Delhi Court February 2000 Judgments

Suraj Bhan Mehta and 2 ors. Vs. C.C.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC612

1. When the matter was called Shri K.K. Anand, Ld. Advocate appeared fo appellant Shri Suraj Bhan Mehta (S.B. Mehta) in Appeal No.C/549/1995-NB. Non( was present for the other appellants.2. There is however a request from Shri Sanjay Kumar Beri (S.K. Beri) vide letter dated 6.7.99 requesting for adjournment on the ground that his counsel has gone ou of station for personal work.3. It is observed that the hearing of these appeals has been adjourned at the request of appellant, Shri S. K. Beri and others and their Advocate on a number o: occasions earlier such as 15.10.98, 15.3.99, 5.5.99, 12.8.99, 20.10.99 and 26.11.99 Since the Bench had already informed the parties as early as 12.8.99 that no further adjournment shall be allowed and the matter relates to appeals filed in 1995, it was decided to proceed with the case after hearing Ld. Counsel, Shri K.K. Anand and the Departmental Representative Shri M.M. Dube Ld. JDR.4. Facts: All the appeals arise from the Order-in-Original dt. 3.8.9...

Mrs. Padma JaIn Vs. Gift-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. The present appeal fifed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 4-8-1992 of DC(A)-V, New Delhi. It pertains to assessment year 1975-76. "1. That the learned DC(A)-V, has legally gone wrong in upholding the order of GTO that out of relinquishment of the assessee was a gift chargeable under section 4 of the Gift-tax Act. 2. That since the demised property was an HUF and no gift/demand gift resulted by the act of relinquishment of the assessee." 3. The assessee is an individual. Her case is that she relinquished her interest in HUF property by an oral partition for distributing equally between her two sons. The GTO treated the act of relinquishment of income by the assessee as gift. The assessee's contention was that the relinquishment of rights in properly was a unilateral act which was not accepted by the GTO who completed gift lax assessment determining the taxable gift at Rs. 41,644 after allowing exemption for Rs. 5000 under section 5(l)(ii). Aggrieved by the order, ...

Rattan Lal Katyal Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)139; 2000(2)ARBLR300(Delhi); 85(2000)DLT661; 2000(53)DRJ589; 2001(2)RAJ484

ORDERJ.B. Goel, J.1. This petition under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act') seeks declaration that there is no valid and concluded contract and as such there is no arbitration agreement also between the parties. 2. The petitioner is doing business under the name of Malik Company as its sole proprietor. It appears that in pursuance of tender enquiries issued from the office of Director General of Supplies and Disposals (for short 'the DGS&D;'), Government of India, the petitioner had submitted his tender alias to be opened on 19.7.1980 for the supply of Myrabolams Nuts. This was not accepted and on 9.10.1980 fresh quotations being invited, the petitioner had submitted the following quotations:- i) Our rate is Rs. 137.85 gross for nett, if the order is placed for full quantity. We will allow you 2% discount. ii) For dispatching from M.P. iii) Inspection at various places at dispatching station, by DEF, Kanpur. iv) No sales tax will be charges extra, but 'D' ...

Shri Karamjeet Singh Bedi Vs. State and Another

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)390; 2000(53)DRJ605

ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment/order passed by the Additional District Judge on 16.11.1996 dismissing the petition filed by the appellant and Smt. Ajit Kaur Bedi praying for grant of probate/letters of administration in respect of the estate left behind by the deceased S. Sant Singh Bedi on the basis of his registered WILL dated 29. 7. 1975. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings Smt. Ajit Kaur died on 26. 6.1990 and in view of the aforesaid eventuality an application was filed by the appellant under Order 32 Rule 12 the Code of Civil Procedure for permission that he be allowed to continue the proceedings in his own name because of his attaining majority during the pendency of the proceedings and also on account of the fact that Smt. Ajit Kaur died leaving behind the appellant as her sole surviving heir and legal representative. The said application was allowed and thereforee, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant alon...

United Phosphorous Vs. Director General (Safeguard)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000(70)ECC622; 2000(118)ELT326(Del)

ORDER1. The petitioners claiming to be domestic producers of yellow phosphorous complain that they have suffered serious injury on account of imports of the said item. They approached the Director General (Safeguards) as per the provisions of Safeguard Duty Rules framed under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Director General (Safeguards) has given his final findings which have been challenged by the petitioners by way of present writ petition. The conclusion recorded in para 22 of the final findings of the Director General (Safeguards) is - 'The domestic producers of White/Yellow Phosphorous have suffered serious injury caused by the increased imports of White/Yellow Phosphorous. It is, however, not in the public interest to impose Safeguard Duty on imports of White/Yellow phosphorous. No recommendation to impose Safeguard Duty on White/Yellow Phosphorous imported into India is, thereforee, made.'2. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that having found that serious inju...