Delhi Court February 1995 Judgments

Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [1995]215ITR89(Delhi)

D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals) under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act)holding the petitioner not to be a 'Local Authority' and thus exempt from payment of Income Tax under Section 10(20) of the Act. The assessment proceedings in question are for the assessment year 1991-92. It appears, after the assessment order was made, attachment orders were issued against the petitioner for recovery of the tax demanded and it bank account attached. While issuing notice to show cause the Court restrained the respondents from effecting any recovery from the petitioner and also stayed the operation of the notices of demand. (2) The assessment order was made on 31.3.94 by the Assessing Officer. An appeal against this order was filed under the Act on 24.4.94. During the pendency of the appeal, it appears that the order of the...

Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (1996)130CTR(Del)520

BY THE COURT :This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of the Assessing Officer (AO) as well as the CIT(A) under the provisions of the IT Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), holding the petitioner not to be a 'local authority' and thus exempt from payment of income-tax under s. 10(20) of the Act. The assessment proceedings in question are for the asst. yr. 1991-92. It appears, after the assessment order was made, attachment orders were issued against the petitioner for recovery of the tax demanded and its bank account was attached. While issuing notice to show cause the Court restrained the respondents from effecting any recovery from the petitioner and also stayed the operation of the notices of demand.2. The assessment order was made on 31st March, 1994, by the AO. An appeal against this order was filed under the Act on 24th April, 1994. During the pendency of the appeal, it appears that the order of the AO was stayed. The appeal filed befo...

Punjab and Sind Bank Ltd. Vs. Labh Singh and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: I(1996)BC228; 58(1995)DLT668

Jaspal Singh, J. 1. Mr. Jaspal Singh, J.--History of this case starts from June 21, 1994 when defendant No. 1 took a loan of Rs. 56,000/- for purchase of a truck against its security and hypothecation and on surety and guarantee of defendant No. 2. Whereas defendant No. 1 executed the agreement of hypothecation, Demand Promissory Note besides other documents undertaking thereby to pay the loan amount on demand together with interest, defendant No. 2 executed letter of guarantee standing surety and guarantor for the refund of the loan amount and interest thereon at the agreed rate. The grievance of the plaintiff Bank is that defendant No. 1 made only two payments one of Rs. 2,200/- on December 17, 1974 and the second of Rs. 2,500/- on July 1, 1976 and thus committed default in payment of the amount of the Demand Promissory Note, interest and other charges. Hence this suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,09,991.50p. inclusive of interest.2. Defendant No. 2 was proceeded against ex-parte.3. Def...

Ruchika Bhartia Vs. C.B.S.E. and Another

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.N. Mittal, President: 1. This order will dispose of Complaint Nos. C-4/92 and C-532/92 which contain common questions of law and fact. The facts in the order are being given from C-4/92. The complainant appeared in the examination of Class X, held by the Central Board of Secondary Education (C.B.S.E.) Opp. Party No. 1 (Opp. Party. 1), but her result was not declared by them. Respondent No. 2 is the General Secretary, Sanjay Gandhi Education Society Ltd. The Society is running the school named a Sanjay Bal Vidhyalaya, Noida and Opp. Party. 3 is the Managar of the said school. The complainant has prayed that her result in the above said examination be declared and the mark-sheet or the certificate be issued to her by Opp. Party. 1. She has also claimed damages from the Opp. Parties. 2. The complaint has been contested by the Chairman of Secondary Education, Opp. Party 1. He inter-alia pleaded that the C.B.S.E. is not rendering any service, while conducting examinations and consequently...

Prosoya Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT344TriDel

1. In these two appeals filed by M/s. Prosoya Industries Ltd. (formerly known as Kalani Industries Pvt. Ltd.), Indore, the issue involved is the classification of the goods described as "Bio Health Heater". The importers had sought the classification under Tariff subheading No.9021.19 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Tariff), as Orthopaedic appliance. On the basis of the adjudication order passed by the Collector of Customs, New Delhi, Customs duty has been demanded under sub-heading No. 3926.90, as article of plastics, by the Appraiser (Customs). The appeal against the order of the Appraiser (Customs) demanding customs duty under sub-heading No. 3926.90 of the Tariff has been rejected by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi. The Revenue has filed cross objections with regard to the appeal filed by the appellants. As both the appeals emerge from the same bill of entry, they were taken together for hearing and are being disposed o...

Gold'N Sand Vs. Collector Of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(77)ELT383TriDel

1. M/s. Gold'n Sand and M/s. Sathya Deep Exports have filed the abovecaptioned appeals being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs, Customs House, Kandla. The said appeals were received on 22nd August, 1994. Applications for condonation of delay duly supported with affidavits have been filed. Since the issue involved is identical, the same are being disposed of by this common order. Shri L.P. Asthana, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellants. He pleaded that in the present matters the show cause notice was issued on 24-5-1993 and was received at Delhi address and there was no service though a mention was there on the show cause notice and the advocate had sent the reply on 11-8-1993 from Delhi address giving his address and the appellants had waived the personal hearing. The order was passed on 15-3-1994 and issued on 25-3-1994. He further stated that the Bench had ordered the production of the original records and he has been told by the learned...

Keshri Steels Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT178TriDel

1. None present for the appellants when the matter was called who, however, through their telegram received on 7-2-1995 requested decision on merits.2. Collector (Appeals) in his Order No. 18-CW/IND/91, dated 17-5-1991 disallowed higher notional credit taken subsequently on the ground that credit must be taken immediately on receipt of goods.3. Ld. DR reiterated the Department's arguments and leaves the matter to the judgment of the Bench.4. I have heard Ld. DR and perused the records of the case. The appellants contend that they took Modvat credit on 15-2-1989, 18-2-1989, 23-2-1989 and 27-2-1989 but while preparing the monthly report they discovered that higher notional credit was not taken which was available to them and therefore they took credit of the differential duty of Rs. 1,702.80 on 28-2-1989. In the Memo of Appeal, the appellants contend that Collector (Appeals) has not cited any authority under which the credit cannot be taken subsequently. The appellants rely on the case ...

Swaraj Mazda Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT586TriDel

1. M/s. Swaraj Mazda Limited had filed 8 appeals being aggrieved with the order-in-original dated 12-10-1994, passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh. Alongwith the appeals, they have also filed stay applications under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), praying for waiver of the pre-deposit of the Central Excise duty demand of Rs. 2,39,65,986.89 and for staying its recovery till the disposal of the appeals.2. All the 8 stay applications were heard on 25-1-1995 when Shri V.Sridharan, Advocate briefly narrated the facts of the case. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle chassis which were sent to M/s. Sutlej Coach Builders for body building. The ownership of the Chassis and the built-up vehicle remained with the appellants. After the body is built on the chassis, the completed vehicle was delivered by the coach builder to the appellant, or as per their directions, and the ownership of the ...

Shri Vinod Gupta and Others Vs. Shri Braham Vira Gupta and Others

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR1996Delhi102; 59(1995)DLT383

ORDERD. K. Jain, J. 1. This appeal under S. 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 (for short the Act) is preferred by defendants Nos. 1 to 4, in the suit, against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 28th September 1994 whereby appellants application, is 331/94 (wrongly noted as is 313/93) in Suit No. 3626/92, under O. 6, R. 5 and O. 11, R. 14 read with S. 151 of the C.P.C. seeking a direction to respondent No. 1/plaintiff to supply copies of the documents mentioned in the application and furnish better particulars was dismissed.2. In the suit defendants Nos. 1 and 5 are the sons of the plaintiff. Defendants 2 to 4 are the wife and two minor sons of defendant No. 1, defendants Nos. 6 and 7 are the wife and minor son of defendant No. 5 and defendant No. 8 is the unmarried daughter of the plaintiff. Plaintiff's case is that he started publishing business in the year 1946; all that he earned was his individual acquisition; with a view to provide his progeny aforesaid and to reduce t...

Kamal Kumar Vs. the State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)915; 1995CriLJ2204; 1995(1)Crimes735; 59(1995)DLT65

S.D. Pandit, J. 1. Kamal Kumar s/o Ram Ji Lal r/o F-72. Gali No. 5, Dakshin Puri, New Delhi stands convicted of the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default to suffer RI for Six months by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Session's case No. 235/88. 2. Deceased Roop Kumari is daughter of P.W. 3 Dharam Pal r/o F-509 Dakshin Puri, Dakshin Puri, New Delhi. This P.W. 3 Dharam Pal s/o Kishan Lal has got in all seven children and deceased Roop Kumari was his second child. His eldest son Chandar Sen is married. It seems that as the appellant and deceased Roop Kumari were residing in one and the same locality, they came in contact of each other and the said contact developed into a love affair between the two. Roop Kumari had left her education after 9th Standard about a year prior to incident. Roop Kumari was writing love letters to the present appellant Kamal Kumar and a...