Chennai Court November 2009 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The General Manager, Dove Finance Ltd., Chennai and Another Vs. B. Aso ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2009
HONBLE M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The opposite parties in O.P.72/2005 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, NagercoilRedressal Forum, Nagercoil, are the appellants. 2. The respondent herein as complainant, approached the lower Forum, seeking a direction for the return of RC Book, Duplicate Key, three blank signed cheques, directing the opposite parties to issue No Objection Certificate as well for the compensation of Rs.50,000/- on the grounds, that for the purchase of Hero Honda Splendor Motor Cycle, he has borrowed a sum of Rs.33,000/- by executing hire purchase agreement, that at the time of borrowing the loan, he has handed over the duplicate key, blank cheques signed, that he has paid the entire loan and discharged the same, including interest, by paying a sum of Rs.37,134/-, that despite the discharged of the loan, the opposite parties have not handed over the RC Book etc., thereby, committed deficiency in service and in this view they should be given ...
P.S. Annamalai Vs. Hatsun Agro Products Ltd., Chennai and Another
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2009
HONBLE M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The complainant having filed a case before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chennai (South), claiming a sum of Rs.2 lakhs as compensation, able to succeed in getting a sum of Rs.7,500/-, thereby aggrieved, preferred this appeal for enhancement or claiming the amount as in the complaint. 2. The complainant/appellant celebrated the marriage of his daughter at Guruvayur, and being a popular man as claimed, he intended to have a reception at Chennai on 4.7.2004 at Dharmaprakash Main Hall, Raja Annamalai Road, Purasaivakkam, Chennai, for which, expecting 800 guests, he ordered for the supply of 33 units of ice cream, for which, he paid a sum of Rs.3,168/-, uponr which, the opposite parties have agreed to deliver the above said units of ice cream on 4.7.2004 at 5 p.m. at Dharmaprakash Main Hall. Though the complainant was waiting for the delivery of the ice cream, till 5 p.m. as agreed, the opposite parties have not delivered the ice cr...
The General Manager Dove Finance Ltd., Chennai and Another Vs. D. Mari ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2009
M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The appellants are the opposite parties before the District Forum in C.C.No.84/2005. 2. The respondent herein, as complainant, had purchased a Hero Honda Splendor, Motorcycle, after obtaining financial assistance from the opposite parties/ appellants, by executing Hire Purchase Agreement on 7.8.2001. Out of the total cost of the bike of Rs.43,356/-, the loan was obtained only to the extent of Rs.20000/-, and the balance was paid by the complainant. As per the hypothecation agreement, the complainant has to pay a total sum of Rs.27,800/- in equal monthly instalments, for 24 months @ Rs.1108/-, commencing from 7.8.2001. 3. The complainant has paid so far a total sum of Rs.29,250/-, though he is liable to pay only a sum of Rs.27,800/-. Despite the fact that the entire loan amount was discharged, the opposite party has retained the bank cheques, given as security and also failed to issue No objection Certificate, though they returned the original RC book....
M/S.Alfomega Enterprises Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central E ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2009
Duty demand of Rs.1,23,729/- was confirmed against the assessees as they had availed the benefit of CENVAT credit on certain inputs and cleared them as defectives, without payment of duty either by reversal in CENVAT account or by debit in PLA resulting in contravention of the provisions of Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002. The extended period of limitation was applied against the assessees on the ground of suppression. The demand was confirmed together with interest and penalty of Rs.1,23,729/- was imposed under the provisions of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The assessees paid the duty demand. Before the Commissioner (Appeals), the plea raised by the assessees was that they were not guilty of any suppression and, therefore, penalty was not warranted against them. The Commissioner (Appeals), however, upheld the adjudication order entirely; hence this appeal. 2. I have heard both sides. The finding that the assessees were guilty of suppression of facts with in...
M/S.Coromandel Foams (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,pondi ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2009
I have heard both sides on the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise allowing remission of duty of Rs.3,924/- being the duty involved on finished goods destroyed in fire subject to the condition of expungement/payment of duty credit involved on the inputs used in the manufacture of the aforesaid finished goods and rejecting the remaining amount claimed. 2. The grievance of the appellants that they were not heard before passing of the impugned order is well-founded the order refers to perusal of the records by Commissioner and does not refer to any hearing opportunity extended to the appellants. Since the order is an ex parte one, I set it aside and remit the case for fresh decision to the Commissioner, who shall pass after extending a reasonable opportunity to the assessees of being heard in their defence. 3. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand....
M/S.Suolificio Chennai Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2009
In this case, Intellectual Property Right service was rendered to the assessee in India. The period of receipt of the Intellectual Property Right service is upto to October, 2003. The question which arises for determination in this appeal is whether the appellants are liable to service tax during the relevant period according to the assessees, the date from which they would be required to discharge the liability of service tax is 18.04.2006 which is the date on which Section 66A to Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 was enacted. 2. On hearing both sides, I find that the issue stands settled by the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in Indian National Shipowners Association Vs Union of India and Ors. [2008-TIOL-633-HC-MUM-ST] and the Hon ble Delhi High Court in Unitech Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi [2009 (15) S.T.R.385 (Del.)]. The decision of the Bombay High Court has been followed by the Tribunal in Sharadha Terry Products Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Sa...
Elforge Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2009
CENVAT credit of Rs.1,43,298/- taken by the assessees, who are engaged in the manufacture of Rough Steel Forgings, on furnace oil used during the period in dispute namely March to December 2005 in the manufacture of Rough Steel Forgings cleared without payment of duty to the sister units in terms of Notification No.214/86-CE and used in waste and scrap generated in the course of such manufacture and cleared on payment of duty, has been directed to be reversed on the ground that Rough Steel Forgings were cleared without payment of duty and hence were exempted goods, and that waste and scrap is not the result of manufacture. Penalty of Rs.10,000/- has been imposed on the assessees under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 2. I have heard both sides. In the case of Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. Vs CCE Pune [2005 (183) ELT 353], the Larger Bench of the Tribunal has held that finished goods cleared by a job worker without payment of duty under Notification No.214/86-CE cannot be consid...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore M/S.Sri Varahiamman Steels ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2009
The case of the department is that M/s.Sri Varahiamman Steels (P) Ltd., Coimbatore (SVSPL) contravened the provisions of Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 inasmuch as they had taken credit of Rs.3,01,797/- wrongly in their CENVAT credit account during the month of October, 2004 based on order issued to M/s.S.V.A.Steel Rerolling Mills Ltd., Coimbatore (SVASRML) and utilised the credit amount during the same month. The objection of the department is that the order of the Assistant Commissioner was in favour of SVASRML and not the assessee SVSPL. 2. I have heard both sides. I find that only the name of the company changed from SVASRML to SVSPL. The constitution of the company has not changed. Therefore, the transfer of credit from SVASRML to SVSPL is permissible in law. I, therefore, set aside the finding that CENVAT credit lying unutilised in the account of SVASRML cannot be transferred to SVSPL and allow appeal no.E/319/2007. 3. In the light of the above, I reject the appeal filed...
Ex.Hav.(Clk)parthiban Versus Govt of India, Ministry of Defence â ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2009
ACA Adityan The applicant has approached the Court for disability pension as well as for an attendant allowance by way of writ before the Honourable High Court of Madras, which was transferred after the constitution of this Armed Forces Tribunal, and renumbered as T.A.No.3 of 2009. 2. The short facts in the affidavit to the petition filed by the applicant in brief run as follows:- The applicant enrolled in the Indian Army on 26.03.1985 and after undergoing strenuous training, he was promoted as Lance Naik, Naik and then Havilder and during his course of service, he had undergone periodical annual medical examination and he was found medically fit through out and his character was also assessed as Exemplary. During 1997, he developed problem in both eyes, diagnosed as Cone Rod Macular Dystrophy. In the Army Medical Board conducted on 01.01.1998, his eye ailment was recorded as directly attributable to Army Service. Thereafter, for the next 5 years, he was treated by Army Hospitals and ...
M/S.Metallic Bellows India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chen ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Nov-19-2009
For the reasons recorded below, I grant the prayer for stay of operation of the impugned order for upholding rejection of the permission for conversion of Free Shipping Bill to Advance Licence Shipping Bill and proceed to decide the appeal itself at this stage, as the issue stands covered by the Tribunal’s decision reported in 2008 (228) E.L.T.479 (Tri.-Mumbai) in the case of the same assessee. 2. The request for conversion of the Free Shipping Bill into Advance Licence Shipping Bill was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs on the ground that conversion is not permissible in terms of sub-para (2) of Para 3.2 of Customs Circular No.4/2004, dated 16.01.2004. The lower appellate authority has relied upon the fact that the goods were not examined by the Customs to uphold the rejection of the conversion. However, I find that in the assessee’s own case cited supra, the Tribunal has set aside the order rejecting permission and remanded the case for effecting conversi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »