Delhi Court March 2000 Judgments

Anilama Associates Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(92)LC73Tri(Delhi)

1. These six appeals arise out of the same order. Therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The facts of the case in brief are that five appellants were issued show cause notice asking them to explain as to why duty should not be demanded from them and why penalty should not be imposed. The scrutiny of R.T. 12 returns reveals that the appellants had paid smaller amount of duty on the goods whereas they should have paid a larger amount because large quantities of goods were inspected by the railway authorities and because after an inspection of the goods by the railway authorities, the chances of diversion were rare. The appellants requested for certain documents as most of the papers of the appellants were taken away by the authorities. The Commissioner, while adjudicating the case, confirmed the demand of Rs. 63,50,509/- and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 50 lakh on M/s. Anilama Associates and Rs. ten lakh each on Shri Jeewan Lal, Ms. Meenu ...

Ravi Prakash Agarwal (Huf) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the block assessment order for the block period of previous years 1985-86 to 11th September, 1995 passed under s. 158BC(c) r/w s. 158BD of the IT Act, 1961.2. The facts in brief are that the storage and seizure operations were conducted on 11th September, 1995, in the business premises of M/s Raghunandan Prasad Saraf, Sarafa Bazaar, Meerut, and in the residential premises of the partners of the firm. Shri Ravi Prakash Agarwal was the partner in M/s. Raghunandan Prasad Saraf in his individual capacity.During the search and seizure operations in the business premises of Shri Ravi Prakash Agarwal, certain incriminating documents relating to M/s. Multi-Max Engineering Works of which Shri Ravi Prakash Agarwal (HUF) was the proprietor, were found and seized. Thereafter, account books including cash book, ledger and stock register were also impounded. A notice under s. 158BD was issued and served upon the assessee on 14th December, 1996. In respon...

Chhano Devi Vs. Delhi Municipal Development Authority

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000IVAD(Delhi)136; 86(2000)DLT213; 2000(54)DRJ922

ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the respondent authority to mutate Plot No. 39, Block-E, East of Kailash Residential Scheme, New Delhi in favor of the petitioner after the death of Sh. Muni Lal on the basis of the alleged will dated 12.3.1969 in accordance with the notice published by the authority in the newspaper on 22.10.1990 and its policy guidelines and Resolution No. 163/93. 2. It is stated in the writ petition that late Sh. Muni Lal was the owner of the plot of Land being No. E-39, East of Kailash, Residential Scheme, New Delhi. It is alleged that the petitioner was adopted by deceased Sh. Muni Lal vide deed of adoption dated 27.10.1969 which was duly registered in the Office of the Sub-Registrar. It was also alleged that the deceased Sh. Muni Lal left behind a registered will dated 12.3.1969 in favor of the petitioner. Sh. Muni Lal died on 29.5.1972 at Delhi, subsequent in which in the year 197...

Karan Techno-fab Limited Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000(54)DRJ63

ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the respondent to execute perpetual lease deed conveying title in the Industrial plot measuring 2024.20 square metre, bearing No. 40 Plot A, Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi so as to enable the petitioner to develop the same and also for a direction to refund the amount of Rs.4,87,159/- calculated as unearned increase and paid by the petitioner under protest Along with interest at 24% p.a. from 12.8.96 up to the date of refund. 2. An auction sale was held in respect of Industrial Plot No. 40, Block 'A', Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi. The said plot was auctioned by the Delhi Development Authority - Respondent and the highest offer was made by M/s. DD Leasing Pvt. Ltd. which was accepted by the DDA in the aforesaid auction sale. In accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Auction sale 25% of the bid amount was also deposited with the Respo...

Gurbachan Singh Awla Vs. Rajinder Singh and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 85(2000)DLT334; 2000(56)DRJ204

ORDERMadan B. Lokur, J.1. The Petitioner is a tenant on the first floor of property bearing No. F-119, East of Kailash, New Delhi. The Respondent claim to be the owners of this property and the landlords of the Petitioner. 2. The Respondents had filed an eviction petition under Clause (e) of the proviso to Section 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The case of the Respondents was that the suit premises were originally owned by one Smt. Krishna Kumari. She had sold the entire property to the Petitioners by a conveyance deed executed on 24th October, 1996 but the sale was with effect from 18th November, 1992 3. The Petitioner filed an application Along with an affidavit before the learned Additional Rent Controller seeking leave to defend the eviction petition. He denied the title of the Respondents. According to the Petitioner, Smt. Krishna Kumari had sold the property to Jagdish Arora and Uma Arora. She had sent a notice to this effect to th...

Love Pratap Soni Vs. Ksheer Sagar Cooperative Group Housing Society an ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)372; 2000(54)DRJ169

ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 11.4.1996 passed by the Financial Commissioner, Delhi dismissing the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner under Section 80 of Delhi Co-operative Societies Act as against the order dated 8.1.1996 passed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Delhi whereby she had approved the proposal of the respondent society under Rule 25(4) of the Rules framed under the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972 (hereinafter called the Act) for ceasing the membership of the petitioner from the said Society. 2. The petitioner was enrolled as a member of the respondent No. 1 society. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Rule 25 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules on 9.2.1993 directing him to show cause why his membership of the society be not ceased, as against which the petitioner filed his reply on 16.2.1993. The Managing Committee of respondent No. 1 vide its resolution dated 21.2.1993...

Ashok Kumar (Ex. Constable) Vs. Union of India and Others

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)388; 2000(53)DRJ352

ORDERR.S. Sodhi, J.1. The petitioner, Ashok Kumar, an Ex.Constable, Border Security Force, by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks to challenge the findings and sentence awarded by the General Security Force Court vide order dated 18th April, 1994, which were confirmed by the statutory authority as also the Central Government rejected the statutory petition of the petitioner against the findings and sentence of the said General Security Force Court vide order dated 29th July, 1995.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was enrolled in the Border Security Force as a Constable on 12th April, 1989 and after completion of training was posted in 142 Battalion BSF. During June, 1992 the petitioner was posted in FCompany, Headquarter, located a Border Out Post, Nayatal, Barmer Sector, Rajasthan, within the jurisdiction of Commandant 412 Battalion, BSF. That on 6th June, 1992 the petitioner was nominated by Head Constable Santokh Singh to work as Personal Or...

M/S. Star Estate Management Pvt. Ltd Vs. New Delhi Municipal Council a ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)619; AIR2000Delhi391; 2000(54)DRJ304

ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus quashing and setting aside the recovery notice issued for a sum of Rs.1,10,820/- dated 9.1.1997 and also to set aside and quash the entire proceedings conducted by the respondent/NDMC for the levy and assessment of property tax on the car parking space in building known as Tolstoy House, 15-17, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. 2. The petitioner company is undertaking the job of maintenance, upkeep and preservation of the building, operation of common services and management of the common areas including that of the building known as Tolstoy House, 15-17, Tolstoy Marg. For the aforesaid services rendered by the petitioner it charges and recovers a fixed amount from each of the occupants on account of car parking services. On 4.1.1993, assessment notices were issued by the respondent/NDMC to the petitioner. The said notices were for the years 1989-90 to 1993-94 and...

Delhi Development Authority and Others Vs. S.N. Kapoor and Others

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)905; 2000(53)DRJ562

ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. Both the aforesaid appeals have been preferred in this Court as against the order dated 24.4.1992 passed by the Additional District Judge allowing the appeal PPA No. 16/1991 filed by Shri Des Raj, one of the respondents in the present case. As the issues raised in both the appeals are common, I propose to dispose of both the appeals by this common judgment and order. 2. Shop No. 1181-A, New Subzi Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi, was auctioned by Delhi Development Authority. In the aforesaid auction conducted by Delhi Development Authority, Swaroop Singh was the highest bidder at Rs. 16,600. Said Swaroop Singh deposited 25% as per the terms and conditions being Rs. 4,100/- Along with an amount of Rs. 500/- as earnest money. On 16.11.1970 a letter was sent to Swaroop Singh communicating confirmation of the bid and asking him to pay the balance amount of Rs.12,000/- to be deposited by 16.12.1970. Later on by an order dated 30.7.1971 the name of Des Raj was included Along ...

Shakti Cottage Industries and ors. Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000(53)DRJ664A

M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the Petitioners seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the Respondent by quashing the demand for payment of the rates of premium at Rs. 214/- per sq. meter for 237 sq. meters and at Rs. 1306/-per sq. meter for 162 sq. meters. In the writ petition, a further relief is sought for restraining the Respondent from recovering premium for the plot of land situated at T-1/93, Mangol Puri Industrial Area, Phase-I, Delhi, at a rate higher than Rs. 200/- per sq. meter for the entire area.2. The Petitioners in 1973 started the business of manufacturing machinery in property No. 1022, Gali Chabuk Sawar, Bazar Lal Kuan, Delhi. It is stated that as per the Master Plan and Zonal Plan the said area is a non-conforming area which otherwise means that the said plot of land cannot be used for carrying on industrial activities.3. In 1976 the Respondent announced a scheme whereby it undertook to develop four industrial areas, Patpar Ga...