Delhi Court May 1996 Judgments

Leader Valves (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (1996)55TTJ(Del)532

ORDERB. M. KOTHARI, A. M. :The assessed has raised following grounds in this appeal :'1. That the CIT(A) has wrongly upheld that the appellants claim for interest under s. 214(2) was not covered by provisions of s. 154.2. That the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that in view of the direct authority of Honble High Court reported as Deep Chand Jain vs . ITO , there was no question of there being two opinions on the subject.3. That the CIT(A) has further erred in holding that appellant was not entitled to interest under s. 244(1A) of Rs. 31,302 by misinterpreting the provisions.4. That the order of the Asstt. CIT and CIT(A) are against law and facts of the case.'2. The brief facts relating to the aforesaid appeal are as under. The appellant-company filed its return of income on 11th Nov., 1980, declaring taxable income of Rs. 11,36,270. The appellant had paid advance tax of Rs. 7,09,500 in one Installment on 21st Dec., 1979. The accounting year ended on 30th June, 1979. The original asses...

Satish Mehra Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Mr. Desh Bandhu, Member: 1. The dispute in this case relates to the action of opposite party-Bank in making renewal in a single name FCNRs (Fixed Deposit) which stood in joint names in contravention of the instructions of the complainant Banks own instructions on the subject and well accepted practice of banking. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the complainant is a non-resident Indian settled in U.S.A. He opened a Foreign Currency Non Resident Fixed Deposit Account with the opposite party on 13.9.85 and deposited a sum of $ 3,000 for a period of 12 months. On 11.11.86 he wrote to the respondent to add the name of his wife Mrs. Anita Mehra in the Fixed Deposit and that the amount shall be payable to either of them. Opposite Party Bank carried out the instructions accordingly. On 21.10.88 the complainant got another FCNR issued in the joint name of himself and his wife for US $1,000. The FCN Rs were got renewed by the complainant year after year. The last renewal done was on 4.11....

Northern Railway Vs. Lt. Col. N.C. Mitra

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. Lt. Col. N.C. Mitra, hereinafter referred to as the complainant, deposited his baggage comprising three VIP suitcases and one air-bag in the Cloak Room at New Delhi Railway Station on 28.9.92 for which he was issued four receipts. On the following day when the complainant went to collect the baggage, one VIP suit-case bearing receipt No. 887436 was found missing. The matter was reported to the Station Supdt., New Delhi Railway Station and First Information Report was lodged with the GRP Police Station. Alongwith the FIR a list of articles, cash jewellery etc. which had been placed in the suit-case totaling Rs. 18,875/- was given. The complainant addressed a letter to the Chief Commercial Supdt., Northern Railway on 23.10.92 and on receiving advice from him he also lodged a claim with the Chief Claim Officer on 16.2.93. The complainant failed to get any relief and accordingly approached the District Forum-II claiming the value of the goods lost besides compe...

Naresh Chandra Chandrashankar Purani and Others Vs. K.B. Corporation a ...

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.C. Mankad, President: 1. Complainants are members of four Co-operative Housing Societies which were registered in July, 1989, and they have filed this complaint claiming compensation under various heads and other reliefs. The complaint is filed against opponent No. 1 who is a builder, four Co-operative Societies-opponents Nos. 2 to 5 and Architect who is opponent No. 6. It is the case of the complainants that the four Societies had entered into contracts with opponent No. 1 for construction of houses and the payment of the price of the houses was to be made from the amounts collected from them from time to time. The grievances of the complainants are that there are many defects in the construction work, that the opponents had obtained their signatures on blank papers, that accounts of income and expenditure were not given by opponents Nos. 1 to 5, that receipts were not given in respect of cash amounts collected from them, that they had suffered mental tension on account of their sig...

Shruti Enterprises Vs. Daya Nand

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1996IIAD(Delhi)661; 63(1996)DLT68; 1996(38)DRJ168; 1996RLR267

J.K. Mehra, J.(1) This is a revision petition filed by the. tenant M/s Shruti Enterprises against the order of first appellate Court of Shri Raghuvir Singh, Senior Civil Judge. In brief, the case of the petitioner is that the tenanted premises situated at 9A, Hauz Khas, New Delhi have been let out to the petitioner firm vide lease deed dated 1st February 1991 for the commercial purposes including that of using the demised premises as a restaurant or for any other allied purposes. Some. of the relevant clauses which were referred to by the parties in the present case read as under: '(I)THE Lessee Hereby agrees with the Lesser as follows:- (a) ......... (b) ......... (c) ......... (d) At all times during the said term to use and occupy the demised properly for commercial purposes and not to carry on or permit to be carried on any ostensive or prohibited trade or business in the said premises. (e) ......... (f) The lessee undertake to affect repairs, white washing every year and distemper...

Rajinder Kumar Sharma Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1996IIAD(Delhi)371; 1996CriLJ2810; 52(1996)DLT497

Mohd. Shamim, J. (1) Appellant Rajinder Kumar Sharma was tried by an Additional Sessions Judge for murder of Shri P.R. Sood, ( hereinafter referred to as the deceased), under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life vide judgment and order dated Aug., 31, 1992. (2) The facts leading to the present appeal which find a mention in the report under section 173 Cr.P.C, F.I.R. and in the statements of the prosecution witnesses are as follows: that Asi Samey Singh during the intervening night of 6/7th January, 1988 was posted as Duty Officer at Police Station Chitranjan Park from 8.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. He received an information from Police Control Room through Inspector Gurdayal Chand, that he had been informed by some un-known person with regard to an incident of firing at E-510, Greater Kailash, Part Ii, New Delhi. The said information was recorded at Seriall No. 15A in the daily diary ( vide Ex. PW13/A). A copy of the said report was prepared...

indraprastha Sehkari Bank Ltd. Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1996IIIAD(Delhi)316; 63(1996)DLT204; 1996(38)DRJ163

R.C. Lahoti, J.(1) Indraprashta Sahkari Bank Ltd., the petitioners No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank') is a co-operative bank, governed by the provisions of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1972 and the Rules framed thereunder. Satish Kumar Gupta, the respondent No.1, has been a promoter member of the Bank. He was elected a director of the Bank on 27.9.92. The Bank received a complaint dated 2.9.93 alleging that the respondent No. 1 was carrying on a competing business with that of the Bank within the local limits of Delhi as he was engaging in the business of providing finance to its members from Umang Leasing & Credit Company Pvt.Ltd. The complaint so received was included in the Agenda dated 3.9.93 drawn up for the meeting of the Board of Directors scheduled to be held on 6.9.93. A show cause notice was also issued to the respondent No.1 to appear before the Board of Directors on 6.9.93 and to explain his position on the allegation of his carrying on a similar business...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Kanwal Engineers

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)(87)ELT141TriDel

1. These revenue appeals are directed against common Order in Appeal No. 1911-14/CE/Chd./91, dated 12-12-1991 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). The issue relates to admissibility or otherwise of refund in respect of credit obtained on inputs used in the manufacture of final products which are exported under bond.2. Arguing for the revenue the learned D.R. submits that the refund claim had been rejected on the ground that there was no AR 4/AR 4A from which export could be established. Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in allowing such refund claim. Only on the basis of shipping bills and bill of lading the Commissioner (Appeals) was not authorised to sanction the refund.3. Arguing on behalf of the respondent the learned advocate submits that all the necessary documents like GP 2, shipping bill, bill of lading, invoices, bank certificates were attached to the refund claim.Such claim cannot be rejected merely because there was no AR 4/AR 4A since otherwise the fact of export wa...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Vansal Electricals (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)(87)ELT285TriDel

1. This revenue appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No.317-CE/KNP/85, dated 20-9-1985 of Commissioner (Appeals).2. The issue relates to admissibility or otherwise of proforma credit in case of duty paid stampings and laminations brought into factory as inputs for the manufacture of electric fans when at the intermediate stage electric motors are exempted from duty. 3. Arguing for the revenue the learned D.R. submits that since the electric motors are independently exempted under Notification 28/69, dated 1-6-1969 as amended by Notification 175/73 no credit is admissible and Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in allowing such credit.4. Arguing for the respondents the learned advocate submits that they do not remove the electric motors from the factory but these motors are captively used in production of electric fans. The credit would have been inadmissible only in case electric motors had been removed from the factory without payment of duty. This is not the case here. In this co...

Dda Builders Assoc. Vs. Dda

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR1996Delhi364; ILR1996Delhi274b

ORDER1. This order shall also govern the disposal of CWP No. 770/96 as both the petitions raise common questions of facts and law.2. Brief facts leading to filing of these petitions are that pursuant to the directions given by the Supreme Court in W. P. (Civil) No. 4077/85 the respondent issued tender notices inviting tenders from experienced contractors for construction of sewerage pumping stations, command tanks : and sewerage treatment plants etc. There is a term in all the NITs (Annexures P. 1/1 to P. 1/4) that the tenders will be issued to the con-tractors having experience in construction ofsimilar work and have executed at least two works of similar nature each costing not less than Rs. 100.00 lakhs (Annexures P. 1/1 to P. 1/3). They also require to submit a certificate of satisfactory performance of two works of similar nature from the organisation to whom the works had been executed. The aforesaid conditions in the NITs, arc being impugned in the petition.3. According to the p...