of service and full back wages w.e.f. 1.3.1987. The writ petition was admitted by this Court on 28th November, 1989 and the operation of the impugned award was stayed, as already stated. (3) By the present application, Counsel for respondent No. 2 submits and prays that atleast the respondent No. 2 should be paid full back wages last drawn by him during the pe...
Ram NaraIn and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1992
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT349
Mahinder Narain, J.(1) In this Regular First Appeal, the appellants seek enhancement of compensation for acquisition in respect of land measuring 130 bighas 14 bids was and in addition, half share in 14 bids was of land, all of which was located in village Pausangipur. (2) Land measuring 1669 bighas 18 bids was in the revenue estate of Pausangipur was acquired for planned development of Delhi vide notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894 on 24th October. 1961. The Land Acquisition Collector gave his awards No. 1698 dated 31st March, 1964 and assessed compensation of land of Block 'A' at Rs.1,400.00 per bigha and Block 'B' at Rs. l,200.00 per bigha. (3) The appellants received the awarded amount under protest and filed a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. While deciding the reference, the Addl. District Judge enhanced compensation of land measuring 33 bighas 10' bids was to Rs. 3.050.00 per bigha, 53 bighas 10 bids was to Rs. 3.250.00 per bigha...
Shakuntla Paul Vs. the Lt. Governor and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1992
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT456
C.M. Nayar, J. (1) The short question involved In this writ petition is that, whether, the petitioner is entitled to the Selection Grade, which was intro- duced on November 26, 1971, for Trained Graduate Teachers (for short TGT) and Language Teachers. (2) The petitioner was appointed as Senior Language Teacher Grade Ii on July 15, 1954. She was confirmed as such with effect from July 16, 1955 and was granted Diploma by the Department of Education on November 2, 1955. Thereafter, she passed her M.A. examination in Hindi in the year 1968, She was promoted as Post Graduate Teacher Hindi (for short PGT) with effect July 27, from 1969, prior to the introduction of the Selection Grade for Tgt and Language Teachers. The petitioner has further submitted that she discovered on August 4, 1974, that an unauthorised interpolation in her service book was made showing her to be a Pgt on permanent basis. (3) The post of Pgt is admittedly higher than the post of Tgt and Language Teacher. However, with...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Narayani Udyog Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1992
Reported in: (1992)(60)ELT595TriDel
1. The Revenue as well as the as-sessee had filed the above captioned appeals being not satisfied by the order passed by the lower authorities. Since the issues involved are common the same are being disposed of by this common order.2. Shri J.S. Agarwal, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Agarwal pleaded that the goods in dispute are pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging of iron or steel which are commonly known in the trade as Pattas/Pattis. Shri Agarwal pleaded that upto 1st August, 1983 the goods were falling under erstwhile Tariff Item 26AA(i) whereas the Revenue wants to assess the same under Tariff Item 26AA(iii) and after 1st August, 1983 the assessee wants assessment under erstwhile Tariff Item 25(a) 'Pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging, not elsewhere specified' whereas the Revenue wants to assess under Tariff Item 2S(12)(i) as Hoops, strips. Shri Agarwal further pleaded that the matter is fully covered by the following decisions of the...
Vikram Cement and anr. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1992
Reported in: (1993)(44)LC90Tri(Delhi)
1. These two stay applications are directed against the same order and were heard together. They are, therefore, being disposed of by a common Order.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the two applicants herein have been licensed separately under the Central Excise Rules 1944 for manufacturing the cement which is an excisable commodity under Chapter 25 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The supporting raw material for manufacture of cement is limestone which they obtain from the mines which is crushed and thereafter, passed through various stages when clinker emerges before cement is produced. It was alleged in the Show Cause Notice issued to two applicants that they had removed certain quantities of crushed limestone to the other unit without payment of duty thereby suppressing the production and removal of crushed limestone from the authorities. Both the manufacturers were availing of exemption under Notification No. 448/86-CE, dated 13.11.1988 which is as under: In exercise ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Indian Shaving Products Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1992
Reported in: (1992)(61)ELT747TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order of Collector (Appeals), New Delhi dated 9-3-1990.2. The learned DR stated that the respondent is engaged in the manufacture of 'Razor Blades', had sought to operate under Rule 57F(2) of Central Excise Rules, 1944, for sending Aluminium Foil sheets to outside job-workers to get the same converted into Tucks (Packets) and bring back the said Tucks for packing their final products i.e. the 'Razor Blades'.3. He also stated that the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Jaipur disallowed the permission to operate under Rule 57F(2) by holding that the said aluminium foil sheets did not qualify as 'input' in or in relation to the manufacture of final products, namely, 'Razor Blades'.4. It was his submission that aluminium sheets were required for manufacture of containers in which blades were kept. Hence they could not be considered as inputs for manufacture of blades and he would in this connection rely on the order of the Tribunal in the case of Ponds ...
R.K. Mohta and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1992
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT344; (1992)IILLJ244Del
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) The challenge in this writ petition is to the Provident Fund which is being contributed in case of the employees of Sardar patel Vidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the said School). (2) This petition has been filed by some of the teachers of the school. There is also an application filed by the Karamcharis of the school for intervention. We have allowed the application (C.M. 5810/91) for intervention and have heard Counsel for the petitioner and the other parties including the interveners. (3) The dispute relates to three distinct periods. The first period is 1st April, 1959 to September. 1977. The second period is September, 1977 to August, 1982 and the third period is August, 1982 to August, 1988. (4) In order to appreciate the dispute which is raised it is necessary to examine as to how the respondent school acted in the present case. The memorandum and Rules of the school employees Provident Fund were promulgated and enforced w.e.f. 1st April, 1958. According...
Mood Aslam Habib Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1992
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT394
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) In exercise of the powers under Section 3(1) read with Section 2(f) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the Administrator of Union Territory of Delhi directed that Mohd. Aslam Habib s/o Shri Habib Vali resident of 10. Kedar Building, Room No. 16, 1st floor, Bagty Road, Bombay be detained and kept in custody in the Central Jail Tihar, New Delhi with a view to prevent him from smuggling goods, and also preventing him from engaging in transporting or concealing or keeping smuggled goods. Accordingly an order dated 18th January, 1991 was issued by the Deputy Secretary (Home) Delhi Administration for and on behalf of the Administrator of Union Territory of Delhi. This order was served upon Mohd. Aslam Habib on 9th February, 1991. He was supplied with the order of detention along with the grounds of detention and the documents relied upon in support of his detention. (2) Briefly state...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »