Chennai Court March 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. Numeric Power System Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Pondicherry
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
1. The appellant filed this appeal against rejection of the refund claim of Rs.12,64,800/- under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Static Converter known as Uninterrupted Power Supply System (UPSS) classifiable under sub-heading 85044090 of the CETA, 1985. They availed CENVAT credit paid on the inputs. He submits that apart from that, they imported 1000 nos. of UPSS (1000 VA/800W C/W to M/s. HCL Infosystems Ltd.) under Bill of Entry No. 724445 dated 7.12.2004 and availed CENVAT credit of Rs.9,10,701/- being the additional duty of customs. He further submits that they supplied the same item under the cover of invoice dated 29.12.2004 and 30.12.2004 under the description of 1000 nos. of UPSS (Numeric Digital 1.0 KVA Line Interactive UPS) to M/s. HCL Infosystems Ltd. Pondicherry under Invoice No. 2346 dated 29.12.2004 and 2349 dated 30.12.2004 on payment of duty. He ...
M/S. Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Ltd. and Another Vs. Commissione ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
1. Both the appeals are arising out of common order and both are taken up together for disposal. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessees are engaged in the manufacture of Glass Bottles classifiable under sub-heading no.7007.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They availed Cenvat credit on various inputs including Furnace Oil as fuel. By Notification No.5/94-CE (NT), dated 01.03.1994 issued under Rule 57A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 in supersession of the Notification No.177/86-CE, dated 01.03.1986 MODVAT credit was extended to fuels amongst others. The said notification was amended by Notification No.14/97-CE(NT), dated 03.05.1997 and credit on inputs, namely, Furnace Oil and other items were restricted to the amount of excise duty calculated at the rate of 10% ad valorem instead of 15% ad valorem as paid by them. There was a retrospective amendment of Notification No.14/97-CE(NT), dated 03.05.1997 by Section 87 of the ...
Jayanthi Vs. Dr.K.Selvaraj
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :06. 03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE. S.VIMALA Second Appeal No.672 of 2004 & CMP No.895 of 2010 1. Jayanthi 2. Padmapriya .... Appellants/Resps.4 & 5 / Defendants 4 & 5 Vs.1. Dr. K.Selvaraj .... 1st Resp. / Appellant / Plaintiff 2. Govindan 3. Ramayee 4. G.Sekar .... Respts. 2-4 / Respts. 1-3 / Defendants 1 to 3 Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Namakkal, dated 28.10.2003, made in A.S.No.9 of 2000, reversing the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Munsif, Namakkal, dated 13.12.1999 in O.S.No.238 of 1999. For Appellants : Mr. R.Subramanian For Respondents : Mr. S.Parthasarathy, Sr. Counsel, for, M/s. C.Jagadish, for R-1, M/s. G.Sumithra, for R-2 to R-4 - - - JUDGMENT (i) In a suit for injunction, when it is necessary to seek the relief of declaration of title, either as a main / consequential relief ?....
M.Sridhar Vs. G.Sivakumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR C.M.A.No.309 of 2014 1.M.Sridhar 2.M.Dhanakodi 3.Selvi @ Kalaiselvi ..Appellants/Petitioners versus 1.G.Sivakumar 2.United India Insurance Company Limited, 280, Ooty Main Road, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore-641 301..Respondents/Respondents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree, dated 21.01.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.86 of 2010 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Sub Judge).Sankari. For Appellants : Mr.T.Gobinath JUDGMENT Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation of Rs.4,70,800/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum, son and two daughters of the deceased Muthusamy, have filed the present appeal for enhancement. 2. As per the claim petition in MCo.No.86 of 2010 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Subordinate Judge, Sankari, the 1st appellant, son of the deceased, was stated to be aged 19 yeaRs.The 2nd...
N.Rangaswamy Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJ.W.P.No.22415 of 2010 N.Rangaswamy .Petitioner -versus 1. The Government of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary Home (Police-III) Department Fort St.George Chennai 600 009 2. The Director General of Police Chennai 600 004 .Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st respondent herein in Letter (Ms.No.613, dated 12.07.2010 and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to appoint the petitioner as Sub Inspector of Police from the year 1987 on par with P.P.Ravikumar. For Petitioner :: Mr.R.Shanmugam Senior Counsel for Mr.S.V.Karthikeyan For Respondents :: Mr.S.V.Durai Solaimalai Additional Government Pleader ORDER Mr.N.Rangaswamy has come to this Court by filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the correctness of the im...
S.Sivaprakasam Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated :06. .03.2014 Coram The Honourable Mr.SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and The Honourable Mr.Justice M.M.SUNDRESH W.P.No.3541 of 2014 S.Sivaprakasam .. Appellant Vs. 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary, Environment and Forest Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Madras 600 009 2. The Secretary to Government Highways Department, Fort St.George, Madras 600 009 3. The Principal Conservator of Forests, Panagal Maligai Saidapet, Madras 600 015 4. The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal 5. The District Forest Officer, District Forest Office Mohanur Road, Namakkal 6. The Conservator of Forests J.K.Nagar, Trichy 23. .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the relief of issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to lay road from Pudhurpalapatti to Valkuzhipatti by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.2013....
Karimulla Vs. K.Udayakumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:06. 03.2014 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR C.M.A.No.316 of 2014 Karimulla ... Appellant vs. 1.K.Udayakumar 2.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., No.84/85, Walltax Road, Chennai 600 003. ... Respondents Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 05.09.2013 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.2677 of 2010, on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Judge, Small Causes Court) Chennai. For appellant : Mrs.R.Reena JUDGMENT Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the quantum of compensation, the claimant has preferred this appeal.2. In the accident, which occurred on 13.05.2010, mother of the appellant, died. In this regard, a case in Cr.No.121/H1/2010, has been registered on the file of Washermenpet Police Station, Kancheepuram District, against the driver of the van, bearing Registration No.TN03D1325 for the offences under Section 337 IPC and Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles...
T.John Bose Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06.03.2014 CORAM: THE HON'BLE Ms.JUSTICE K.B.K.VASUKI Crl.R.C.No.1455 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 1.T.John Bose 2.D.Suganthi Bose .Petitioners versus State Bank of India Udhagamandalam Branch rep. by Authorised Officer Chief Manager K.M.Madhaiyan .Respondent Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the entire records in pursuance of the order dated 12.11.2013 made in Crl.M.P.No.1025/2013 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Nilgiris at Udhagamandalam and to set aside the same and to restore the physical possession of the property viz., residential building and guest house building which situates and includes 80 cents of land in R.S.No.1098/Part comprised in R.S.Nos.618/3 & 671/3, New S.No.1098 and 1099/1, situated at Ketti Village, Ketti Panchayat, Coonoor within the limits of Coonoor Sub Registration District and Registration District of Nilgiris to the petitione...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pondicherry Vs. Ce Glass Containers Lt ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Pradip Kumar Das, J. 1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the cenvat credit on MS plates, MS angles, channels, rounds, screws etc. used in the manufacture of chimney. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. Ld. AR on behalf of Revenue submits that adjudicating authority observed that iron and steel articles were used in the repair of chimney. It is submitted that the respondents has not declared in the monthly return or in any other document that they manufactured chimney. She relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saraswati Sugar Mills Vs CCE Delhi 2011 (270) ELT 465 (SC). 4. On the other hand, Ld. advocate submits that Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the credit following the decision of Tribunal in the case of Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. which was affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 2010-TIOL-51-SC-CX. He further submits that these articles we...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-iv Vs. Celebity Designs India ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Pradip Kumar Das, J. 1. Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) insofar as the refund claim filed by the Respondent under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was not hit by limitation. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of textile articles falling under Chapter 62 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The respondents filed a refund claim on 29.3.2005 of Rs.12,76,088/- under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules for the goods exported during the month of February and March 2004. The respondents availed cenvat credit on various inputs which were utilized in the manufacture of finished goods duly exported. Refund claim was filed as they could not utilize the credit. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim on two counts,, the respondents availed drawback claim for some portion of refund and the entire refund claim is barred by limitation. The Commissioner (Appeals) mod...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »