Delhi Court March 1995 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1995 Page 11 of about 169 results (0.021 seconds)Paramjit Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)1355; 1995CriLJ3153; ILR1996Delhi90
P.K. Bahri, J. 1. The appellant, Paramjit Singh alias Pammi, S/o Sh. Moha Singh has been convicted of offences punishable under Section 302, I.P.C. and Section 324, I.P.C. vide judgment of an Additional Sessions Judge dated November 27, 1989 and vide separate order of the even date, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months on the first count and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for four months on the second count with the direction that substantive sentences shall run concurrently and the fine if realised in respect of the fine imposed regarding Section 324, the same shall be paid to injured Rajinder Pal as compensation. He has filed this appeal challenging his conviction and the sentences. 2. The 23rd day of ...
Tag this Judgment!Manish Sood Vs. Lt. Governor and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 58(1995)DLT328
Cyriac Joseph, J.(1) The petitioner in this civil writ petition is a minor and he is represented through his mother and natural guardian. (2) The respondents are: (1) Lt. Governor of Delhi, (2) The Director of Education, National Capital Territory of Delhi, (3) The Principal, Delhi Public School, Mathura Road, New Delhi, and (4) The Delhi Public School through its Manager, Mathura Road, New Delhi. (3) According to the averments in the petition, the petitioner is a student of the Delhi Public School, Mathura Road, New Delhi since 1985. He appeared in Class Xi examination in March 1994 in the Commerce (without mathematics) stream. When the results were declared the petitioner was declared to have failed in English and he was detained. The progress report shows that the petitioner got only 20% marks in English. Taking all the subjects together the aggregate marks obtained by the petitioner is 32%. When it was known that the petitioner had been detained, the petitioner's mother who is also...
Tag this Judgment!Manjit K. Singh Vs. S. Kanwarjit Singh
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 58(1995)DLT208
Devinder Gupta, J.(1) The orders passed on 2.12.1993 and 6.12.1993 by Shri J.D. Kapoor, Additional District Judge, Delhi in Hindu Marriage Case No.181/90 are under challenge in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the behest of the wife who is a respondent in the petition for grant of a decree for divorce preferred by the husband, pending in the Court below. (2) On 26.2.1990 a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was preferred by the husband on the ground that the wife after the solemnisation of marriage had voluntarily sexual intercourse with persons other than her spouse; that after solemnisation of marriage the wife treated the husband withcruelty; and that the wife has deserted the husband for a continuous period of not less than 2 years immediately preceding the date of presentation of the petition. On7.1.1991 the wife filed her reply. Rep...
Tag this Judgment!Siro Plast Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(77)ELT661TriDel
1. This appeal arises from the order-in-appeal dated 28-8-1992 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay. The dispute before the lower authorities was with regard to the product sheet moulding compound and the applicability of the exemption Notification No. 133/86 to this product and to Dough Moulding Compound.2. The Asstt. Collector classified these products under sub-heading 3907.91 of the Central Excise Tariff, 1985 and granted the benefit of the said notification. Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue appealed to the Collector. The ld. Collector has modified the order of the Asstt. Collector as follows :- (i) held that Sheet Metal Compound is classifiable under sub-heading 3920.39 attracting duty @ 60% by denying the benefit of the Notification No. 133/86. (ii) Confirmed the classification of Dough Metal Compound under sub-heading 3907.91 and held that this product can be considered for concessional rate of duty at 40% ad valorem under Notification No. 53/88, dated 1-3-1988 vid...
Tag this Judgment!S.B.M. Engg. Products (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT428TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order-in-appeal No.4321/83 BCH issued on 15-12-1983.2. Brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellants imported one Unit of Maccanofilm Programme Computer and claimed clearance of the same under O.G.L. vide Appendix 10(1) of AM 1982-83.They also claimed concessional assessment under Notification No.179/80, dated, 4th September, 1980 on the ground that the imported Unit of Maccanofilm Programme Computer is a part of Flat Bed Screen Printing Machine assessable under Heading 84.40(1). However, the Deputy Collector of Customs, Bombay, who adjudicated the case did not agree with the appellants and held that the subject goods were not component parts of machine but were computer system as defined in para 5(9) of the relevant policy. He also observed that the electronic equipment system, such as, the machine goods would fall under Serial No. 508 of Appendix 3 of the relevant policy. Accordingly, he ordered for the confiscation...
Tag this Judgment!Unipex Electronics Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT146TriDel
1. This appeal is against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi. By that order the Collector confirmed the finding of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise that Modvat credit taken on inputs used in "two-in-ones" could not be utilised towards payment of duty on tran-sister radios. He also confirmed the findings of the Assistant Collector that credit taken on inputs could not be utilised towards payment of duty on cassette player which were not declared as final product.2. I have heard Shri K.J. Ghairat, Advocate for the appellant and Shri B.D. Bhagat JDR for the Collector.3. It is the appellant's claim that there was a combined RG 23A register maintained. There is no one to one correlation between inputs and final products. It is argued on the second count that there is no definition in the trade between tape recorder and cassette player, therefore credit was correctly taken, tape recorders had been declared.4. Shri Bhagat argued for the department and ...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Square Deal Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT187TriDel
1. M/s. Square Deal Industries manufactured bolts and nuts classifiable under Tariff Item 52 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. They purchased nuts and washers, galvanised them and cleared the bolts on which the washers were fitted and the nuts screwed. The unit had paid duty on the bolts manufactured by it. The Department however, was of the view that for calculating the exemption limit under Notification No. 71/78, the value of the bolts, nuts and washers in the form in which they were cleared should be taken into account. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise came to this conclusion and confirmed the consequent demand of duty. In appeal the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay held that, since galvanising was not a process of manufacture, the unit was not required to pay duty, and set aside the Assistant Collector's order. The Department has now come up in appeal before us.2. We have heard Shri M.K. Jain, SDR for the Collector. He points out that the unit cleared ...
Tag this Judgment!Shantilal Soni Vs. Collector of Customs and Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT151TriDel
1. These two appeals, one under the Customs Act, 1962 and other under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 are against the order of the Collector of Customs, Jaipur. He has confiscated under these Acts the gold stated to have been recovered from Shri Shanti Lal Soni and imposed penalties of Rs. 10,000/- under each of the Acts on him.2. Briefly, the Collector's findings in his order is that the police authorities intercepted the appellant on 22nd December, 1986 and recovered gold bearing foreign marking from his person. Subsequently, following his interrogation gold bearing foreign marking were also recovered from his residence by the Police. This gold was handed over to the customs officers on 24th December, 1986. Shanti Lal subsequently, gave a statement which disclosed the manner in which he had come into the possession of the gold. On the basic of these data and others cited in the order, the Collector confiscated the gold and imposed the penalties. At the outset, Shri G.K. Rana, Advocate ...
Tag this Judgment!Johnson and Johnson Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT193TriDel
1. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. have filed this appeal feeling aggrieved by the order of Collector of Central Excise. The Collector had held :- "In the light of the aforesaid exposition, I hold that the assessee has failed to comply with the procedure laid down under the Law and have contravened the provisions under Rules 173B and 173F of Central Excise Rules, 1944, and are, therefore, liable to penal action as contemplated under Rule 173Q. The amount of duty totalling to Rs. 32,45,820/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty only) leviable on the goods captively consumed by M/s. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. Andheri-Kurla Road, Bombay-400072, during the period from 1-4-1981 to 30-9-1985 and 1-10-1985 to 31-12-1985 is confirmed under Section 11A(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and it shall be paid by the assessee immediately. I impose a penalty of Rs. 5.00 lakhs (Rupee Five Lakhs only) on M/s. Johnson & Johnson Ltd., Bombay 400072, under Rule 173...
Tag this Judgment!Garg Strips and Rolling Mills (P) Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT93TriDel
1. M/s. Garg Strips and Rolling Mills have filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). The Collector in his order had held :- "I have given a thoughtful consideration to the submission made in the appeal memorandum and assessee contended in the written brief. It is observed from the impugned order that during the course of personal hearing, the sample drawn from appellants factory was examined by the adjudicating authority in the presence of the Counsel as well as it was found that the said sample was of rectangular cross-section having width of uneven thickness being less than 600 m.m., whereas the appellants contended that the sample contained uneven thickness which cannot be classified under Heading No. 7211.59. The ratio of CEGAT decision cited supra cannot be made applicable in the instant appeal as the said decision categorically refers to Iron and Steel products not having rectangular cross-section and width of uneven thick...
Tag this Judgment!