Delhi Court February 1992 Judgments

Collector of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Prakash Calender Factory

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1992)(61)ELT81TriDel

1. All the above appeals are on the same issue and have been clubbed together for disposal as per law.2. The Revenue appeal is E/2878/90-D and all the other appeals are those of different assessees.3. The Revenue have filed one common Misc. application No.E/Misc.1021/90-D in their appeal as well as the following appeals E/1964/83; E/323/85-D; E/2372/90-D and E/2878/90-D.4. The Revenue have likewise filed Misc. No. 1022/91-D in the following appeals of assessees No. E/413 to 421/90-D.5. (i) In Misc. 1021/91-D, Misc. 1022/91-D, the Revenue have prayed for permitting them to raise additional grounds and additional evidence.(ii) It is stated by them in para heading 'Additional Evidence', thus, that while going through the records of the case, they have observed that neither order-in-original nor the appellants have placed on record, any catalogue of the compressive shrinkage Range Machine, also known as Zero Zero Machine. They contended that the technical opinion is also very important an...

V. Prakash and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, New Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1992RLR165; [1992]85STC547(Delhi)

B.N. Kirpal, J.1. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following question of law to this Court for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that medicines, being taxable to sales tax at the first point of sales in terms of notification of the Chief Commissioner dated January 1, 1965, were liable to tax as such irrespective of the sales being to registered dealers and the assessed having obtained requisite declaration from them ?' 2. In our opinion the question as framed does not bring out the controversy in the correct perspective. We would, thereforee, reframe the question as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that medicines sold to the registered dealers which were manufactured, were liable to tax in terms of the notification of the Chief Commissioner dated 30th December, 1964 ?' 3. Briefly, stated the facts as found by the Tribun...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Korea Indo Traders (P.) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: ILR1992Delhi863

ORDERThe Court 1. This Court vide order dt. 11th October, 1991 had issued notice only with regard to one of the questions which was as follows : '4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the trading receipts of Rs. 1,56,000 could not be included in the total income of the assessed in the year of receipt ?' 2. The petitioner is engaged in export of manpower from India. It receives Rs. 15,000 per worker for the purpose. The previous year, relevant to the asst. yr. 1985-86, is calendar year of 1984. The respondent had received a total sum of Rs. 14,05,500 from various workers who were to be exported to Middle East countries. On 31st December, 1984, 104 workers could not be sent abroad and, thereforee, sum of Rs. 15,000 received from each one of them, totalling Rs. 1,56,000, was transferred by the respondent to advance service charges account. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this change in...

Bal Ram Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 47(1992)DLT77

B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) This judgment will dispose of Civil Writs Nos.1164 and 1142 of 1979 which are directed against the order of the Government of India whereby revision petitions filed by the petitioners against the order of the Collector of Customs and Central Excise were dismissed.(2) Briefly stated the facts are that on 13/03/1965 the Police and Central Excise & Customs Officials, near the exit gate of Company Bagh opposite Delhi Main Railway Station, recovered from Balram (petitioner) one Gold bar weighing 1698.25 grams of over 14 carat purity. This Gold bar was seized by the officials under Rule 126-L of the defense of India (Amendment) Rules,1962. On a statement alleged to have been made by Balram the business premises of the other petitioner Sant Lal, were raided at Katra Sat Narain, ChandniChowk, Delhi. Indian currency of Rs. 14.720.00stated to be representing part sale proceeds of the seized Gold bar were recovered.(3) The case was adjudicated upon, after show cause notice had ...

O.P. Handa Vs. P.C. Sharma and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 42(1992)DLT525

Y.K. Sabharwal, J. (1) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the tenant seeking quashing of order made on 12th February 1974 by the competent authority under Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act, 1956 granting permission to landlord-respondent No. 2 herein to institute eviction proceedings in respect of the disputed premises under Section 19 of the aforesaid Act. The application under Section 19 was filed by respondent No. 2 before the competent authority on or about 4th January 1973, inter-alia, plodding that the tenant is a government servant in the Ministry of Irrigation and was getting about Rs. 1100.00 per month and his son was working in the Irwin Hospital getting about 600.00 per month and thus the tenant was a man of status and was not likely to create any slum In case of his eviction. The competent authority came to the conclusion that the emoluments of the petitioner-tenant were established around Rs. 600.00 per month. The competen...

Kalpavriksha Engineers and Management Consultants (P) Ltd. Vs. Nationa ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1992(1)ARBLR427(Delhi); II(1992)BC7; [1993]76CompCas446(Delhi); 47(1992)DLT381; 1992(22)DRJ441

Anil Dev Singh, J.(1) This order will dispose of application (I.A No.8462/91) of the petitioner under Section 41 read with IInd Schedule of the Arbitration Act for restraining the respondent from invoking and encashing the bank guarantee No.NPL/28/89 dated May 23,1989 subsequently renewed vide letter dated August 9,1990. The facts necessary for the disposal of this application are as follows: The respondent by its letter dated May 23,1989 awarded the work of 'providing project management consultancy services for Lower Periyar Hydroelectric Project in Kerala' to the petitioner on the terms and conditions contained therein (for short 'Agreement'). The petitioner was to give consultancy on several matters including the following: 'A)Review of the physical and financial progress of the work once in a month and suggest remedial measures for the recovery of back-log and prepare a recovery plan. b) To assist in correspondence with the clients on important issues haying financial/commercial be...

Commissioner of Sales Tax, Delhi Vs. the Motor and General Finance Ltd ...

Court: Delhi

B. N. Kirpal, J.1. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question to this Court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the utilization of the vehicles on hire-purchase basis before their actual sales did not render the second proviso to section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as then extended to Delhi applicable.'2. The admitted facts are that the dealer is registered under the local Act and had made purchases on the basis of its registration certificate. The business of the dealer is that of hire-purchase. It enters into agreements and sells vehicles on hire-purchase basis.3. The assessing authority in respect of the year 1973-74 came to the conclusion that the registration certificate had been misutilised because the dealer had purchased vehicles for resale, but, in the year in question, it had not resold them. He, therefore, invoked the provisions of section 5(2)...

Ram Lal and ors. Vs. Madan Jha and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1992(23)DRJ62; 1992RLR170

S.C. Jain, J.(1) The facts giving rise to this petition are that the consolidation proceedings took place in village Pindwala Khurd, in 1953-54. The petitioners along with other co-sharers were allotted kila No. 22/1 besides other land in the consolidation proceedings and were put in possession of the same. The consolidation proceedings were completed in 1956 and the scheme came into force in 1956 itself. On the application filed by the petitioners for partition of their holdings from other co-sharers, the partition of the land was allowed by the order of the Revenue Assistant dated 21.1.1987 and land measuring 50 bighas and I bids was including khasra No. 22/1 fell to the share of the petitioners. One Ranjit Singh Filed An application under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 before The Financial Commissioner in April. 1987. claiming passage to his fields. The Financial accepted that application and remanded the case to the ...

Jagan Nath Vs. Har Lal and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 46(1992)DLT644

Y.K. Sabharwal, J. (1) This petition under Article 227 is directed against the order of the competent authority under Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, made on 15th January, 1974 granting permission in favor of respondents 1 and 2 herein to institute eviction proceedings in respect of disputed premises No. 583, Kucha Pati Ram, Delhi. The respondents 1 and 2 had filed an application under Section 19 of the aforesaid Act seeking permission to institute eviction proceedings against the petitioner and respondents 3, 4 and 5 besides Sh. Shiv Prasad, father of the petitioner and respondents 3, 4 and 5. It seems that Sh. Shiv Prasad had died during the pendency of the proceedings before the competent authority. According to the averments made in this petition Sh. Shiv Prasad died on 6th November, 1971. (2) In the impugned order, on consideration of evidence which was filed in the form of affidavits, the learned competent authority has come to the conclusion that the petitioner...

Delhi State Cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs. Jagdish Singh and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 46(1992)DLT436; 1992(23)DRJ173; 1992RLR172

S.C. Jain, J.(1) The facts giving rise to this petition are that Jagdish Singh, hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 1 was employed by Delhi State Cooperative Bank Ltd., here in after referred to as the petitioner bank for the first time in 1962. A few months after his appointment in the bank, he was granted emergency commission in the Indian Army. After serving for about five years he was released from the army in 1967 and he rejoined his duties with the petitioner bank. The period of service spent by the respondent No. 1 in the army was counted towards the service of respondent No. 1 in the bank as he had the lien on his post in the bank. He was promoted as the Executive Officer in 1967 and Manager Grade I in 1969. He was appointed as the acting General Manager of the Bank by the then Administrator of the bank in December, 1977 and he continued to officiate as Acting General Manager till 23rd March, 1980. Respondent No. 1 was given the substantive rank of Deputy General Manager ...