Delhi Court November 1993 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.
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Electrometal Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-1993
Reported in: (1994)(70)ELT72TriDel
1. The short issue involved in this appeal is whether aluminium alloy ingots made out of scrap can be regarded as virgin aluminium for the purpose of benefit of Notification No. 43/75-C.E., dated 1-3-1975. The said Notification exempts inter alia, aluminium in any crude form including castings if made inter alia from waste or scrap obtained from virgin metal, or virgin aluminium in any crude form, or a combination of both on which the appropriate duty of Excise etc. has already been paid. The appellants have contended that as per the definition of "aluminium" under Tariff Heading 27 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff "aluminium" included, "alloy aluminium" and further, that the "virgin aluminium" meant, aluminium in crude form which has not been worked. They cited in support of their contention the Tribunal decisions reported at 1989 (43) E.L.T. 183 (SC) in the case of TOMCO and at 1987 (30) E.L.T. 507. On behalf of the department the Learned JDR contended that as per I.S. 5407 vi...
Anchal (Binny Showroom) Vs. Anand Prakash and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-1993
Reported in: 53(1994)DLT348; (1993)105PLR51
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) I find no merit in this civil revision. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. No one has appeared on behalf of the respondent. I have perused the record. Vide order and judgment dated September 19, 1979, the learned Sub Judge had, while dismissing the application of the petitioner seeking leave to defend, passed the decree for recovery of Rs. 4,974.75 paise with proportionate costs. (2) The suit was brought by the plaintiff under Order xxxvii of The Code of Civil Procedure pleading that the plaintiff, which is a registered partnership firm with Sh. Anand Prakash being its registered partner, had supplied cloth goods to the petitioner and three cheques in the sum of Rs. 4,454.80 paise were issued as price of the goods but the cheques were dishonoured being presented to the bank. (3) The petitioner came up with the pleas that the plaintiff firm is not registered were not at all supplied and these cheques were issued in advance and as the goods were not s...
Shiv Mohan Kapur Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-1993
Reported in: (1994)49ITD89(Delhi)
1. The assessee, a partner of M/s Sat Prakash Kapur & Sons, had filed these appeals and the department are also in cross appeals for these years. These cross appeals involve the common issue of the valuation of the property situated at 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi and accordingly, the appeals have been grouped and disposed of by this common order.2. Shri Agarwal, the learned counsel for the assessee, narrated the facts of the case, from the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that, property at 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi was a residential property, owned by Shri Sat Prakash Kapoor (after this called SPK). SPK had two wives, and he had two sons, Sh. Shiv Mohan Kapoor & Sh. Joginder Mohan Kapoor by the first wife (after this called SMK & JMK) and four sons, Sh. B.M. Kapoor, Sh. Jag Mohan Kapoor, Sh.Ashok Kapoor & Sh. Surendar Kapoor, by the second wife. On the death of SPK, the Delhi High Court ordered for division of the said property into eight parts and...
D.K. JaIn Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-1993
Reported in: (1994)49ITD269(Delhi)
1. The assessee is in appeal against order dated 13th August, 1992 of the learned CIT (Appeals)-XI, New Delhi. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. It is contended that the assessment under Section 143(3) dated 27-3-1992 is without jurisdiction, is invalid, and therefore, non est in law. 2. It is contended that the notice issued under Section 143(2) to commence and continue the proceedings under Section 143(3) is invalid and non est in law. 3. It is contended that the order under Section 143(l)(a) dated 2-3-1990 is itself an order under Section 143(3) and, therefore, the subsequent proceedings, without the authority of law are invalid. 4. It is contended that the deduction under Section 32AB of Rs. 10,65,178 is wrong. 6. The disallowance of Rs. 10,000 out of telephone and telex expenses is wrong. 7. The assessment under Section 143(3) dated 27-3-1992 is wrong, invalid and time barred. 8. The provisions under Section 234B and 234C are not applicable at all. 9.The ...
Banwari Lal and Sons (P) Ltd. Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-1993
Reported in: 53(1994)DLT99
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) These two writ petitions pertain to challenging the orders of the appellate authorities by virtue of which appeals filed by the petitioner under the Punjab Municipal Act objecting to the fixation of rateable value of the property bearing No.1, Aurangzeb Road, New Delhi, for the assessment years 1975-76 & 1976-77 had been dismissed. (2) The main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner in the two writ petitions is that the property in question had been admittedly let out prior to June 2, 1944, at the rental ofRs.418.00 per month and thus, by virtue of Section 6A(l)(a) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 the said amount would be deemed to be the basic rent and the rateable value of the property under the Punjab Municipal Act has to be fixed keeping in view the standard rent. I have perused the orders of the assessing authorities and find that the assessing authorities have fixed the rateable value on the basis of the standard rent arrived at taking into acco...
D. K. JaIn Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-1993
Reported in: (1994)48TTJ(Del)675
ORDERN. S. CHOPRA, A. M. :The assessed is in appeal against order dt. 13th Aug., 1992 of the learned CIT(A)-XI, New Delhi. The assessed has taken the following grounds of appeal :'1. It is contended that the assessment under S. 143(3) dt. 27th March, 1992 is without jurisdiction, is invalid and, thereforee, non est in law.2. It is contended that the notice issued under S. 143(2) to commence and continue the proceedings under S. 143(3) is invalid and non est in law.3. It is contended that the order under S. 143(1)(a) dt. 2nd March, 1990 is itself an order under S. 143(3) and, thereforee, the subsequent proceedings. Without the authority of law are invalid.4. It is contended that the deduction under S. 32AB of Rs. 10,65,178 is wrong.5. The disallowance of Rs. 8,102 under S. 43B is wrong.6. The disallowance of Rs. 10,000 out of telephone and telex expenses is wrong.7. The assessment under S. 143(3) dt. 27th March, 1992 is wrong, invalid and time barred.8. The provisions under Ss. 234B and...
Dujodwala Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: (1994)(70)ELT104TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the Order of Collector of Central Excise, Delhi, No. 27/90, dated 8-6-1990.2. At the outset, the learned Advocate has raised a preliminary objection filed vide letter, dated 3-12-1991. However, subsequently, he withdrew this objection on 15-1-1992 and both the sides were heard on merits.3. The learned Advocate has stated that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Durone-10, a product made from rosin since 1979 for which they had been duly licensed.4. From the very beginning, it was classified by the Department under Tariff Item 68 until new Tariff Act of 1985 came into being.Thereafter, it was first classified under 3801.90 until 28-2-1987 and subsequently under 3806.90.5. During the relevant period - July 1983 to 11-4-1988, the Department drew samples from time to time and approved the classification lists and the Assistant Collector had with him two test reports before the Classification Lists were approved in 1986-87.6. The process of manufa...
Har Kishan Lal and ors. Vs. JaIn Textiles Traders
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)977; 53(1994)DLT80; 1994RLR88
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This Civil Revision pertains to an interim order made by the learned Sub Judge by which he had negatived the plea of the petitioners/ defendants that the suit was not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 478 of The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. (2) The suit was brought by the respondent/plaintiff pleading that the plaintiff is having his business at first floor of premises No. 336/3, Naya Katra, Chandni Chowk, Delhi and the plaintiff is selling the cloth in wholesale and large number of traders and customers visit his shop on the first floor and the petitioners/ defendants 1 & 2 are having business premises again on the first floor and they are dealing in wholesale business of selling 'Dupattas'. There exists a big courtyard on the first floor and besides the two shops, there are other shops also located on the said first floor. The customers and the shopkeepers had to go through a long passage on the groun...
Kelvinator of India Ltd. Vs. A.P. Bagai
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)877; 1994(28)DRJ74; 1994RLR55
D.K. Jain, J.(1) The petitioner, M/s.Kelvinator of India Ltd. is a tenant in possession of the premises bearing No.29, Friends Colony (West), Mathura Road, New Delhi, having been let out the same by the respondent Mr.A.P. Bagai as Karta of his Hindu Undivided Family. The respondent claims that his Hindu Undivided Family, consisting of himself and his son, is the landlord/owner of the said premises, which had been purchased by him from Nathu Ram Friends Colony Cooperative House Building Society Limited vide registered sale deed dated 03 January 1970.(2) The respondent A.P.Bagai, as Karta of his H.U.F., filed a petition on 15 May 1986 under section 14(l)(e) read with section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short theAct),for eviction of the petitioner company from the said premises on the ground of bona fide requirement of self and other members of his Hindu Undivided Family on the pleas : (i) that he was residing on the first floor of a rented house at J-51, Lajpat Nagar Iii...
Rahis Ahmed Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)932; 1994(28)DRJ59
S.C. Jain, J. (1) The facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 15th April,1991 A.S.I. Suraj Bhan of Narcotic Branch,Kamla Market received a secret information that one Rahis Ahmed of D.D.A. Quarters, Anand Nagar, Inderlok (appellant) would be returning from his home at 4.30 p.m. and that he would be carrying heroin with him. This information was passed on to A.C.P.Mr.J.P.Singh and a raiding party was organized comprising H.C. Sukhbir Singh, H.C. Ram Bhagat, Constable Satbir Singh, Constable Raj Kumar, S.I. Ramesh Rana, Constable Lekha Rani and A.S.I. Suraj Bhan himself. The said raiding party reached at Primary School No. 37 within the areaofP.S.Sarai Rohilla at about 4p.m and a nakabandi was arranged. At about 4.20 p.m. the accused was apprehended and an option was given to him whether he would like to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, but he declined. On the search of the appellant a polythene packet from the right dub of his Ahmed was recovered. On opening t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »