Chennai Court January 2014 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.
M/S. Sujana Metal Products and Another Vs. Cce, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
Per Mathew John, J. 1. In these appeals, there is a finding that the first appellant M/s Sujana Metals had indulged in clandestine manufacture and clearance of TMT bars during the period May 2006 to May 2008. The second appellant, M/s R. D. Enterprises is a dealer who is said to be involved in sale of such non-duty paid goods. 2. The case is made out on the basis of private records of production maintained by the first appellant as against the entries in the statutory record namely, RG-I maintained by the firm. When the matter was heard at stay stage, the Tribunal ordered pre-deposit of Rs.30 lakhs and to report compliance on 19.11.2013 which matter is actually coming up for compliance only today. It was mentioned in the said stay order that at the time of reporting compliance both the sides are at liberty to mention the matter for disposal of the appeals because at the stage of hearing stay petition it was felt that no detailed findings are recorded on certain issues. 3. Today both th...
Ex J.W.O. R.P. Krishna Rao Vs. Union of India Represented by Its Secre ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
V. Periya Karuppiah, Member-Judicial: 1. This application is filed by the applicant for the reliefs to issue a direction to the respondents to pay pension to the applicant in the rank of J.W.O Group-II (Group Y) with all consequential benefits with effect from 1.1.1996; to issue a direction to the respondents to revise and pay the revised pension as per the VIth C.P.C. Report with effect from 1.1.2006 and to pay the same with entire arrears; and to pay the arrears with 12% interest and for costs. 2. The factual matrix of the applicants case would be as follows :- The applicant joined the Indian Air Force on 22.8.1964 and his trade in the I.A.F. was Meteorological Assistant. He secured higher ranks due to sheer hard work and physical fitness and he was promoted to the rank of J.W.O with effect from 1.6.1985. He was discharged from service on 31.8.1985 after completing the service of 21 years and 10 days. His tenure at the rank of J.W.O was three months. As per Pension Regulations for th...
L. Rajiah Vs. the Additional Director General of Personnel Services an ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
L.t. Gen Anand Mohan Verma, Member-Administrative: 1. This application has been filed seeking the following reliefs: a) Quashing of opinion of the Release Medical Board, order of Army Medical Corps Records vide No.C/JC 692657 M/DP(I), dated 12th August 2011 and order of ADG Personnel Services, Adjutant Generals Branch vide No.B/40502/975/11/AG/PS-4, dated 17th August 2012; b) To declare the disability as aggravated by military service and direct the respondents to grant 20% disability pension (rounded off to 50%) for life along with interest, costs and with all consequential monetary benefits; c) To pass such further or other orders as this Tribunal may deem fit. 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was enrolled as Soldier (Pharmacist) on 17th August 1983 and after serving 28 years and 15 days, he was discharged in the rank of Subedar on 1st September 2011. He is in receipt of service pension. He was found to be suffering from a disease called œCHOROIDAL NEO-VASCULAR ...
Alstom T and D India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ltu, Che ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Jan-13-2014
P.K. Das, J. 1. After hearing both sides, we find that appeal may be taken up at this stage of hearing of stay petition. Accordingly, after disposing of the stay application, the appeal is taken up for hearing. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The Learned advocate submits that they have paid duty on the differential amount for subsequent revision of price after clearance of the goods. It is contended that appeal relates to demand of interest and penalty. Ld. advocate further submits that the present appellant was formerly known as Areva T and D India Ltd. It is submitted that the Tribunal for the earlier period dismissed the appeal on the same issue which was challenged before the Hon'ble Madras High Court. It is submitted that by order dt. 10.4.2012, the Hon'ble Madras High Court in MP.No. 1 to 1 of 2012 in CMA No.475 to 478 of 2012 granted absolute stay. 4. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE Vs SKF India Ltd. 2009 (239) ELT 385 (SC) held that ...
Janab Haji Hafeez Moulvi A.M. Imdhathullah Saheb, Prop.Moulana Haj Ser ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
(The complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Hence appellant / opposite party prefer an appeal in F.A.No.300/2010 praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.291/2007, dated 17.03.2010, while the complainant filed an appeal in F.A.No.258/2011, for enhancement. These appeals coming before us for hearing finally on 12.12.2013, upon hearing the arguments on either side , perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order.) A.K.Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The 1st and 2nd complainants who are the husband and wife approached the opposite party who is a tour operator to have a Holy Haj Trip for the year 2006-2007. At that time it was specifically informed to the opposite party that the 1st complainant and his wife were sick and heart patients and they could not climb stair case. A...
M/S.Telco Construction Equipment Co.Ltd. Rep.by Its Zonal Head and Oth ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
(The complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Hence appellant / opposite parties prefer an appeal in F.A.No.823/2008 praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.80/2003, dated 20.06.2008, while the complainant filed an appeal in F.A.No.431/2010, for enhancement.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member The complainant is a registered partnership firm carrying on business of construction and other commercial activities purchased an Earth Excavator as Tata JD 315SE Back Hoe loader from the opposite parties 1 and 2 for Rs.16,00,000/- for which the opposite parties 3 and 4 financed the amount. The complainant alleged that on the date of delivery of the vehicle the opposite parties 1 and 2 did not have a trade license to sell the same in Tamil Nadu and thereby the complainant was not in a position to register the vehicle with registering authorities for want of neces...
Jayamary Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
L.t. Gen Anand Mohan Verma, Member-Administrative): 1. This application has been filed praying for the following reliefs: (a) To set aside the impugned order/letter of the 2nd respondent in its Letter No.4541/2574395/NE-1dt. 21 June, 2012 as it is arbitrary, illegal, unjust and untenable; (b) To convert the classification of the death of the applicants husband from Physical Casualty into Battle Casualty, grant Liberalised Family Pension and pay all consequential monetary and other benefits to the applicant from the date of death of the applicants husband, i.e., from 11.09.1992; (c) Grant costs of this case and (d) Pass suitable further orders that may be deemed just and necessary in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice. 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioners husband late Havildar P.Singarayar who was serving with 14 Assam Regiment died on 11.09.1992 when the vehicle in which he was travelling from Srinagar to Leh fell into Indus River at a place 15 Kms from ...
Coimbatore District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. A. Sadayappan a ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
(The Appellant is the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying certain relief. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, the appellant / 2nd opposite party filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.377/2003, dated 19.12.2006. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 12.12.2013, upon hearing the arguments on either side, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The 2nd opposite party is the appellant. 2. The 1st Respondent / complainant had made 4 various fixed deposits with the 1st opposite party bank for Rs.27,256/- on 17.1.2002 for a period of 30 months and for Rs.35,607/- for 13 months and Rs.55,486/- for a period of 182 days and for Rs.16,500/- for 6 months. The 1st and 2nd deposits were made on 17.1.2002 and 3rd deposit was made on 20....
D.G.M. Textiles Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
1. The applicant has filed this application for restoration of Appeal No. C/385/2011 which was dismissed vide Final order No.776/2012 dated 29.6.2012 for noncompliance of pre-deposit direction given by the Tribunal as per section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962. This order dt. 29.6.12 was an ex-parte order. The applicant was suffering from Jaundice during May 2012 and June 2012 and that was the reason why he could not appear before the Tribunal. Further, it is submitted that applicant had filed restoration application on 29.11.2012 which is presently under consideration. 2. The matter relates to imports made under Advance License No. 321003061 dated 19-10-2005 with export obligation as a condition to be satisfied after import. For discharging the obligation, the appellant should have produced Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC) from DGFT which they failed to produce before lower authorities during the proceedings leading to the order challenged in the appeal. Consequently, t...
M/S. Salem Textiles Ltd. Vs. Cce, Salem
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the imposition of penalty of Rs. 10.00 lakhs under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn. The appellant had defaulted for discharging duty for the month of August, 2003 to December, 2003 and for the month of March, 2004, and subsequently discharged duty along with interest under Rule 8(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Ld. Advocate submits that the appellant was facing acute financial crisis as well as the appellant company was under the BIFR during the material period and therefore, there was a delay in payment of duty. He submits that they have paid duty with interest before the issue of Show cause notice when the appellant company was under BIFR. Therefore, penalty under Rule 25 of CER, 2002 is not sustainable. He relies upon the decision of the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CCE, Guntur Vs. Andhra Ce...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »