Delhi Court February 1999 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.
Simplex Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC345Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants received Polyester Staple Fibre (duty free) for export production of cotton Polyester blended fabrics. The demand of duty over Rs. 3 lakhs has been made on the ground that the waste arising in the production of fabric has not been accounted for.2. Arguing the appeal, learned Counsel, Shri M.H. Patel submits that it is an undisputed fact that in the manufacture of yarn and fabric from staple fibre a certain quantity of waste arises. The appellants' records also show clearance of such waste under GP1's. He explains that according to the norm .1.211 kgs. of Polyester Staple Fabric is allowed to be received duty free for manufacture of fabrics containing 1 kg. of Polyester Staple Fibre under Rule 191BB. He submits that it is clear from this norm that wastage of about 20% arises in the manufacture. He also explains that the waste emerging is exempt from duty under Tariff Item 5503.39. He submits that the correlation of the input to export product as well as waste which wa...
Sunder Builders Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)355; AIR1999Delhi209; 78(1999)DLT439; 1999(49)DRJ363; (1999)122PLR11
ORDERS.K. Mahajan, J.1. This petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act was filed by the petitioner for filing of Agreement No. 30 of 1987-88 relating to the work of providing Kota Stone Flooring in Rajasthan Pavilion at Pragati Maidan, New Delhi and for reference of disputes which had arisen between the parties under the said contract to an Arbitrator. The petitioner was awarded the work of providing Kota Stone flooring in Rajasthan Pavallion at Pragati Maidan, New Delhi vide the aforesaid agreement. Certain disputes having arisen between the parties, the petitioner on June 20, 1998 requested the Chief Engineer (Building) P.W.D, Jaipur to appoint an Arbitrator for adjudication of the said disputes. The following claims were sought to be referred to the Arbitrator. (i) Claim No. 1 The contractor claims a sum of Rs.1,50,232.49 on account of first and final bill for the work actually executed. (ii) Claim No. 2 The contractor claim a sum of Rs. 2,300/- on account of earnest money. ...
Tilak Raj Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: 1999IIIAD(Delhi)362; 1999(49)DRJ18
ORDERJ.B. Goel, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 14th February, 1992 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (ASJ) whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (for short the 'NDPS Act') and sentenced to RI for 10 years and a fine of Rs. one lakh and in default of payment of fine SI for 3 months. 2. Briefly, the facts are that the appellant was an undertrial (in case FIR No. 111/89 under Sections 380/411 IPC) and an inmate in Tihar Jail. On 10th July, 1989 when he was returned after a meeting/interview with his relations in the meeting room, he was searched by SI Ganesh Murthy TSP at about 11.30 a.m. and on his search two paper packets containing smack concealed in two green chillies were recovered in the presence of PW S.K. Matta, Assistant Superintendent of Jail. The accused was produced before Shri Sunil Gupta, Deputy Superintendent of Jail ...
R.K. Bhatia Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)413
ORDERK. Ramamoorthy, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order of removal by the first respondent. The facts culminating in the writ petition could be narrated thus:Till 1989, the petitioner was working under the first respondent Board and a place lled 'Trilok Puri' was within his jurisdiction with reference to checking of meters. On the 24th of January, 1989, the petitioner inspected the premises of one Hari Shankar in respect of Meter No. K-127602 - 127588/DL installed at premises No.13/216, Trilok Puri, Delhi. The petitioner did not find any misuse. On the 8th of June, 1990, there was a joint inspection conducted by the Vigilance Department and it was found that there was misuse by the owner. On the basis of this, disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner and an inquiry was conducted. The inquiry officer gave his report taking a view that the charge leveled against the petitioner was only partially proved and what was proved was only the negligence on the part of t...
New Delhi Municipal Council Vs. Shri Aftab Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)730
ORDERMukul Mudgal, J.1. This writ petition filed by the NDMC challenges the Award of the Industrial Tribunal dated 7th August, 1996 passed in I.D. No. 109/91. On 6th March, 1997 notice limited to the question of delay in raising the issues involved in the reference in the year 1990 was issued by this Court to the respondents. Consequently, the scope of the present writ petition is confined to the said issue. The grave man of this issue arises from the plea of the petitioner that the respondent was selected on the post of Senior Lab. Technician and promoted on ad hoc basis from 16.10.1976. He was reverted back to his substantive post of Jr. Lab. Technician from 20.6.1978. 2. It has been contended by the petitioner in the writ petition that the impugned Award which grants the relief for the promotion of respondent as Sr. Lab. Technician at least from the date his Junior Smt. Rajni Gaur was promoted could not have been passed because the respondent's case suffers from unexplained delay an...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. General Industries Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: 77(1999)DLT737
D.P. Wadhwa, J. 1. This is a petition under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 filed by the Revenue. The assessment year involved is 1982-83. The Revenue want the following two questions to be referred to this Court for decision : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in holding that the interest paid to partners at Rs. 25,187 for which deduction was allowed in earlier assessment years could not be taxed under s. 41(1) of the IT Act when the amount was written back 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in holding that the onus was on the Assessing Officer to establish that deduction for an amount of Rs. 36,667 was allowed to the assessed in earlier assessment years even though the assessed was claiming exemption from tax in respect of this amount and relevant facts were in the personal knowledge of the assessed ?' 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. As far as question No...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rameshwar Dayal (Huf)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: [2000]241ITR204(Delhi)
Arun Kumar, J. 1. These income-tax references raise a common question about gifts made by the karta of a Hindu undivided family in favor of the coparceners/near relations. The references pertain to the assessment years 1970-71, 1975-76 and 1976-77. The question of law framed in these income-tax references are as under ; Income-tax Reference No. 12 of 1981 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the interest on amounts gifted by the karta of the Hindu undivided family to his son could not be included in the assessor's income ?' Income-tax Reference No. 192 of 1982 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and thereby directing that the two share income in question were to be excluded from the assessor's total income ?' (sic) Income-tax Reference No. 305 of 1982 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding th...
Mohan Vs. Dalel Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: 1999(49)DRJ189
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. The plaintiff filed this suit for specific performance of an Agreement to Sell dated 12.4.1996 whereby the defendants had allegedly agreed to sell, convey and transfer to the plaintiff the agricultural land in their bhumidari and possession comprised in khasra No. 59/9(4-16) and 59/10(4-12) in Village Nangal Thakaran, Tehsil Delhi @ Rs. 5,55,000/- per acre. The total land allegedly agreed to be sold measured 9 bighas and 8 biswas. The plaintiff is stated to have paid a sum of Rs. 1,10,000/- as advance to the defendants and the time of completion was fixed one year from the date of the agreement. In accordance with the agreement to sell, the defendants were allegedly required to obtain No Objection Certificate from the competent authority under the Delhi Land (Restriction on Transfer) Act, 1972 and Income Tax Clearance certificate and all other permissions and certificates required for the purpose to enable them to execute a valid and lawful sale deed of the land in ...
Modern Steel Industries Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)67TTJ(Del)76
ORDERU.B.S. Bedi, J.M.By means of present application assessee-appellant seeks to grant stay of outstanding demand for the assessment year 1993-94 and submitted that for the assessment year 1993-94 the appellant filed a return of income showing a total income of Rs. 9,71,010. Against the income returned an order of assessment was passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act by the assessing officer enhancing the total income to Rs. 11,89,140 vide order of regular assessment dated 22-3-1996. While making the assessment, the assessing officer made an addition of Rs. 3,43,117 in respect of the alleged difference in inflated purchases made from M/s Jay Shree Steels and M/s Jay Shree Industries and he also made an addition of Rs. 51,995 on the same alleged ground in respect of purchases from M/s Shree Ram Steel Centre.There were a few minor additions and disallowances made in the assessment by the assessing officer against which the applicant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Ap...
C.C.E. Vs. Omax Lab. (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC424Tri(Delhi)
1. Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 30-11-1994 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Central Excise, Pune.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of medicaments. The respondents filed a classification list in respect of their products and claimed the classification of the goods under Chapter Heading 3003.20. The adjudicating authority modified the classification of the products under Chapter Heading 3003.10 leviable to duty treating these medicaments as P & P medicaments as the word "Q-max" was printed in bold red letters in distinct manner on the label which established clear relationship with the product and the owner. The respondents filed an appeal. The Collector (Appeals) vide impugned order set aside the order passed by the Collector and allowed the appeal filed by the respondents.3. Ld. JDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that to make a medicine P & P medicine a brand name i.e. a name or a reg...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »