Delhi Court December 1996 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.
Nav Bharat Banaspati and Allied Vs. C.C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: (1997)(92)ELT127TriDel
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.6-C.E./CHD/91, dated 31-12-1990 whereby the Commissioner confirmed the demand of duty leviable on spent earth manufactured by the appellant during the course of manufacture of vegetable product.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that appellants are engaged in manufacture of vegetable products falling under Heading 1504.00 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. He further submitted that appellants used activated earth in the manufacture of vegetable product as the bleaching agent. After some time this activated earth loses its bleaching ability and emerges as spent earth which is sold by the appellant. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Modi Vanaspati Manufacturing Company v. CCE reported in 1990 (47) E.L.T. 57 and decision of the Tribunal in Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CCE reported in 1985 (22) E.L.T. 232 and pleaded that spent bleaching earth is a waste material arising in manufac...
K.C. and Sons Appliances (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: (1997)LC81Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants had originally paid duty on the basis of value determined by the departmental authorities with reference to the selling price of their purchasers who were held to be their related persons. The stand of the department regarding their purchasers being related persons was set aside by the High Court of Gujarat which decision was upheld by the Supreme Court on appeal by the Government with the direction to assess the goods with reference to the value at which the present appellants had sold the goods to their wholesale dealer. It was further directed that such fresh assessment shall be made in accordance with the judgment in the Bombay Tyre International case and that if on such assessment being made, it was found that any amount was refundable by the Government to them, the same shall be refunded. The Assistant Collector then granted the refund to the appellants on 23-10-1986. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued on 22-4-1987 within the period of six months from t...
Gabriel India Ltd. Vs. Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financia ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: [1999]98CompCas793(Delhi); 65(1997)DLT1017
Dalveer Bhandari J. 1. The petitioner in this petition has prayed that the order dated June 10, 1996, of the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction be set aside/quashed and paras. 18(a), 18(b) and 18(d) of the order dated April 30, 1996, be also set aside and quashed and also para. 3(iv) of the impugned order dated June 10, 1996. 2. The petitioner-company was aggrieved by the sanctioned scheme and prayed that the scheme be modified in the following terms : (i) no interest is payable by the petitioner-company for the period from April 1, 1995, till the date of payment of one time settlement amount of Rs. 23.23 crores; (ii) the petitioner-company should not be directed to pay sales tax to the U.P. State Government; (iii) the scheme to be modified by which all the shareholders of the sick industrial company, i.e., SSL, are bound by the scheme sanctioned by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction and they have to compulsorily transfer the shareholdi...
Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. Vs. National Highways Authority of Ind ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)257; 1997(1)ARBLR343(Delhi); 1997(40)DRJ827
C.M. Nayar, J. (1) This petition is directed against the respondents for a writ of certiorari to quash the decision in the matter of issuance of letter of acceptance for award of the work under contract No.ll allegedly already approved by respondent No.l, National High- ways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Authority') in favor of respondent No.4 and for issuance of a writ of mandamus for directing respondents I and 2 to give effect immediately to its own resolution for award of the work under the said contract to the petitioner and for further directions to respondent No.3 to exercise its powers under Section 33 of the National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to ensure that preference granted to Indian citizens or Companies or Firms is not, in any manner, prejudiced or whittled down at the instance of any foreign body or agency which is detrimental to the interest of the Indian Bidders.(2) The petitioner is a Company duly...
Regal theatre Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)440; (1997)143CTR(Del)81; 1997(40)DRJ225; [1997]225ITR205(Delhi)
M. Jagannadha Rao, J. (1) This is a reference under Section 256 of the Income Tax Act,1961 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench) in respect of the assessment-year 1973-74 for which the relevant previous year ended on 31.10.1972. The question referred is as follows: 'WHETHER,on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that a part of the borrowing had been directed by the assessed to its non-business purposes and that the assessed is not entitled to claim interest on those borrowings under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act,1961?'(2) The petitioner is a partnership concern running a cinema called Regal Theatre in Delhi as also a restaurant. The dispute relates to disallowance of deduction towards interest in a sum of Rs. 23,166 out of a total claim for interest-deduction in a sum of Rs.26,108. (3) The Income-tax Officer in his order dated 20.10.73 noticed that the return filed by the assessed was of income of Rs. 2,67,...
Mishri Devi and ors. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC93; 1998ACJ665; 65(1997)DLT979
Usha Mehra, J. (1) These are two sets of appeal one filed by the legal heirs of deceased 0m Prakash and the other by the New India Assurance Company Ltd. Since the point involved in both these appeals is the same i.e. challenge to the amount of compensation awarded, hence these appeals are taken up together and disposed of by one order. (2) 20TH August, 1987 w.as the dark day in the life of Smt. Mishri Devi when her husband and father of S/Sh. Ram Kishan, Mahanand, Niraj, Sushil, Satish, Master Ashok as well as Km. Manisha Kaushik and Sunita was snatched away from them due to the accident caused by Sh.Trilochan Singh, driver of Mini Bus No. DLP-5663. Late Sh.Om Prakash was going on his two-wheeler Vespa Scooter on Malviya Nagar Road at 11.00 a.m. He was on his correct side of the road when from the opposite direction coming from Panchsheel Road crossing side, the Mini Bus in question driven by respondent No.2 in a rash and negligent manner hit his scooter. The bus dragged the scooter a...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Arun Sondhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC81; 1997ACJ1286; 65(1997)DLT989; 1997(40)DRJ424; (1997)IILLJ906Del
Usha Mehra, J. (1) Delhi Transport Corporation (in short D.T.C.) has assailed the order of the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (in short the Tribunal) on the ground that the compensation awarded is not only on the higher side but in fact based on no evidence. (2) In order to appreciate the challenge the brief facts of the case are that Arun Sondhi who was 21 years old was going on his motor cycle towards Irwin Hospital via Mathura Road on 4th March,1983 at about 7.20 p.m. Hardly had he reached near Purana Qila at 'T' Junction Mathura Road/Bhairon Road and took a turn towards Tilak Bridge, all of a sudden a Dtc bus driven by respondent No.1 coming from Sunder Nagar side and going towards Ito, hit his motor cycle from behind. The bus which was being driven at fast speed in a rash and negligent manner made him cripple for the rest of his life. The impact of this accident was so forceful that the motor cycle Along with the petitioner were thrown into the iron railing on the left side of the ...
VipIn Sehgal Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)473; 65(1997)DLT270; 1997(40)DRJ200
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.(1) RULE. (2) A Division Bench of this Court comprising of two of us referred two questions for consideration of this Full Bench. The referring order dated 8.10.1996 reads as follows:- 'LIST this matter before the Full Bench. The question for consideration in this writ petition is as to the meaning of the word 'apply' occurring in sub-clause (2) of Section 9 of the Cofeposa - 'In the case of any person detained under a detention order to which the provisions of sub-section (1) apply ...'The question is what is the meaning of word 'apply' Does it mean that a declaration under Section 9(1) actually made is sufficient or is it necessary that such a declaration should be a valid declaration This aspect has not been dealt with in detail in the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in Magudoom Meera Hammeem vs. Joint Secretary to the Government and Others (Cr.W.P.No. 83/95 decided on 17.8.1995). Even in the Full Bench Judgment reported as Akhilesh Kumar Tyagi vs . Union ...
Gyan Devi Saxena Vs. Mohinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)617; 65(1997)DLT764; 1997(40)DRJ538
K. Ramamoorthy, J. (1) The Plaintiff No.1 Mrs. Gian Devi wife of K.S. Saxena and plaintiff No.2 Smt. Bimal Saxena wife of Shri Mohan Saxena who is the daughter of plaintiff No.1 have filed the above suit claiming the relief of specific performance against the defendant Sardar Mohinder Singh. The case of the plaintiffs tersely stated is this: (2) On 26.07.1979, the defendant agreed to sell the plot of land bearing No. B-7/59 situate at Safdarjung residential Scheme measuring 281 sq. yds @ 725.00 per sq. yds. A sum of Rs. 10,000.00 was paid as an advance. The defendant was to execute the necessary documents within 30 days. On 22.08.1979 before the expiry of the 30 days period, the second plaintiff wrote a registered letter to the defendant to complete the documents as the plaintiffs are ready to pay the balance amount. (3) On 24.08.1979 a telegram was also sent to the defendant. The defendant did not act as per the terms of the agreement, thereforee, the plaintiffs had to file the presen...
Pradumn Dutt Sharma Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education Shiksha K ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 66(1997)DLT6
Devinder Gupta, J.1. Rule D.B.2. The petitioner is a Post Graduate Teacher, imparting education to students in Summer Field School, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. He has felt aggrieved against an order passed on 17.11.1993 (Annexure-VIII) by the respondent-Board declining to appoint him as a Practical Examiner. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of an appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to appoint him as the Examiner of Physics for the Senior School Certificate examination and to quash the order (Annexure-VIII) dated 17.11.1993 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education.3. It is alleged that the petitioner has been discharging his duties and functions with honesty, diligence and integrity. He has been enjoying very good reputation amongst his fellow teachers and the students. For the integrity and sincerity of the petitioner, he continued to be a Practical Examiner appointed ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »