Delhi Court October 1994 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1994 Page 7 of about 93 results (0.021 seconds)Maheshwari Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT733TriDel
1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 2 months 19 days in the presentation of the appeal before the Tribunal. Ms. Archana Wadhwa, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner is a partnership concern with Suresh Kumar Mantri and Sanjay Mantri.Shri Suresh Kumar Mantri is the senior partner who is managing the affairs of the firm. He was sick and confined to bed and could not attend the normal duty and therefore, the appeal could not be filed in time. The learned counsel submitted that in a similar situation that the Tribunal in the case of Haryana Insulated Wires (P) Ltd. v.Collector of Central Excise reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T 444 (Tribunal) condoned a delay of 59 days and prayed for a similar relief in this case as well. Heard Shri K.K. Dutta, learned JDR.2. We gave our anxious consideration to the plea of the learned Counsel seeking condonation of delay and we are afraid that in the facts and circumstances of the case, we cannot acceed to the plea...
Tag this Judgment!India Gypsum Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT188TriDel
1. Being aggrieved by the orders in Appeal No. E/1979 and 2004/91-NRB passed by the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) M/s. India Gypsum Ltd. the appellant in this case have filed this appeal. As the two appeals arise out of the same order they are being dealt with by this common order. The Collector (Appeals) in his order had held :- "I notice that in this case, there is no dispute about the fact that the appellants had applied for destruction of goods in question on the ground that these were unfit for consumption. The order of the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi remitting the duty involved were subject to certain conditions one of which was that the modvat credit if any taken on the inputs used in the manufacture of the said goods (which were to be destroyed) will be reversed by making a suitable debit entry in RG 23A Pt. II Register. The appellants accordingly debited the relevant sum under protest on account of the inputs credit availed of on the inputs contained in the g...
Tag this Judgment!Shivalik Agro Poly Products Ltd. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)LC510Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against the order of Collector of Central Excise Chandigarh No. 36/87, dated 20-11-1987.2. Learned Counsel stated that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of protective caps/covers made of plastic for covering grains etc.3. They obtain LDPE granules for this purpose and subject them to a manufacturing process during which a flat tube gets extruded and from this flat tube they form these covers.4. A question has arisen whether in the process a LDPE film (plastic film) also comes into existence and, if so, whether it was by itself an excisable and dutiable product and if excisable, whether it was exempted.5. It was their contention that their final product could be manufactured by two different processes, one in which such a film may come into existence by slitting of the tube formed by extrusion and another in which such a film does not come into existence but the caps for cover can be directly made from the extruded tube.6. The department has insisted that...
Tag this Judgment!Nath Peters Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)LC522Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the impugned adjudication Order-in-Original passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad.2. Factual Backdrop : The appellants inter alia manufacture Phenyl and Antiseptic Lotions. A Show Cause Notice dated 8-5-1987 was issued to the appellants calling upon them to show cause as to why the Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs. 8,69,735.11 in respect of the excisable goods, namely Phenyl and Antiseptic Lotions manufactured and removed by them during the period from 1-3-1986 to 19-1-1987 without payment of duty be not paid by them and further that why the seized Phenyl and Antiseptic Lotions be not confiscated. They were also asked to show cause as to why the penalty be not imposed upon them. It was alleged in the Show Cause Notice that Phenyl is a preparation consisting of Rosin, Castor Oil, Caustic Soda and is used as a disinfectant and, therefore, the same is classifiable under Heading 3801.90 (revised 3808.90) attracting duty at the rate of 1...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Management Advisers and Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)51ITD566(Delhi)
1. These two appeals, one by the assessee and the other by the revenue for the assessment year 1990-91 are directed against order of CIT (Appeals)-I, New Delhi dated 22-12-1993. As common points are involved, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of through this consolidated order.2. The first issue relates to disallowance of depreciation on bottles.The assessee-company in the relevant period carried production of Punching, binding and laminating machines and leasing business. It had claimed 100% depreciation on soft drink bottles which the company purchased from M/s Arizona Printers and Packers Ltd. and leased out to M/s Residency Food and Brewerages Ltd. vide Lease agreement dated 1-2-1990. The learned revenue authorities disallowed the claim mainly on the ground that these bottles were not put to use and, therefore, conditions of Section 32 of the Act were not satisfied. The CIT (Appeals) held that only 11 out of 50 trucks of bottles sent by the manufacturer (Sup...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kumar Tyagi Vs. the State and Another
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)878; 1995CriLJ1877; 1994(3)Crimes1037; 56(1994)DLT253; 1994(31)DRJ262; ILR1995Delhi52
ORDER1. This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The facts relevant for the present application are : on the night of 4/5th July, 1991 at about 2.55 a.m. a case of death on account of bullet shot was registered at P.S. Mansarover Park, Delhi. The incident occurred in a marriage party. The petitioner herein as well as the deceased Ranbir Singh were part of a marriage party. Admittedly the petitioner as well as deceased Ranbir Singh and a few others had enjoyed drinks and at the relevant time they were dancing in front of the marriage procession. The petitioner as well as deceased Ranbir Singh had revolvers in their hands and were firing in the air through their respective revolvers as part of enjoyment and marriage celebrations. In the course of dancing and while shots were being fired, one bullet hit deceased Ranbir Singh. He was immediately rushed to the hospital where he was declare as 'brought dead'. The FIR was lodged by one...
