Delhi Court January 2001 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hamdard Dawakhana (Wakf)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2001)171CTR(Del)222; [2001]249ITR601(Delhi)

Arijit Pasayat, C.J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions have been referred for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C' (for short the 'Tribunal') :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the running of the business of Hamdard Dawakhana by the assessed-trust was with a view to furthering the objects of the trust and quami income was eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the sum of Rs. 7,21,206 received by the assessed as income-tax refund while examining the question of application of income for charitable purpose ?'2. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue. There is no appearance on behalf of the assessed in spite of notice. The assessmen...

Shambhuji Vs. Adityanjee and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001VAD(Delhi)56; 90(2001)DLT321

S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. Admit. The matter has been heard with the consent of the parties and is being disposed of finally. 2. The plaintiffs who are respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the present petition filed a suit for injunction against the defendants on the allegations that property in suit was the self-acquired property of late Mr. O.P. Kulshreshtha and on his death, the property has been inherited by the parties to the suit. It was further alleged that defendants 1 to 3 were intending to grab the entire property left by late Mr. O.P. Kulshreshtha and were not only trying to forcefully dispossess the plaintiff and their family members from the premises in suit but they were also threatening to raise construction in the suit property so as to deprive the plaintiffs of their legitimate share in the property. 3. Prior to the filing of the suit by the plaintiffs, the defendants including the petitioner in the present petition had filed certain suits against the plaintiffs/respondents 1 and 2 and...

Nehru Enclave Residents Welfare Association Vs. V.K. Duggal, Commissio ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001IVAD(Delhi)797; 90(2001)DLT461

S.K. Mahajan, J.1. In a petition filed by the petitioner, Counsel for the Municipal Corporation of Delhi on 14th August, 1998 made a statement that in the action taken on 3rd March, 1997 and 14th March, 1997, all encroachments from the land pertaining to the writ petitioner had been removed and that the respondent-MCD had not permitted any commercial activity to be carried on in the disputed premises. On this statement being made, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn.2. Present petition for initiating contempt has been field on the ground that the action taken by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi on 3rd March, 1997 and 14th March, 1997 was only a temporary relief and the shopkeepers/car repair shops have again come up on the land and they are continuing to carry on their commercial activities. It is, thereforee, stated that the respondent have no regard to the Court and are intentionally flouting their own statement made before the Court.3. I have carefully read the statement ...

Rajpal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2001]250ITR832(Delhi); [2001]116TAXMAN805(Delhi)

Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. At the instance of the assessed, the following questions have been referred for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Delhi Bench 'E', New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal') :' 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the first appeal filed by the asses-see-firm before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on April 14, 1978, was bad for not containing the grounds of appeal ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have held the said omission to be of the nature of a mere irregularity and ought to have allowed the omission to be supplied ?' 2. The assessed's first appeal was dismissed on the ground that it was not accompanied by a memorandum of appeal. Analysing the factual position, the Tribunal held that the first appeal filed by the assessed was not maintainab...

Asstt. Cit Vs. Amadeus India (P) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2001]79ITD407(Delhi)

ORDERKeshaw Prasad, A.M.The appeal has been directed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 13-7-1998 pertaining to assessment year 1996-97. The only ground of appeal raised by the revenue relates to the deduction under section 80HHE of the Act.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the main business activity of the company is to make customers (mainly travel agents) online with AMADEUS CRS System. For connectivity to AMADEUS System agents are supplied with free of cost computers systems which are being provided by GTS. The agents are also provided with training and system usage free of charge by Amadeus India (P) Ltd.3. The agents receive latest information regarding schedules and availabilities of worldwide participants in the AMADEUS System, and create reservation data and records which are proceeded and exported immediately into the system, while data created is simultaneously processed in the AMADEUS Data Processing Centre abroad in Eroding, German...

Paramount Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2002)76TTJ(Del)127

ORDERC.L. Bokolia, A.M.This appeal is preferred by the assessed against the order passed by the assessing officer under section 158BC read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. A search under section 132 was carried out at the business premises of the appellant on 21-11-1996. The appellant is one of the companies of Modi group where Hindustan Dev. Corpn. is the flagship company. During the course of search, at the business premises of the assessed, books of account and documents were found and seized. The assessing officer, thereforee, issued a notice under section 158BC, dated 8-7-1997, directed the assessed to file return of undisclosed income for the block period from 1-4-1987, to 21-11-1996. In compliance to this notice, assessed filed a return on 12-9-1997, declaring nil undisclosed income. As against this, the assessing officer completed undisclosed income of the block period at Rs. 1,67,24,889. Against this order of the assessing officer, assessed has come in appeal before ...

M/S. R.S.L. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Indore

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. M/s R.S.L. Ltd. have filed the present appeal, being aggrieved with the Order No. 1346-CE/BPL/99 dated 3.11.1999 in which Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the Adjudication Order imposing penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- and confiscating excisable goods, namely Strips of Iron & Steel and Waste and scrap valued at Rs.33,99,,683/- for non-accounting them in RG-I Register with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs.5,00,000/-.2. Shri Naveen Mullick, learned Advocate, mentioned that on their visit to the factory premises of the Appellant on 19.9.1997, the Central Excise Officers found the following goods lying unaccounted in RG-I Register:-1. G.S.Strips 41.059 12,52,792-00 (below 60 mm)4. C.R. Strips 81.000 15,39,000-00 33,99,682-00 3. The learned Advocate submitted that the seizure was effected without taking into consideration the process of manufacture of the final products; that the major raw material, H.R. coils, was found quite correct in Raw Material Record which is e...

M/S. Spl Ltd. Vs. Cce Delhi-iii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal, filed by M/s S.P.L. Ltd., the issue involved is whether refund is admissiable to them of the Modvat Credit debited by them in 1994-1995 and the refund claim submitted in 1997.2. Shri M.P.Devanth, Ld. Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture ceramic tiles; that they were operating under the Value Based Advanced Licence (VBAL) Scheme that: in 1994 a licence was issued to them for duty free import of certain inputs worth Rs.22.5 lakhs with an obligation to export goods worth Rs. 62 Lakhs; that as they had also taken modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs, they had reversed a sum of Rs. 5,18,722/- on 24-12-1994, 15-6-95 24-6-1995; that they had written a letter dt. 19-6-95 to the Supdt Central Excise in which they pointed out that the modvat credit reversed by them was in excess of the modvat credit involved in the goods imported and used in the manufacture of good exported; that they had given a sufficient indication that they had paid amount in excess...

M/S. Puneet Steels and Alloys Vs. Cce, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. On careful examination of the records of this case and on hearing both sides, I find that this is a fit case for remand and accordingly, after allowing the present application unconditionally, I proceed to dispose of the appeal itself finally.2. The appellants, who were engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Ingots falling under Chapter Sub-Heading 7206.90 and were covered by the provisions of Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules read with Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, filed an abatement claim with the jurisdictional Commissioner of Central Excise for certain period. This claim was rejected by the Commissioner without personal hearing. The party, therefore, preferred appeal to this Tribunal. The Tribunal by order dated 24.11.99 set aside the Commissioner's order and remanded the matter to that authority for fresh disposal in accordance with the principles of natural justice. While the abatement claim was originally pending before the Commissioner, show-cause notice dated 4.9.9...

M/S. Rewa Fan Industries Vs. Cce, Bhopal

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT261TriDel

1. In this appeal, filed by M/s. Rewa Fan Industries, the issue the issue involved is whether the Modvat Credit is available to them on the strength of Gate Passes neither issued in their name nor endorsed in their favour.2. Shri M.P. Devnath, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants get their job work done through their job-workers stationed at Varanasi; that the inputs are sent directly to the job-workers by the manufacturer of the inputs as per advice; that their Head Office is also situated at Varanasi, and there is no unit named 'Rewa Fan Industries at Varanasi; that they directed M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd., Renukot, to sent the inputs directly to their job-workers at Varanasi. Accordingly M/s. Hindalco Industries despatched two consignments of inputs to job workers by mentioning the name on Gate-Passes as "M/s. Rewa Fan Industries, Varanasi"; that similarly M/s. Shalimar Paints had sent the inputs to their Head Office at Varanasi which was sent back to the factory at R...