Delhi Court February 1995 Judgments

Supersun Laminations and Vs. C.C.E.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(77)ELT119TriDel

1. As both the appeals from the same issue they are taken up together for disposal as per law.2. E/863/93-C : This appeal arises from order-in-appeal dated 2-2-1993.The Id. Collector has phased his own ruling given in his order dated 8-1-1993, wherein it has been held that as the appellants had availed credit of excise duty on plastic granules, the rate of duty applicable on the final product i.e. Bags and Sacks manufactured by them was leviable to discharge duty @ 30% Adv. instead of at 20% Adv. as per Notification No. 53/88, dated 1-3-1988 as amended vide Notification No.148/90-C.E., dated 20-9-1990.3. E/864/93-C: This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal dated 8-1-1993 denying the appellants the benefit of the Notification No. 53/88, dated 1-3-1988 as amended on Bags and Sacks manufactured and cleared by them. "I have considered the submissions made by the appellant. Notification No. 53/88-CE as amended prescribed at the rate of 20% ad valorem for Bags and Sacks made out ...

Resistance Alloys (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(77)ELT721TriDel

1. Appeal No. E/1696/93-A & E/2035/94-A are filed by the party and E/CO/425/94-A in Appeal No. E/2035/94-A is filed by the Department involving a common issue, and, therefore, they are clubbed together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The issue relates to interest on deposit. The point to be considered in these appeals is whether interest on deposits and trade advances collected by the appellants from their buyers is to be included in the assessable value of the goods namely Electrical Resistance Wires manufactured by the appellants.3. Shri S.R. Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellants have two type of customers namely (1) consignee agent and (2) dealers. The appellant received trade deposit from consignee agent and trade advances from dealers. He said that the appellants had received deposits of Rs. 19.5 lacs on which they paid interest at 20% per annum on Rs. 12.5 lacs. The appellants had received these amounts as se...

Raj NaraIn Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 57(1995)DLT755

P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10/11/1990 of an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi by which he convicted the appellant of an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. having intentionally caused the death of one Smt.Asha @ Attri by pouring kerosene oil on her and setting her on fire and order dated 13/11/1990 by which he awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs, 2,000.00 and in default to under gorigorous imprisonment for one month more.The facts, as have come out from the evidence, in brief, are that deceased Asha was married to one Pyare Lal many years ago and three issues have been born from the said wedlock out of whom two were female and one was a boy and she was living with her husband Pyare Lal in a lane near Chowki No.2 and even after the death of her husband she continued to live there.(2) It is the case that about four years prior to her death, she had started living as wife of appellant. Raj Narain, in the Jhug...

General Manager, Desu Vs. Asha Rajput

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.N. Mittal, President: 1. This order will dispose of appeal Nos. 251 to 257 of 1993, which arise out of the same order dated 16.2.93 of District Forum-II and by which the complaints have been allowed and the Opposite Party has been directed to allow the complainants to make fresh applications for new connections and give the electric connections to them in accordance with the rules, prescribed procedure and the latest policy decisions. It further directed them to pay to Rs. 5,00/- as costs to the complainants in each. 2. Briefly the facts are that the complainants made applications for domestic electric connections. It is alleged that no electric connection had been given to them. Consequently they filed the complaint for appropriate directions. 3. The Opposite Party contested the complaint and inter-alia pleaded that the complainants were not consumers and that no applications for electric connections had been filed by them. The District Forum held that the complainants had filed the...

Om Prakash Aggarwal Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)53ITD7(Delhi)

1. This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the DCIT(A) dated 5-8-1992 for the assessment year 1990-91 for which the previous year ended on 31-3-1990.2. The assessee is an individual. She originally filed return of income on 26-10-1990 declaring total income of Rs. 33,160. In the statement of income filed along with the return, she claimed credit for TDS of Rs. 1265 and self-asstt. tax paid under Section 140Aof Rs. 3,210. Later on, she filed claim for refund of tax dated 26-3-1991 in Form No. 30 along with the statement of income showing the total income at the same figure of Rs. 33,160. In the statement of income filed along with the said Form No. 30, she claimed credit for advance tax paid of Rs. 5,300 on 14-3-1990. Along with the covering letter dated 27-3-1991, receipted challan for Rs. 5300 was appended and another return was also filed.Reliance was placed on the order of the DCIT(A) dated 21-5-1990 in the case of Shri Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal for the assessment year 1986...

Metal Forgings (P) Ltd. Vs. Allahabad Bank and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 58(1995)DLT54; 1995(32)DRJ592; (1995)110PLR50

Jaspal Singh, J. (1) The parties are fighting their legal battles since the year 1985. There seems to be no end to it. Whereas M/s. Metal Forging Pvt.Ltd. has filed as many as four suits the Allahabad Bank has instituted one. A brief resume of those suits is called for to have an overall view of the applications leading to this order. Suit No-1192 of 1985 by Metal Forging Pvt. Ltd. is- for the recovery of Rs-60,60,395.37. The company alleges that loss was suffered due to stoppage of L.C. facilities and bank guarantee facilities by the defendant bank. The second suit by it bears No-1195 of 1985. It is for the recovery ofRs-40,06,687.85. It alleges losses on account of alleged acts of omissions and commission on the part of the defendant bank. The third suit bears No-1626/85. This too is by the said Company and is for the recovery of Rs-21,42,404.85. It makes a grievance of the alleged refusal or failure of the defendant bank to adjust certain amounts due to the plaintiff. Suit No. 1196 ...

Sheelawanti and anr., Vs. Delhi Development Authority and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)725; AIR1995Delhi212; 57(1995)DLT801; 1995(32)DRJ403

D.K. Jain, J. (1) This batch of writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the price demanded from the intending purchasers of the flats allotted under the 'Registration Scheme on New Pattern - 1979' (the Scheme for short) sponsored by the Delhi Development Authority (the D.D.A.). (2) The petitioners are registrants of flats under the Scheme. In the brochure published by the respondent D.D.A. regarding the Scheme, the terms and conditions were specified along with the details of Scheme 'formulated to reduce the sale price of MIG/LIG and Janta flats, so as to be within the reach of the common man'. Apart from prescribing period of registration, eligibility criteria, 'area', 'accommodation', the 'likely cost' and other conditions were stipulated in Clause 13 and 14 respectively. Dispute being only qua the cost, the same set out in Clause 13 for each of the three categories of the flats was: M.I.G. Rs.42,000.00 L.I.G. Rs.18,000.00 Janta Rs. 8,000.00 ('the prices...

Rameshwar Sarup Bhatnagar Vs. Ram NaraIn Arora and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)1082; 57(1995)DLT617; 1995(32)DRJ656; 1995RLR189

Arun Kumar, J. (1) This revision petition is directed against the judgment of the Addl.Rent Controller, Delhi dated 29.8.1985. By the impugned judgment the eviction petition filed by the petitioner under section 14(l)(e) read with Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was dismissed; (2) Rameshwar Sarup Bhatnagar who had filed the eviction petition died on 24.7.1994 during the pendency of the present petition. His legal heirs were duly brought on record vide order dated 26.8.1994. The amended memo of parties was filed Along with the application for bringing the' legal heirs on record. (3) Briefly stated the facts are that the tenancy premises was let out to respondent No.1 by late Shri Din Dayal Bhatnagar, father of Shri Rameshwar Sarup Bhatnagar and father-in-law of the present petitioner No.1. According to petitioner the premises was let out for residential purpose and was being used as such by respondent No.1. In terms of a Will left behind by...

Gulab Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)1164; 58(1995)DLT19; 1995(32)DRJ467

K. Ramamoorthy, J. (1) This writ petition is filed challenging the notifications issued by the first respondent on 13th of November 1959 u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and the declaration dated 27th of January 1966 issued under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act with reference to 36 bighas and 2 bids was of the land situated in a place called Village Wazirpur, Delhi. On 29th of March 1973 the petition was presented and the rule was issued on 5th of April 1973. There was no reply filed by the respondents. Subsequently, there was an amendment of the writ petition bringing to the notice of this Court notification issued by the Government on 21st of December 1911. The amended writ petition with all the annexures were served on the respondents and no reply has been filed. On 25th of January 1995 Mr. K.C. Mittal with Ms. Rina Bhatia appeared and prayed for an adjournment. On their request, the matter was adjourned to 27th of January, 1995 after hearing the learned counsel for the petit...

G.M. Modi Hospital and R.C.M.S. Vs. Shankar Singh Bhandari and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995(32)DRJ574; ILR1995Delhi792

K. Ramamoorthy, J. (1) The revision petitioner Modi Hospital is defendant in 15 suits filed by 15 different plaintiffs. The plaintiffs in all the 15 suits prayed for interim injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the possession of what according to them quarters inside the Hospital Campus. The trial court declined to grant injunction. The plaintiffs in all the 15 suits filed appeals before the learned appellate court challenging the order of the trial court. The lower appellate court allowed the appeal and granted injunction pending the suits. (Hereinafter the plaintiffs will be referred as the 'plaintiffs' and the Hospital shall be referred as the 'defendant'): The defendant had filed a single civil revision petition seeking the leave of this Court to file a single revision petition. In C.M-3040/94 this Court has granted the leave and, thereforee, a single revision petition is now considered against all the orders of injunction passed in 15 suits. The learned couns...