Delhi Court April 1994 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.
Jai Shree Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT156TriDel
1. This is a stay application filed with reference to the order of the Collector (Appeals), New Delhi dated 15-7-1994.2. Learned Counsel stated that they had filed classification list in respect of the products described as "Made up textile articles NES woven sacks of polymers of ethylene or propylene of combination thereof (known as HDPE woven bags)" classifying this item under 63.01 and this classification had been duly approved by the Assistant Collector.3. Subsequently, the Central Board of Excise and Customs issued an Order No. 8/92, dated 24-9-1992 exercising its power under Section 378 for the purpose of uniformity of the classification of the said goods.Consequently, they filed a revised classification list classifying the item as directed by that order under 3923.90 and this classification list which was filed on 26-10-1992 was also duly approved. Later on, a Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice dated 19-3-1993 was issued by the Assistant Collector asking them to pay the differential...
Zenith TIn Works Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: (1994)LC137Tri(Delhi)
1. Briefly the facts of this case, as set out in the impugned order as follows :- 1.1 The appellants imported a consignment of 44,4409 M. Tons of Tin Plate Prime of thickness 0.19 mm vide Bill of Entry No. 1381/11 dt. 22-6-1992 and claimed the goods under duty exemption scheme in terms of Notification No. 159/90-Cus. 1.2 The appellants produced 6 Advance Licences and DEEC Books, the thickness of the Tin Plate for the manufacture of the resultant product specified, in 3 Advance Licences and DEEC Books is as under :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------S. No. Advance Licence DEEC Book No. & Thickness of Tinplate for No. Date the manufacture of resultant product.1. P/L/3468215 045001 0.29 mm & .20 30-7-1991 1-8-19912. P/L/3468224 045010 0.22 mm & 0.25 1-8-1991 1-8-19913. 0300358 046343 0.18 mm & 0.24 22-10-1991 25-10-1991 1.3 The importers claimed 34.7438 Mts. of Tin-plate having CIF value of Rs. 7,73,5277- against Advance Licenc...
C.C. Ex. Vs. Rajaram Corn Products (Punjab)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT346TriDel
1. These are six appeals filed by the Department involving common issues and, therefore, they are clubbed together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The point to be considered in these cases is regarding eligibility of certain inputs for set off of duty under Notification No. 201 /79, dated 4-6-1979. In all these cases the respondents were engaged in the manufacture of Liquid Glucose falling under Item 1E of the Central Excise Tariff. In Appeal Nos. E/257, 357, 359 and 364/86-D, they used activated carbon in the manufacture of Liquid Glucose and availed set-off of duty in terms of Notification No. 201/79 dated 4-6-1979 as amended. Similarly, they used 'Indian Hip Resins' in Appeal No.E/358/86-D and 'Dicamol and resins' in Appeal No. E/362/86-D and availed credit accordingly. According to the Department, after the amendment of the Notification No. 201/79 by Notification No. 105/82, dated 28-2-1982 the input duty relief was restricted to raw material or component parts a...
Yashodha Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: 1994IIAD(Delhi)469; 54(1994)DLT637; 1994(29)DRJ319
Jaspal Singh, J.(1) In a case where a bond for appearance of the accused is forfeited, can penalty be imposed upon the surety without first serving upon him a notice to show cause? This is the precise question which needs to be answered in this appeal. However, before I proceed to deal with the question, let me provide the background.(2) The appellant is none other but the daughter of Bihari Lal who is facing trial under section 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act. By an order of November 19, 1993 passed by the High Court the accused was granted interim bail till November 15, 1993. The appellant stood surety for him in the required sum of Rs.25000.00 . It so happened that the accused surrendered in court, not on November 16, 1993 but on November 19, 1993. This invited the following order from the learned Additional Sessions Judge:(3) File put up today on the application of the accused to surrender in court. He was on interim said bail till 15.11.93 as per order of Hon'ble Court dated 9.11.93 and he...
Usha Subramaniam and anr. Vs. Daljit Kumar Bhandari and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: 1994IIAD(Delhi)749; 54(1994)DLT628
Sat Pal, J. (1) This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Order 40 Rule I read with Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of a Receiver with regard to the property bearing House No. 224, Jor Bagh, New Delhi.(2) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the property bearing house No.224, Jor Bagh, New Delhi (in short the suit property) was owned by Shri G.L.Bhandari who died on 18/12/1958. Shri G.L. Bhandari left behind his wifeSmt. Shakuntala Bhandari, mother Smt. Kulwanti, two daughters (who are plaintiffs 1 & 2 in this suit), three sons, namely, Shri Daljit Kumar Bhandari (defendantNo. 1 herein), Shri Ranjit Kumar Bhandari (defendant No. 2 herein) and Shri Dalip Kumar Bhandari. Smt. Kulwanti died on 18.12.65 and Shri Dalip Kumar Bhandari died on 29.4.1978. Defendant No. 3, namely, Shri Shailendra Bhandari is the son and defendant No. 4, namely, Smt. Gayatri Lamba is the daughter of late Shri Dalip Kumar Bhandari.(3...
Addidas Ag and anr. Vs. Addi Worsted Limited and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-1994
Reported in: 54(1994)DLT361
Mr. C.M. Nayar, J. 1. These three petitions, being C.M.(M) Nos. 413/92, 398/ 92 and 399/92 have been filed to impugn the order dated July 21, 1992, passed by the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks, Delhi, by which he disposed of the interlocutory petitions filed on August 31, 1990 in the Opposition Nos. DEL 6249, DEL 6254 and DEL 6247. The interlocutory petitions were filed by M/s Bata India Limited and the grounds taken therein are that M/s Adidas Sports shuhfabriken Adi Dassler & Co. KG, West Germany were the proprietor of a number of trade marks in India including Registration Nos. (1)271864-8, (2) 352655 in class 25 and (3) 271863 in class 18. The consideration of these trade marks arises in the present Oppositions. The petitioner No. 1 assigned the trade marks by Deed of Assignment dated January 17, 1989, to M/s Bata India Ltd. and it is contended on behalf of this Company that they are the assignees and necessary parties to the Opposition and they may be added as Opponents in the pr...
Transocean Shipping Agency (P) Vs. Collector of Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-1994
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT337TriDel
1. The appellant (Importer) imported "Container handling equipment" (DD 62 CH) as lifting and handling equipment under 84.22 CTA, with additional duty under CET. The Deputy Collector identified the goods as "Fork-Lift-Trucks" and assessed them to duty under 87.07 CTA read with Item 34B of CET. Before the Collector, the importer had pleaded that the impugned goods are Container lift trucks and had no forks as lifting media and relied on ISI specifications. They had also pleaded that Dy. Collector had taken into consideration the various Section Notes like 2(a) & 3(A) of Section XVI and Section Note 2(c) of Section XVII and Rule 3(a) of Interpretation Rules. They pleaded that ISI specification 4660 :1977 speaks about work trucks falling under 87.04/07 CTA as well lifting machinery falling under 84.22 CTA . They had pleaded that the imported goods were industrial trucks and were different from "work-trucks" and made an appeal for assessment under Heading 84.22 CTA, on the ground that...
Frontier Springs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-1994
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT385TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Additional Collector, Kanpur, dated 27-11-1989.2. Learned Counsel stated that they are manufacturers of spring leaves.They had filed a declaration under Rule 57G showing both input as well as final product for modvat purposes. The amended declaration dated 9-3-1988 shows leaves for springs (untempered and without shot peening) as input and springs and spring leaves as output.3. The department however has made out this case against them on the assumption that "Spring leaves" could not be manufactured out of spring leaves. According to the department that what has been shown as input was itself a final product and therefore no modvat could be taken with reference to it.4. It was however their contention that they used to receive semifinished springs in the sense that they were untempered and without shot peening on the gate pass and to subject these inputs to further processes of tempering, peening etc. and this clear the product for sale af...
Kuldip Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-1994
Reported in: 1994IIAD(Delhi)445; 1994CriLJ2502; 54(1994)DLT380; 1994(29)DRJ407
Y.K. Sabharwal, J. 1. A telegram received from under-trial Kuldip Singh who was confined in Central Jail, Delhi, was treated as a writ petition which is being disposed of by this judgment. The telegram bears the stamp of Telegraph office dated 9th October, 1990. It has been, inter alia, alleged in the telegram that on 5th October, 1990 Deputy Superintendent of Jail No. 4 Sh. Garg who was having old enmity against Kuldip Singh gave ruthless beatings, with rods and dandas and Kuldip Singh received severe injuries all over the body; the said injuries were grevious; he was left unconscious; the medical aid was provided to him and that his life was in danger. Alleging in the telegram that no report was registered by the Police, directions have been sought for registration of a case against Garg and his associates. The telegram purports to have been sent by Kuldip Singh through Satnam Singh. 2. By orders dated 17th October, 1990 while issuing notice to respondents to show cause why the petit...
Daulat Radhu Bhatija Vs. State and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-1994
Reported in: 1994IIAD(Delhi)725; 1995CriLJ2158; 1994(29)DRJ557; 1994RLR291
S. C. Jain, J.1. The facts giving rise to this writ petition in brief are that Shri Sunil Bagga (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 2) as attorney of M/s. S.A.S. Exports, A-30 Bapu Park, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi filed a complaint before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, New Delhi purporting to be under section 156, Cr.P.C. against Shri Daulat Radhu Bhathisa (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner) seeking a direction to the S.H.O. Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi to register a case for offences under Sections 420/506/379/323 I.P.C. and investigate the same and file a report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. 2. Shri Sukhdev Singh, M.M. to whom this case was assigned by his order dated 19-7-1993 directed the S.H.O. Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur to get a case registered and investigate the same under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. and to submit his report on 10-8-1993. 3. It is this order of the M.M. which has been challenged in this writ petition. Investigation being made ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »