Delhi Court August 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.
Telemechanique and Control (i) Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT614TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order dated 4-7-1991 passed by the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) by which he held that the order passed by the Deputy Collector imposing a penalty of Rs. 2,000/- on the appellants was sustainable. Appearing on behalf of the appellants Shri S.S. Mehra, Learned Consultant submitted that the appellants factory was visited by the Central Excise Officers on 24-9-1986 when after checking the accounts certain excesses and shortages over the R.G.I balance was found. He added that the Collector (Appeals) had held the discrepancy has arisen because of improper accounting and except one item all other items were accounted for. He added on that ground that there was no deliberate attempt to evade duty. The Collector (Appeals) had held that the charge of clandestine removal was not sustainable. He submitted that in view of this finding by the Collector (Appeals) the imposition of penalty of Rs. 2,000/- held as sustainable by him has to be deemed as illegal. H...
Bhurji Super-tek Industries (P) Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT146TriDel
1. Arguing upon the application for waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 1,42,000/- confirmed by the authorities below on 'stamping foils' imported by the applicants, Shri Lachman Dev, Learned Consultant submits that the imported goods were classifiable under Heading 32.12 of the Import Tariff Schedule and assessed to duty and the rate of duty applicable was as provided in Notification No. 42/90. However, before the goods were released on payment of duties, the applicants had executed a bond for provisional assessment and one of the conditions in the bond was that the proper officer would call for such documents and information as he deemed fit for the purpose of finalisation of the assessment. The applicants did not produce any end-use certificate and for non-production of such a certificate the Department has confirmed the duty on the ground that no end-use certificate was produced. He submits that the production of end-use certificate is not a condition stipulated in Notification No. 42/90...
Sushil Sharma Vs. Vijay NaraIn Pandey
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Delhi116
ORDER1. Plaintiff shri Sushil Sharma has come before this Court with the case that he is the owner of free hold plot bearing No. 145, Savitri Nagar, Post Office Malviya Nagar, New Delhi. That defendant Mr. Vijay Narain Pandey is a builder and contractor. According to the plaintiff, defendant entered into a contract to bring down the existing structure on the said plot and to built a multi stored residential flats with the right to sell out the flats except one flat which was to be chosen by the plaintiff himself and to pay the amount of Rs. 30 lakhs to the plaintiff. The said agreement took place on 4th of May, 1989 and in part performance of the said agreement defendant paid a cheque of Rs. 2 lakh and agreed to pay the remaining amount within 18 months. But when the plaintiff presented the said cheque it was dishonoured.Therefore, plaintiff contacted defendant. At that time, defendant again gave three cheques of Rs. 1 lakh each and promised to pay the remaining amount as agreed. When ...
The Sports Authority of India Vs. a and a Enterprises
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: 60(1995)DLT335
Jaspal Singh, J. (1) This is a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. None is present on behalf of the respondent today. On the last date of hearing also none was present on its behalf. Even counter affidavits by way of evidence have not been filed by it despite last opportunity having been granted. (2) In support of its case the petitioner has placed on the record an affidavit of one Shri Rajesh Dhingra which shows that the petitioner had appointed the respondent as an agent for running of sports raffle and with regard to the same had entered into an agreement with it on 11th May, 1984. The said agreement was to be valid for a period of one year and the raffle for the period covered by the agreement was to be run under the name and style of National Sports Raffle. The date of the draw was fixed as 25th July, 1984 initially but later extended to 29th September, 1984. The draw was to be conducted at New Delhi in the manner as stipulated in the agreement and soon thereafter th...
Punjab and Sind Bank Vs. Harjeet Kaur and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: 60(1995)DLT62
S.D. Pandit, J.(1) Plaintiff is a Bank and has filed the present suit to get a decree for Rs. 1,87,401.49. (2) It is the case of the plaintiff that defendant No. 1 Harjeet Kaur applied for financial assistance of Rs. 1,50,000.00 against the mortgage of her Bungalow No. C/ 30, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. She also agreed to pay interest @ 7% over and above the Reserve Bank of India rate of interest, with minimum interest of 16 per cent per annum. The said prayer of defendant No. 1 Harjeet Kaur was accepted. On 27th May, 1976, an amount of Rs. l,50,000.00 was paid to her on executing equitable mortgage and it was agreed to repay the amount of Rs. l,50,000.00 in monthly Installment of Rs. 3,500.00 but the defendant No. 1 never paid regular Installments. thereforee, additional security was taken from her by obtaining the guarantee executed by defendant No. 2 on 6th May, 1977. On 30th September, 1977, the defendant No. 1 was owing a sum of Rs. 1,65,841.67 and the defendant No. I had confirmed...
Kanta Kumari and ors. Vs. Lakhi Ram and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT758
C.M. Nayar, J.(1) The present appeal is directed against the award dated September 30, 1981, passed by Shri H.P.Bagchi, Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Delhi. (2) The appellants-claimants filed petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 arising out of the accident that occurred on December 26,1978 at about 6 p.m. on road going from Hindu Rao Hospital towards Chauburja under the jurisdiction of P.S. Civil Lines, Delhi. The deceased Charan Dass was driving motor cycle No. Dlm 7090 along with Manjit Singh Sethi who was sitting on the pillion seat. They were going from Hindu Rao Hospital towards Mall Road and when they were on the left side towards North i.e. Chauburja and had gone about 100 yds from the out-gate of the hospital, truck No. DHG-1121 driven by respondent No. I in due course of his employment with respondents 2 and 3, came from the opposite direction and hit the motor cycle with great force after coming on the wrong side. It was further alleged that ...
Kuldip Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: 1996(36)DRJ24; 1996LabIC1759
Mahinder Narain, J. (1) Only a short question is involved in this petition. We issue Rule D.B.. and proceed to decide this petition. (2) The petitioner Kuldip Singh says that he has joined the Border Security Force on 4.9.1971 as a constable (Radio Mechanic). On 4.2.1973 he was promoted as head constable. He says that due to domestic circumstances, he' had to resign from the service in 1973.(3) The copy of the resignation letter has neither been filed with the petition, nor has it been filed by the respondent in response to the show cause notice. In fact, the respondent says that the resignation letter which was submitted by the petitioner was destroyed in the year 1991. (4) Consequent upon the resignation, the same was accepted. The acceptance order has been produced as annexure 1 by the respondents. The said acceptance of the resignation reads as under :- .BRONo. 1008 DATED:24.2.1983. Resignation THE resignation tendered by No.712980850 HC(RM) Kuldip Singh of 74 Bn Bsf is hereby ac...
Gtc Industries Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-1995
Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT264TriDel
1. This miscellaneous application is filed by the applicants for directing the Collector of Central Excise, Delhi as well as Collector of Central Excise, Bombay to withdraw detention order dated 21-8-1995 and lift the consequent detention of finished goods made by the Superintendent of Central Excise till the application for stay is heard and disposed of by this Tribunal.2. Ms. Malini Sud, learned Advocate appearing for the applicants submitted that the matter has come up for hearing on 7-7-1995, but it could not be taken up due to paucity of time. Accordingly matter has been adjourned to 14-9-1995. In spite of fact that the matter is pending before the Tribunal, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise without any prior notice issued a detention order under Rule 230 of the Central Excise Rules. By virtue of that order Superintendent of Central Excise has detained finished goods i.e., Cigarettes valued at Rs. 86,73,923. She submitted that for no fault of the applicants the matter, ha...
Ashok Leyland Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-1995
Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT87TriDel
1. The appellants are aggrieved with the order-in-appeal passed by the Collector (Appeals), New Delhi. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle chassis falling under Chapter 87 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were availing pro-forma credit under Rule 56A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 before 1-3-1986 and was having a balance of Rs. 8,34,986.55 as BED and Rs. 3,519.33 as SED as on 1-3-1986 in the RG-23 Part II being maintained by them under Rule 56A. They filed their declaration opting for Modvat under Rule 57A on 12-3-1986 and from 1-3-1986 to 12-3-1986 and took the credit of Rs. 6,46,950.00. It is alleged by the Department that they had, before filing the declaration, a balance of Rs. 14,81,938.55 as BED and Rs. 3,519.33 as SED in RG 23 Part II. It is alleged that as per Rule 57H(3), this amount of credit lying unutilised could have been transferred to the RG-23 A Part II account maintained under Rule 57A, after the same was allowed to be transferred by ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Shubhla Pharmacy
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-1995
Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT454TriDel
1. This Revenue Appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No.261/83, dated 29-9-1983 of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals).2. The issue relates to assessable value under Notification No. 161/66, dated 8-10-1966 which permits a discount of 25% from the retail price of medicines.3. Arguing for the Revenue, the Ld. D.R. submitted that the Respondents, during the period Nov., 1976 to April, 1978 declared the price of their goods as Rs. 3 per strip of 36 Tablets. The assessable value of Rs. 2.06 per strip for retail sale was determined by the Deptt. in terms of Notification No. 161 / 66, dated 8-10-1966, after allowing 25% discount on the retail price specified in the retail price list referred to in the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1979, issued under Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The Respondents supplied major part of their product in the wholesale to related firm and no discount was allowed in about 70% of the sales by wholesale.4. None was present for the respondents when th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »