Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1987)(12)ECC113
1. These appeals are directed against the order of the Collector of Customs, Bombay dated 27-5-1985. Since three appeals arise out of the same order, they are taken up together and are disposed of by this common order.2. The appellants imported what is described in the relevant invoices and Bills of Entry is "100% polyester lining material size 44". The price as per invoice was US$ 0.35 C.I.F. and the suppliers are M/s Shabi Boeki Shokai, Higashi Ku P.O., Osaka, Japan. The import was effected in three vessels namely, "s.s. Raya Glory", "s.s. Raya Fortune" and "s.s. Portoroz". The ships arrived on 4-11-1983 and 2-12-1983. The Bills of Lading were dated as follows :-Raya Glory 25-3-83 A total quantity of 3,01,393 yards was imported and the value declared was Rs. 10,86,375/-. 29 Bills of Entry were filed. Originally details of 13 import licences issued under 0.1 and 0.2 of Appendix 17 of Import Policy AM 1983 were given in respect of 5 Bills of Entry of appellants M/s East Punjab Traders...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:11. h April, 2019 Pronounced on:29. h April, 2019 + W.P.(C) 4902/2018 & CM APPLs.4903/2019, 4904/2019 % 1. RAM KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. C. Mohan Rao, Adv. with Mr. Lokesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ajay Verma, SSC for DDA with Mr. Dhanesh Relan, SC, Mr. Sumit Mishra, Ms. Komal Sorout and Mr. Rajiv Jha, Advs. Mr. P.S. Singh, Sr. Panel counsel with Mr. Rajpal Singh, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT The petitioner, whose land was compulsorily acquired, in 1992, under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Land Acquisition Act), is, as per the information stated to be available on the website of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), being allotted an alternative plot in Narela. Prior thereto, however, the petitioner had, in 1992 itself, been paid W.P. (C) 4902/2018 Page 1 of 65...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.750/2018 % Reserved on:28. h February, 2018 Date of Decision:23. d March, 2018 KAILASH GAHLOT & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manish Vashist, Mr. Sameer Vashist, Mr. J.P. Gupta, Mr. Rikky Gupta, Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Ms. Astha Gupta, Mr. Manashwy Jha and Mr. Ravi Raghunath, Advocates. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS. Versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Amit Sharma, Mr. Dipesh Sinha, Ms. Ayiala Imti and Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocates for ECI. Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC, Ms. Rajul Jain with Mr. Yuvraj Sharma, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC for GNCTD. Mr. Mudit Gupta and Mr. Sangam Kumar, Advocates for R-4. WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) No.751/2018 RAJESH RISHI & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manish Vashist, Mr. Sameer Vashist, Mr. J.P. Gupta, Mr. Rikky Gupta, Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Ms. Astha Gupta, Mr....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.750/2018 % Reserved on:28. h February, 2018 Date of Decision:23. d March, 2018 KAILASH GAHLOT & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manish Vashist, Mr. Sameer Vashist, Mr. J.P. Gupta, Mr. Rikky Gupta, Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Ms. Astha Gupta, Mr. Manashwy Jha and Mr. Ravi Raghunath, Advocates. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS. Versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Amit Sharma, Mr. Dipesh Sinha, Ms. Ayiala Imti and Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocates for ECI. Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC, Ms. Rajul Jain with Mr. Yuvraj Sharma, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC for GNCTD. Mr. Mudit Gupta and Mr. Sangam Kumar, Advocates for R-4. WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) No.751/2018 RAJESH RISHI & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manish Vashist, Mr. Sameer Vashist, Mr. J.P. Gupta, Mr. Rikky Gupta, Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Ms. Astha Gupta, Mr....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.750/2018 % Reserved on:28. h February, 2018 Date of Decision:23. d March, 2018 KAILASH GAHLOT & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manish Vashist, Mr. Sameer Vashist, Mr. J.P. Gupta, Mr. Rikky Gupta, Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Ms. Astha Gupta, Mr. Manashwy Jha and Mr. Ravi Raghunath, Advocates. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS. Versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Amit Sharma, Mr. Dipesh Sinha, Ms. Ayiala Imti and Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocates for ECI. Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC, Ms. Rajul Jain with Mr. Yuvraj Sharma, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC for GNCTD. Mr. Mudit Gupta and Mr. Sangam Kumar, Advocates for R-4. WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) No.751/2018 RAJESH RISHI & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manish Vashist, Mr. Sameer Vashist, Mr. J.P. Gupta, Mr. Rikky Gupta, Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Ms. Astha Gupta, Mr....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1999)69ITD69(Delhi)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dt. 23rd December, 1997 of the CIT(A), Dehradun for asst. yr. 1994-95.1.1. That the learned CIT(A), Dehra Dun, has erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in disallowing the appellant's claim of depreciation amounting to Rs. 12,50,48,50,000 in respect of assets to which it was eligible under s. 32 of the IT Act, 1961.1.2. That the learned CIT(A), Dehra Dun, ought to have held that under s. 43(6)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, the written down value should have been computed by the AO after taking into account the aggregate of the written down value of all assets falling within a block of assets at the beginning of the previous year i.e., 1st April, 1993, and adjusting it by increasing the actual cost of the assets acquired during the year and reducing it by the moneys payable in respect of any assets which were sold, discarded, demolished or destroyed during the previous year.1.3. That the learned CIT(A), Dehra ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:31. t January, 2019 Pronounced on:15. h March, 2019 + W.P.(C) 4374/2018 & CM No.16982/2018 ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Kamal Gupta and Ms. Pragya Agrawal, Advs. versus DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION AND ANR Through: Mr. Ramesh Singh, SC ..... RESPONDENTS for GNCTD with Mr. Chirayu Jain and Ms. N. Goyal, Advs. Mr. Khagesh B. Jha, Ms. Shikha Sharma Bagga, Advs. for Justice for All Reserved on:6. h February, 2019 Pronounced on:15. h March, 2019 + W.P.(C) 13546/2018 & CM APPL. 52763/2018 (for stay) MOUNT CARMEL SCHOOL SOCIETY AND ANR ....... Petitioners Through: Mr. Sunil Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Romy Chacko, Mr. Vedanta Varma, Mr. Chandan Kumar Mandal, Mr. Akhil Kumar Gola and Ms. Mannat Sandhu, Advs. versus DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ramesh Singh, SC with Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, ASC for W.P.(C) 4374/2018 & W.P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.2036/2016 Date of decision:15. h January, 2019 BHARTI INFRATEL LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Gaurav Jain, Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal and Ms. Deepika Agarwal, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Deepak Anand & Mr. Piyush Goyal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.: Bharti Infratel Limited (Petitioner/BIL, for short) by this writ petition impugns legality and validity of notice for re-assessment dated 31st March, 2015 issued under Section 148 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act', for short) for the Assessment Year 2008-09. BIL has also challenged the order dated 23rd February, 2016 passed by the Assessing Officer, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(2), the first respondent to the writ p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :21. t August, 2014 Judgment pronounced on :15. h October, 2014 % + I.A. No.11376/2014 in CS(OS) No.1808/2014 SANOFI INDIA LTD. & ANR. Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr.Pravin Anand, Adv. with Mr. Raunaq Kamath, Adv. versus UNIVERSAL NEUTRACEUTICALS PVT. LTD. ....Defendant Through Mr. Rahul Beruar, Adv.with Ms. Jasneet Kaur, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, copyright, passing off, unfair competition, dilution, tarnishment etc. against the defendant.2. By way of this order I propose to decide the application being I.A. No.11376/2014 under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC filed by the plaintiffs seeking interim injunction against the defendant restraining from using the mark/name UNIVERSAL or any other mark similar thereto including the domain name or doing any other act amounting to inf...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1998)(62)ECC591
1. These appeals have been filed against Order-in-Original No. 3/95, dated 29-12-1995 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi.Following are the particulars of the appellants :______________________________________________________________Appeal No. Name of the appellant Referred to asE/ 209/ 96- A M/s. I.T.C. Ltd. ITCE/210/96-A J.N. Sapru -E/211/96-A J. Narayan -E/288/96-A M/s. Asia Tobacco Ltd. ATCE/289/96-A M/s. Hyderabad Deccan Cigarette HDCF Factory Ltd.E/290/96-A M/s. Lakshmi Tobacco Co. LTCE/291/96-A M/s. Reliable Cigarettes RCTI and Tobacco IndustriesE/292/96-A M/s. Master Tobacco Co. MTCE/293/96 M/s. Crown Tobacco Co. CTCE/294/96-A R. Bhoothalingam 2. The particulars of demand of duty proposed in the show cause notice for the period 1-3-1983 to 28-2-1987 and demand confirmed and penalty imposed on the assessees are as follows :-_____________________________________________________________Concern Duty proposed Duty confirmed Penalty Penalty (in rupees) (in rupees) in...
Tag this Judgment!