Delhi Court December 1994 Judgments

Mohammad Shahid @ Mohammad Shahid @ Shahid Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995(32)DRJ9

Jaspal Singh, J.(1) On March 24, 1994 the officers of the bide rate of Revenue Intelligence recovered 250 foreign marked gold biscuits weighing 29.166 Kgs. valued at Rs.l,34,16,360.00 from a blue coloured Maruti Gypsy. It is claimed that the present petitioner and one Nadeem Anwar were its occupants. Both of them in their respective statements under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 allegedly admitted the recovery and seizure. The petitioner now seeks bail on the ground that his trial has not been concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case. In support, he relies upon sub section (6) of section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which reads as under: '437.(6) If, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said...

Ultrachem Industries Vs. M/S. Geeta Roadways

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.N. Mittal, President: 1. Briefly, the facts are that the complainant is manufacturing Ultarmhrine Blue (Neel). He booked four consignments of Neel from Delhi to Karnal as detailed below:S.NoG.R. No.Date of bookingNos of bagsValue of goods1.103959.1.199260Rs. 35,943/-2.103949.1.199210Rs. 5,990/-3.1336214.4.199240Rs. 23,520/-4.1470329.5.199280Rs. 47,040/-Total :Rs. 1,12,493/-Out of the said consignments 1st 3 were in the name of self and the 4th in the name of Binaca Washing Powder Company. It is alleged that the O.P. delivered the goods without getting the good's receipt to someone. Consequently, there is deficiency in service on their part and they are liable to pay the price of goods to the complaintant. 2. The complaint has been contested by the opposite party (O.P.). They inter alia pleaded that the payment of the goods had been made to the complainant and, therefore, they are not entitled to get any amount from them. 3. The only question that arises for determination is, whether,...

Kamlesh Rastogi Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT557TriDel

1. The above appeals arise out of the order of the Collector of Customs, New Delhi confiscating absolutely Indian currency of Rs. 2,40,000/- seized on 13-2-1985 from the dicky of scooter driven by Ashok Kumar Rastogi, accompanied by Ram Chander Rastogi on the pillion, on the ground that it represents sale proceeds of smuggled gold, and imposing personal penalty of Rs. 10,000/- each on Shri Ashok Kumar Rastogi and Shri Kamlesh Rastogi under Section 112 of the Customs Act and identical penalty on the above two appellants under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 13-2-1985 the Gold (Control) Preventive Officers of Central Excise Collectorate, New Delhi intercepted Shri Ashok Kumar Rastogi and his brother Ram Chander Rastogi near Red Fort and during the course of the search of the scooter being driven by Ashok Kumar Rastogi, Indian currency of Rs. 2.4 lakhs was recovered from the helmet box of the scooter. Shri Ashok Kumar Rastogi stated t...

Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board Vs. Collr. of Central Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT99TriDel

1. The miscellaneous application dated 7-8-1993 has been filed by the Executive Engineer, Workshop Division M.P.E.B., Bhilai in connection with their appeal registered as E/3825/90-B, seeking permission for adducing additional evidence under Rule 23 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. Such evidence is in the shape of the Letter dated 29-11-1976 issued to him by the Inspector of Central Excise, Raipur and their reply thereto dated 30-11-1976. The Inspector, vide the said letter, informed them that the structures and fabrication for towers, sub-stations in the central workshop was liable to central excise duty @ 1% with effect from 1-3-1975 and directed him to supply information regarding the goods manufactured, quantity and value and their clearances outside the factory and the quantity in balance. In their reply dated 30-11-1976, they had contended that excise duty was not payable by them. It was, however, stated by them that as the department was emphasising the necessity of obtaining a ...

Tata Engineering and Locomotive Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)LC674Tri(Delhi)

1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Collector Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay dated 1-4-1986. Shri A.R. Madhav Rao, ld.counsel for the appellant submitted that the issue for consideration in the present appeal is whether U-Bolts and U-Clamps would merit classification under Tariff Item 52 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff and whether the activity of the appellant in getting thread rods and bending it would amount to manufacture within the meaning of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The ld. counsel at the outset fairly conceded that the Supreme Court in the case of Plasmac Machine Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE reported in 1991 (51) E.L.T. 161 while dealing with the issue relating to classification of Tie Bar Nuts for fixing platens has taken the view that they would merit classification under Tariff Item 52 of the erstwhile Tariff. The ld.counsel, however, contended that the activity of the appellant in the present case would not amount to manufacture ...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Maxxon India Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT369TriDel

1. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh has filed this application for condonation of delay in respect of the Reference Application filed by him which in turn related to Order No. A/368 & 369/94-NRB dated 18-4-1994 passed by this Tribunal. In the application for condonation of delay, it has been stated that the Tribunal's order in question was received on 17-5-1994 in the collectorate and the Reference Application was filed on 12-8-1994. There has been a delay of 26 days in filing the application which had occurred only while examining the Tribunal's order. The delay was neither wilful nor intentional and the department did not stand to gain anything by delaying the filing of the Reference Application. It has been urged that this delay which was beyond their control may be condoned. A date chart has been enclosed with the application indicating the action taken on various dates from the date of receipt of the Tribunal's order till the date of preparing the draft Reference Appli...

intercity Cable Systems (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT86TriDel

1. The above captioned Misc. applications have been filed seeking modification of the Tribunal's interim Order No. Misc./E/247/94-Bl, dated 26-8-1994 directing the applicants to deposit the duty amounting to Rs. 36,44,264/- + Rs. 54,878/- within 8 weeks of the date of receipt of the order. Appearing on behalf of the applicants Shri Soli Sorabji, Ld. Sr. Advocate submitted that the Tribunal in passing the Misc. Order No. Misc./E/247/94-Bl, dated 26-8-1994 had relied upon the judgment rendered by single judge of Karnataka High Court in the case of Nector Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI in W.P. No. 1154/88 on 3rd December, 1993, reported in 1994 (70) E.L.T. 172 holding that para 7 of the Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986 as amended by Notification No. 223/87, dated 22-9-1987 was not ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. He stated that the operation of the said order of the single judge in W.P. No. 1154/88, dated 3-12-1993 had been stayed by the following order pas...

Collector of Customs Vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT712TriDel

1. The Collector of Customs, Bombay has filed this appeal being aggrieved with the order dated 10-11-1993 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. The brief facts are as follows :- M/s. Hero Honda Motors Ltd., New Delhi the respondents herein have entered into Technical Collaboration Agreement on 24-1-1984 with M/s. Honda Motors Co. Ltd., Japan. M/s. Honda Motors IKCDo. Ltd., Japan have equity participation of 26% in the Indian Company. M/s. Honda Motors Co. Ltd., New Delhi among other things, designs, drawings, standards, specifications or other data etc. were also granted industrial property rights like patents, utility models, symbols, designs, trade-marks, brand services marks and other abbreviations relating to the products. They have also granted know-how pertaining to parts which will be manufactured by those who will be granted sub-contracts. In consideration of the services provided by the licensor M/s. Honda Motors Co. Ltd., Japan, Indian Company shall pay a lum...

Asian Can Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT91TriDel

1. Shri Pradeep Jain, learned Advocate for the applicants shows a spare copy of the Intimation of their having complied with the requirement of pre-deposit of a sum of Rs. 21,61,248/- in terms of the stay order passed by this Bench. The original certificate issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise was also produced by him wherein a number of debit entries in the RG 23A Part II account showing the dates of such debit of the amounts debited have been certified by the Superintendent of Rewari Range. In view of the amount having been deposited as above, Shri Jain requested that the appeal may be restored to its original number. He also refers to the application made by them for out of turn hearing. When asked to clarify the ground for such a request, Shri Jain stated that the amount involved is high for them as it amounts to a sum of Rs. 21 lakhs. The issue is also of a recurring nature. There are a certain decisions of the Tribunal in their favour which he would like to urge.2. In ...

Union of India Vs. M/S. Rattan Lal Brij Mohan and Another

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995(32)DRJ23

K. Shivshankar Bhat, J. 1. In this appeal by the Union of India, the validity of the award made by the Umpire, who entered the reference on the ground of belatedness of make the award by the two arbitrator, is challenged on three grounds; Viz. (1) the umpire could have entered the reference only if the two arbitrators had disagreed and that there was no occasion for the umpire to intervene as per the terms of the agreement; (2) the parties to the dispute let the time to expire and even thereafter participated in the proceedings by the two arbitrators and thereforee, none of them can seek the intervention of the umpire on the ground of belatedness in making the award by the arbitrators; and (3) a lump sum award by the umpire, without giving the award under different beads of claim, is illegal, 2. The 1st respondent M/s. Rattan Lal Brij Mohan entered into a contract with the Railways (appellant) to carry out certain works. The contract was governed by the 'General Conditions of the Contr...