Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1983(12)ELT258(Del)
Sachar, J. 1. This group of petitioners was heard together as common points arose in all these petitions. The arguments were addressed in C.W. 2131/1982. A part from details as to the quantity to be imported and the dates there is no difference and the judgment in this case will govern the other writ petitions also. 2. The petitioners import defective/secondary grade stainless steel circles. The said material is broadly used in the consumption of industries engaged in the manufacture of the utensils in the country. By Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter to be called the 1962 Act) duty of Customs shall be levied at such rates as may be specified under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter to be called the 1975 Act). Goods having been received the petitioner presented their bill of entry for clearance to the Customs Authorities. The petitioners claim that they were entitled to clear the goods by paying rate of duty under entry No. 73.15(1) in the schedule to 1975 Act, wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1985]156ITR463(Raj)
Sidhu, J.1. On an application made by the assessee under Section 256(1), Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter called 'the Act'), the Appellate Tribunal made a reference to this court inviting our opinion on three questions of law framed by the Appellate Tribunal as follows :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right, in holding that the purchase and installation of secondhand machinery not earlier used by the firm, which was otherwise an industrial undertaking, disentitles the firm from claiming deduction under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that mere purchasing of a polishing machine by an undertaking already in existence and addition of one more process to the existing manufacturing in the accounting year corresponding to the assessment year 1969-70 did not constitute setting up of a new industrial undertaking ?(iii) Whether, on the facts an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This RFA is filed under sec.96 of CPC., against the Judgment and decree dt:28.09.2015 passed in OS No.281/2011 on the file of the XLIV Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengalure (CCH-45), partly allowing the suit for recovery of money.) 1. Since common question of law and facts are involved in all these cases, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The above appeals and cross objections arise out of common judgment and decrees dated 28.09.2015 in O.S.No.213, 214 and 281/2011 passed by the IV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. By impugned judgment, the trial Court allowed applications of the plaintiff under Order 12 Rule 6 of CPC and decreed all the three suits for the amount mentioned as below: O.S. No.213/2011- Rs.21,59,213/- O.S. No.214/2011- Rs.6,97,862/- O.S. No.281/2011- Rs.29,69,497/- Further, the trial court rejected the claim of the plaintiff for interest at 18% p.a. 3. Sri.P.Muralidharan s/o G Parthasarthy is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). . OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (Crl.) No(s). 7899-7900 of 2015) MANOJ PRATAP SINGH . APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN . RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Dinesh Maheshwari, J.Table of Contents Preliminary 2 Relevant factual and background aspects 7 The Evidence 12 The Trial Court found the appellant guilty and awarded death sentence 33 Deceased aged 7 years, mentally and physically challenged 33 Deceased last seen with the appellant 34 Discoveries on the information of appellant 34 1 Medical evidence 35 Report of FSL36Defence contentions rejected 37 Chain of circumstances complete 40 Death sentence by the Trial Court 41 High Court confirmed the death sentence awarded to the appellant 44 Rival Submissions 48 The scope and width of these appeals 61 Procedural questions relating to investigation and trial 64 Concurrent findings of fact: whether requiring interference?. 67 Whether death sentence be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)(147)ELT490Tri(Mum.)bai
2. This is an appeal filed by the department against the decision of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), Ahmedabad made in Order-in-Appeal No.581/97 made in filed No. (24-KDL) CUS/COMMR/(A)/AHD dated 8.10.1997 whereunder he had held that the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Custom, Kandla made in Order-in-Original No. KDL A.C./04/96 APPB. G.R.I dated 29.11.1996 confirming the duty short levied amounting to Rs.22,57,65,172/- demanded under show cause notice dated 30.10.1996 was wrong and allowed the appeal of the respondents.3. Respondents had been regularly importing heptene/nonene at Kandla.They were using these chemicals for manufacture of oxo chemicals at their factory. There was a dispute with regard to the classification as to whether heptene/nonene could be classified as "AIF/Motor Spirit" or "otherwise". According to the opinion of the Chief Chemist, C.R.C.L., New Delhi, if end use and flash point criteria are taken into consideration, then he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar
Reported in : (1993)46ITD104(Asr.)
1. The appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 1975-76, and the cross-objection relating thereto are conveniently considered together and disposed of by a common order.2. The major objection of the Revenue through its first ground is about the cost of construction of a cinema building by the assessee-firm and the addition made on account of unexplained investment. The Income-tax Officer made an addition of Rs. 6,56,186, which represented the difference between the cost of construction as per the Departmental Valuation Officer of Rs. 23,76,505 and the cost of construction as per the assessee's books of Rs. 17,20,320. It was pointed out from para 8 of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the Departmental Valuation Officer made valuation five times and each time the cost of construction worked out was different. The first assessment which was made by the Income-tax Officer by order dated March 28, 1979, was set aside by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (2004)89ITD235(Delhi)
1. This Special Bench has been constituted under section 255 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to decide the following question arising out of the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 6177/Del/96 for assessment year 1993-94 : "Whether on facts and in law, the gains earned on cancellation of the Foreign Exchange Forward Contract are capital receipt or revenue receipt? If it is capital receipt, whether the same should be reduced from the cost of plant & machinery in connection with which the forward contract was entered into?" 2. At the outset, relevant facts having bearing on the point in issue may briefly be set out. The assessee company is a limited company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of automobile tyres, tubes etc. The assessee imported certain plant and machinery for setting up a new tyre manufacturing plant near Baroda in Gujarat state during the year 1991. For financing the project, the assessee borrowed funds in US Dollars and Pound Sterling from US Exim Bank and C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [2006]130CompCas295(Bom); [2006(106)FLR551]
N.A. Britto, J.1. This is a complainant's appeal against the acquittal of the accused.2. Shri V.S. Khatre who was the manager of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation filed a complaint under Section 85(a) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('the Act' for short), against accused No. 1 which, according to him was an establishment under the Act having been allotted Code No. 32-28-67 and against accused No. 2 who was director and occupier of the said establishment named M/s. Cortalim Shipyard and Engineers P. Ltd.3. The complaint was filed for the failure to pay the contributions for the wage periods of October, 1992, to May, 1993, which were payable in terms of regulations 31, 39, and 40 of the Employees' State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950.4. The complaint was filed after the sanction was accorded by the Regional Director of the said Corporation.5. Although the sanction was obtained to prosecute the principal employer, i.e., A2 and the said establishment M/s. Cortal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2012(11)SCALE140
Madan B. Lokur, J.1. In these appeals, this Court issued notice limited to the question of the sentence awarded to the appellants. They were awarded the death penalty, which was confirmed by the High Court. In our opinion, the appellants in these appeals against the order of the High Court should be awarded a life sentence, subject to the faithful implementation of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Code, 1973.The facts:2. In view of the limited notice issued in these appeals, it is not necessary to detail the facts. However, it may be mentioned that as many as six persons (including the appellants) were accused of various offences under the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC) and the Arms Act, 1959. They were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak by his judgment and order dated 13th November, 2009 in Sessions Case No. 47 of 2004/2009 of the offence of murder (Section 302 of the IPC), attempt to murder (Section 307 of the IPC), rioting, armed with a deadly weapon (Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1333 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.7002 of 2012) Sunil Dutt Sharma ... Appellant(s) Versus State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) ... Respondent(s) JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.1. The accused-appellant was tried for offences under Sections 302 and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for short the Penal Code) for causing the death of his wife in the night intervening 16/17.05.92. He has been acquitted of the offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code on the benefit of doubt though found guilty for the offence under Section 304-B of the Penal Code following which the sentence of life imprisonment has been imposed. The conviction and sentence has been affirmed by the High Court. Aggrieved, the appellant had moved this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.2. Limited notice on the question of sentence imposed on the accused- appellant having been issued by this Court the scope of the present ...
Tag this Judgment!