Tag this Judgment!Wwf International Vs. Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)730; 56(1994)DLT271; 1993(31)DRJ413
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) I have heard arguments in detail for deciding these two applications, one filed by the plaintiff seeking grant of interin injunction till the disposal of the suit and the other filed by the defendant for vacation of exparte injunction order granted by this court on July 11, 1994. (2) Due to devastating pollution and uncontrolled exploitation of the natural resources made available to human being on this planet, the plaintiff organization came up with the keen object of conservation of natural environment, various species of plants and animals which were on the verge of extinction or are being endangered with the massive growth of human world population. It had global representation of 23 affiliate and 5 associate national organizations and it interacts with various Government departments dealing with such subjects and particularly it works in close harmony with World Conservation Union. (3) It is averred in the plaint that Wwf International-plaintiff is involved in m...
Tag this Judgment!M.L. Dalmiya and Co. Ltd. Vs. International Airport Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)437; 1994(2)ARBLR520(Delhi); 1994(31)DRJ537
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) In a petition filed under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act by the petitioner. notice was given to the Umpire/respondent No.2 in response to which he had filed the award and the proceedings in this Court. Notice of tiling of the award was given to both the parties. Both the parties have filed objections to the award. Following issues were framed :- 1. Whether the award is liable to be set aside or modified in view of the objections filed by the parties 2. Relief. (2) It was agreed by the counsel for the parties, as mentioned in order dated 25th January 1993, that the question of grant of pendentelite interest which has not been decided by the Umpire be decided by this Court instead of remitting the award to the Umpire for the decision on this question. Issue N0.1 (3) Facts leading to the giving of the award, in brief, are that in and about December 1977, a global tender was invited by the Government of Maldives to upgrade the existing airport of Hulule Island. The pro...
Tag this Judgment!Sunair Hotels Ltd. Vs. N.D.M.C. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 56(1994)DLT177
K. Shiva Bhankar Bhat, J. 1. In C.W. 2197 of 1990 (referred as the I W.P.) the petitioner seeks the quashing of a communication dated 10.7.1990 (Annexure P-1); at the same time, petitioner seeks protection of its possession of a Hotel Site. Under another prayer, a declaration is sought that payment of license fee shall commence qua the aforesaid Hotel site when possession of the entire site is handed over to the petitioner. 2. Petitioner is a public limited company. Initially it was allotted a site to construct a hotel of not less than 3 star standard, at Mandir Marg, New Delhi, in the year 1977; the allotment was out of successful bid at an open auction. When the petitioner commenced construction, allotment was cancelled. In view of the earlier allotment, another site (which is the subject matter of the present writ petition) was allotted on 9.12.1982, measuring 7109 Sq. Yds. at Gole Market. An agreement called license deed was executed on 8.12.1982. The built area of the hotel was to...
Tag this Judgment!Prasad and Co. Vs. Satish Gupta and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)433; 1994(2)ARBLR488(Delhi); 56(1994)DLT267; 1994(31)DRJ659; 1995RLR32
R.C. Lahoti, J. (1) This order shall dispose of IAs 5173/94,6338-39/94. (2) is 5173/94 is an application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 Civil Procedure Code filed by the plaintiff seeking an ad- interim injunction. is 6338/94 is an application under Order 39 Rule 4 Civil Procedure Code filed by the defendants, seeking vacating of the ex-parte injunction order dated 30.5.94 also adopted by the defendant as reply to is 5173/94. .IA 6339/94 is an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 filed by the defendants seeking stay of the suit on the ground of there being an arbitration agreement between the parties. (3) The plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of Rs.26,21,322.00 . Vide para 16 of the plaint, the parties are admittedly members of the Delhi Stock Exchange Association Limited. According to the plaintiffs they had entered into a contract with the defendants whereunder the transactions entered into by the plaintiffs on the floor of the Stock Exchange were directly en...
Tag this Judgment!