Delhi Court February 1995 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1995 Page 2 of about 156 results (0.021 seconds)Shyam Lal Biri Mfg. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(77)ELT657TriDel
1. This Reference Application seeks reference of the following alleged points of law said to arise out of Tribunal's Order No. A/138/94-NRB, dated 31-1-1994: (i) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal can take two different views on identical issues; (ii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was correct in not taking into account that the principles of natural justice must be followed by the Excise Authorities at all levels in all proceedings under the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 and the order passed in violation of the principle's of natural justice is a nullity. (iii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in upholding the order passed by the Additional Collector especially when the entire proceedings were initiated against the applicant on the basis of third parties' statements recorded at the back of the applicant; the copies of which were not supplied to the applicant; and the applicant was not allowed to cross-examine them in spite of a specific request made, and the matter being rem...
Tag this Judgment!JaIn Ceramics Industry Vs. Collector of C. Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT186TriDel
A claim for refund of Rs. 23,746.95 was filed by M/s. Jain Ceramic Industries (Appellants) on the ground that they had paid duty on the item @ 25% instead of 15% on porcelain ware under 23B(4) during the period 5-4-1976 to 28-3-1977. They also requested that the entire amount paid @ 25% be refunded as their product falling under Item 68 was exempt vide Notification No. 176/77. On being called upon to explain as to why their claim should not be rejected as time-barred having been filed on 14-5-1980 and as to why it should not be held that the product was correctly classifiable under Item 23B(4), the party replied that they had paid the duty under protest by making an endorsement "under protest" on the TR challans and gate passes. They also stated that their claim for assessment under Item 68 was proper as Explanation-II under Item 23B showed that it did not include electrical insulators or electrical insulating fitting or parts thereof. Since they could not be under 23B they had only t...
Tag this Judgment!Surya Products Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT249TriDel
1. These two appeals are directed against two orders dated 5-5-1987 passed by the Collector of Customs, Cochin. Appellants, M/s. Ajantha Umbrella Works imported in March, 1987 a consignment of components of umbrella frame consisting of Gents Auto-folding Ribs size 21x8 with tube fittings, handle crook and cap from Taiwan. They declared the price as US $ 5.20 c.i.f. per dozen. In the case of appellants, M/s.Surya Products, the import at the same time was similarly of components of umbrella frames consisting of Ladies Auto Folding Ribs size 19x8 with tube fittings handle ivory and caps, also from Taiwan. They declared the price as US $ 4.65 per dozen c.i.f. The Custom House took the view that the invoice value in both the cases was low as compared to quotation of similar goods of Taiwan origin based on a quotation dated 14-1-1987 of HSU Ge Umbrella Enterprises Ltd., Taiwan, according to which the price was US $ 8.40 per dozen c.i.f. for goods similar to those imported by the appellants,...
Tag this Judgment!Northland Development and Hotel Vs. Assessing Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)53ITD333(Delhi)
1. These five appeals of the assessee relating to assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 are disposed of by this consolidated order. The common issue relates to penalty under Section 271(1)(c). Relevant facts are that assessee is a registered firm. In 1974 it had purchased a hotel for which money had been borrowed from Citi Bank. Assessee having failed to fulfil the commitments made to the Citi Bank for repayment of the loan, a suit had been filed by the Bank in the year 1978 for the recovery of the dues. On the basis of the compromise between the assessee and Citi Bank, a Consent Decree for a sum of Rs. 42,45,477 was passed by the first Additional Civil Judge, Agra on 30-4-1982, in Suit No. 293 of 1978. As against the liability of Rs. 52,07,873.15 as shown in the books of account of the assessee. As per the said decree assessee was to make the payment of Rs. 39,60,000 by 15-11-1984 and if the payments were made by the assessee in time as referred to above, the decree for a sum of Rs. 42...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Sanjeev Dadhwal Vs. All India Institute of Medical Sciences
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1995Delhi268; 1995(34)DRJ46; 1995RLR379
ORDERA. K. Srivastava, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Consti graduated India has been filed by one Dr. Sanjeev Dadhwal who has graduated from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, hereinafter referred to as the 'institute' and trying to get into the post graduate courses of the institute through the competitive examination for the January Course 1995. By this petition, following three reliefs were prayed for :'(a) issue appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the AIIMS to accept and consider the application of the petitioner for the PG entrance examination scheduled to be held in November, 1994, or any other date (for the PG course commencing in January 1995, and also for any future PG examination, in the category of 'Institute Graduate', with 33% reservation applicable to the said category, and to consider him for selection on the said basis to the post of junior resident at the m...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Prasad Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)1220; 1995(3)Crimes9; 58(1995)DLT740
S.D. Pandit, J.(1) Jagdish Prasad, appellant convicted of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge of Delhi in Sessions Case No. 189/87on24.1.1991 and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 6,000.00 and in default to suffer further R.I. for two years with a direction to pay Rs. 5,000.00 as compensation to the victim Shivani Sood, daughter of Kesari Dass Sood.(2) Shri Kesari Dass Sood is resident of House No. l/206/47,SanatanDharam Building, Sadar Bazar, Delhi Cantonment. He is residing there along with his wife and children. The present appellant is his neighbour.(3) On 4.3.1987 there was a function in the house of the appellant on account of birth of his grant child. Gita Devi, wife of Kesari Dass Sood, had gone to the house of the present accused Along with her daughter, victim Shivani Sood, in order to attend a Kirtan. The grand-daughter of the present appellant, viz., Shalu is of the age group ...
Tag this Judgment!Lakhan Lal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2699; 59(1995)DLT182
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Appellant Lakhan Lal son of Narayan Singh stands convicted of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default to suffer further R.I. for three months, on 18-4-1990 by an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. It was held that the appellant Lakhan Lal had committed the murder of his wife Vidhya by setting her on fire.2. Vidhya was the daughter of PW/1. Buddha Ram. She had given up her education in graduation in Art Faculty in the year 1980 and had taken up a job as a Telephone Operator. In March 1981 her marriage took place with the appellant Lakhan Lal, was an arranged marriage. After the said marriage she joined her husband and started living with him in the joint family of the appellant which consisted of appellant, his parents and sister. But it seems that appellant's sister, particularly, was harassing the deceased Vidhya and appellant's parents were also asking her to get...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Starch Industries Ltd. Vs. Prudent International Shipping and T ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 58(1995)DLT107
Devinder Gupta, J.(1) M/S Bharat Starch Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiff') has preferred a suit, being suit No.2788/94, against four defendants. The first two defendants are M/s Prudent International Shipping and Trading Company Ltd., and M/s Andagro Services Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'defendants 1 & 2' respectively). The other two are the London Maritime Arbitrators. Association and Mr. J.A. Schofield, the arbitrator. Decree for declaration prayed for by the plaintiff in the suit is to the effect that there is no privity of contract between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 and consequently there does not exist any arbitration agreement between the plaintiff and defendant No.1. As a consequence to this it is prayed that defendant No.3 has no jurisdiction to entertain any arbitration proceedings and award, if any rendered by defendant No.4 would be illegal and nullity. Decree for injunction has been claimed restraining defendants 3 & 4 from proceedi...
Tag this Judgment!Ex. Major R.S. Budhwar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 58(1995)DLT339; 1995(34)DRJ426
C.M. Nayar, J. 1. The present writ petition challenges the legality of orders passed by the Government of India, Ministry of defense dated December 24, 1992, rejecting the post confirmation petition dated November 15, 1990, and affirming the finding, sentence, confirmation and pro amalgamation of General Court Martial held from January 4, 1989 to February 24, 1990. The petitioner has submitted the following facts in the petition, which may be reproduced briefly as under:--2. The petitioner during June, 1987 was serving as a Major in 8 JAT Regiment in Regular Army located in Kaying Area in the eastern sector. At that time, Col. S.S. Sahota was the Commanding Officer and Major Jaspal Singh was the Second-in-Command of the above said Regiment. On June 16,1987, at about 12.50 hours two jawans of 'A' Company 8 JAT Regiment, namely, Sepoy Mahavir Singh and L/NK Inderpal Singh absconded allegedly after shooting and killing Col. S.S. Sahota, Major Jaspal Singh, Capt. B.K. Chhetri and Capt. A. ...
Tag this Judgment!Anushree Contractor and Consultants Associates (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: (1995)53TTJ(Del)80
ORDERVIMAL GANDHI, J.M. :This appeal, by the assessee, for the asst. yr. 1989-90, is directed against the order of CIT(A)-I, New Delhi upholding the assessment order allowing depreciation at the rate of 33.33% instead of 100% claimed by the assessed under first proviso to s. 32(1)(ii) of the IT Act. Another ground relating to claim of investment allowance permissible under s. 32A(4) has been raised in the memo and it is contended that the assessed ought to have been allowed an opportunity to create requisite amount of investment allowance reserve to claim investment allowance in respect of cost of plant acquired and used for purposes of business. The latter ground is not arising out of the order of the CIT(A) and was not argued during the course of hearing of the appeal. It is, thereforee, not considered. We would only consider the assessor's claim under first provision to s. 32(1)(ii) of the IT Act.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellant-company, during the prev...
Tag this Judgment!