Delhi Court April 1995 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.
inder Vijay Singh Vs. N.D.M.C
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-1995
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)1389; 1995(33)DRJ299; 1995RLR254
Y.K. Sabharwal, J. (1) In these two writ petitions the question involved is about the assessment of house tax under the provisions of Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (for short the Act) in respect of Flat No.3, Gauri Apartments, 3 and 4, South End Lane, New Delhi. In CW.3908/93, the assessment years in question are 1991-92 and 1992-93. In CW.4938/93, the assessment year is 1993-94.(2) The flat in question has been assessed by the assessing authority at the annual value of Rs.3,24,000.00 on the basis of actual rent fetched by the flat at the rate of Rs.27,000.00 per month. The appeals filed by the petitioner in respect of the assessments for the years 1991-92, 1992-93 were dismissed by Additional District Magistrate by a common order dated 12th February, 1993 which is impugned in C.W.3908/93. The Appellate order, however, directed that the petitioner is free to seek rebate for moveable furniture under N.D.M.C. House Tax Bye-laws. Since the appeals as afore- said had been dismissed and orders...
Wiegand India (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT331TriDel
1. By this Miscellaneous application, the appellant is seeking permission to place certain documents in support of their additional grounds raised therein that designing and fabrication undertaken by them is not exigible and they had mistakenly offered for assessment to excise duty classifying the impugned goods under Chapter 84 of the Schedule. The appellant in their application has submitted that the ground urged by them is a legal and jurisdictional issue, the same is to be permitted to them to raise it.2. These are counter and objections filed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi to the above application of the appellant. By mistake, the Registry has numbered it. As it is not an application but only a counter to the application filed by the appellant for raising additional grounds and to file supporting evidence thereto, the contents are accepted as arguments and the miscellaneous applications are otherwise rejected.3. We have heard Shri S.P. Mittal, the Learned Advocate ...
Green Carriers and Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commission ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: (1995)53TTJ(Del)177
ORDERN.S. CHOPRA, A.M. :The assessed as also the Revenue are in cross appeals against order dt. 2nd Nov., 1989 of the learned CIT(A). Both the appeals having been heard together, are disposed of by this common order.2. The first grievance of the assessed is against disallowance of a lump sum of Rs. 10,000 out of tyre expenses. The assessee-company is engaged in business of transport of goods with a network located in different parts of the country. Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the expenditure claimed by the assessed on tyres as relating to a newly acquired truck No. RSJ-3745 was excessive (Rs. 64,233) as compared to tyre expenses of various old trucks. The AO noted that the expenditure was incurred within a period of 10 months of the acquisition of the truck. He disallowed a sum of Rs. 10,000 on estimate basis. The assessed went in appeal before the learned CIT(A) but, however, failed to meet with any success.2.1 The learned authorised representative submitted that the authorities...
Jolly Televisions Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: (1995)LC71Tri(Delhi)
1. The issue involved in the present appeals is, as to whether the Additional Excise Duty can be levied and demanded on television sets exported out of India. The Collector (Appeals) in his impugned Order has confirmed the demand, inter alia, on the ground that Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 does not permit export of the goods without payment of duty leviable under the Finance Act, 1985 in the absence of any specific Notification exempting payment of Additional Excise Duty on goods under export and further that the provisions of Rule 13 are not applicable as far as the levy of Additional Excise Duty under the Finance Act, 1985 is concerned.2. Arguing on the Stay Applications, Shri Surinder Kumar Mallick, learned counsel, submitted that the said issue was pending before the Government for consideration and ultimately the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) has issued a Circular No. 93/4/95-CX, dated 18th January, 1995 opining that "It is clear that this AED was in lie...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Jandial Shoe Factory
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: (1995)LC253Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed by the Department against the Order-in-Appeal dated 29-7-1986 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.2. The point to be considered in this case is whether the respondents were entitled to exemption from payment of duty under Tariff Item 36 of CET in terms of Notification No. 88/77, dated 9-5-1977 as amended.3. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of footwear falling under T.I. 36 of CET. Show cause notice was issued to the respondents based upon the report of the Central Excise Officers who searched the factory premises on 23-10-1981 on the ground that they were not entitled to exemption since visiting officer found 63 workers engaged in the manufacture of footwear and also found that electric motor of 2 H.P. was installed in addition to pasting machine of 1/2 H.P. Since total power used in the manufacture of footwear was found to be 2.5 H.P. including one pasting machine installed with 1/2 H.P. motor in the precincts, which...
Gupta Manufacturing Company Vs. Collector of C. Ex
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT172TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 31-5-1991 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh.2. Facts briefly are the appellants are the manufacturers of iron channel other than slotted channel from iron flats below 5 mm in thickness which are rolled in muffle furnace to get the resultant product. These channels are used to hold rubber tyre fixed to the rim of the wheels of Rehri/Tonga. The Department sought to classify these goods under Item 26AA(ia) of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff whereas the claim of the appellants herein was that these goods would rightly fall for classification under Item 68 of CET covering goods not elsewhere specified in the tariff. When the matter was called both the parties agreed that the issue with reference to classification of these goods now stand settled by the decision of the Tribunal in its final Order No. 124/91-B1, dated 7-6-1993 in the case of M/s. Mahabir Engineering Works v. Collector of Central Excise, Chan...
Rajesh Kumar Alias Kala Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ607
P.K. Bahri, J.1. Rajesh Kumar alias Kala S/o Ram Lal and Vikram Singh, S/o Munshi Ram have been convicted of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and they have also been convicted of offences punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and Vikram Singh has also been convicted of an offence under Section 27 of The Arms Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months on that count with the direction that substantive sentences shall run concurrently vide judgment dated January 11, 1991 of an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. Both these convicts have filed the present appeals which are being decided by this judgment. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that PW-3, Manju Aggarwa...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Chetan Dass Lachhman Dass
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: 58(1995)DLT841; [1995]214ITR726(Delhi)
Dr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. This petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been filed by the Revenue for a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal relevant to the assessment year 1983-84 to state a case and refer to this court for its opinion the following question stated to be a question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in cancelling penalty of Rs. 2,00,890 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act ?' 2. The assessee-firm carried on business in hing, jeera, dry fruits, etc., in Delhi and Bombay. The assessed filed its return of income for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1983-84 on September 28, 1983, declaring its total income at Rs. 71,850. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment of the assessed on March 25, 1986, computing the total income of the assessed at Rs. 11,27,429. In the appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the said amou...
Rakesh Aggarwal Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2180; 1995(3)Crimes149; 1995(33)DRJ414
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) Rakesh Aggarwal s/o Shri Ram Kishan Dass Aggarwal has filed this appeal challenging the judgment and order dated November 18, 1988, of an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, by which he has been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. (2) The case of the prosecution, in breif, is that Public Witness 6 Smt.Kanta Sharma, her brother Public Witness 10 Keshav Chand and their brother Subhash (since deceased) were living in house No.51, Lane Raja Kidar Nath, Chawri Bazar, Delhi. The appellant was a friend of Subhash. Appellant had allegedly loaned some money to Subhash. On July 16, 1984, the two brothers accompanied by their sister at about 11.30 Am were proceeding to temple Chaurasi Ghante for having some pooja on the auspicious day of Monday of Sawan. They had started from their house and were proceedings in through churiwalan road and they found appellant standing opposite to th...
Szechwan Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Coal India Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: 1995IIAD(Delhi)99; 58(1995)DLT525
N.G. Nandi, J.1. In the suit on the basis of offer dated 15.7.1993 by the plaintiff and the writing dated 23.8.1993 by the defendant the plaintiff prays for the relief of permanent injunction seeking to restrain the defendant from terminating the management contract of the plaintiff with regard to the guest house at A-59, New Friends Colony, New Delhi and also perpetually seeking to restrain the defendant from accepting any tender or offer for the management contract of the said guest house contending that the plaintiff's offer dated 15.7.1993 has been accepted by the defendant vide its communication dated 23.8.1993 and that the same is the binding contract which is for the period of five years; that the defendant has not terminated the plaintiff contract and that before impliedly terminating the plaintiff's contract the plaintiff has not been heard and the principles of natural justice have been violated by the defendant and the defendant cannot accept the tender of any other person w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »