Delhi Court November 1995 Judgments

Modi Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT440TriDel

1. Appellant is a manufacturer of liquid chlorine which is packed in cylinders and sold in that condition. Appellant submitted a price list showing the price of gas as Rs. 1,415.35 per cylinder. Appellant showed Rs. 200/- per metric tonne as cost of packing! Assistant Collector approved the price list with the alteration that the cost of packing of Rs. 200/- per metric tonne has to be included in the assessable value for the purpose of determining the quantum of duty. This order was challenged before the Collector (Appeals). The appeal had been dismissed. The same is challenged in this appeal.2. The appellant submitted a certificate of the Chartered Accountant and an affidavit of the appellants' representative explaining the basis of charging Rs. 200/- per metric tonne as cost of packing. This is seen extracted in para 3 of the impugned order. The cost of each container is Rs. 1800/-1 The life of each container is eight years. Interest for eight years on the cost of the container is R...

Northern Plastics Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(89)ELT744TriDel

1. The captioned two appeals, one filed by M/s Northern Plastics Ltd. and the other by Shri R.K. Sharma, Commercial Manager, arise out of the same order-in-original. Therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of X-ray films, graphic art films, cinematographic films by cutting, slitting and perforating the jumbo rolls imported by the appellants. Two show cause noitces were issued to the appellants as under : (a) one show cause notice was issued on 19-5-1989 for the period 19-11-1988 to 18-5-1989. (b) another show cause notice was issued on 4-6-1989 for the period 14-12-1988 to 13-6-1989. A corrigendum to these show cause notices was issued on 13-6-1990 wherein the show cause notices were made answerable to Collector of Central Excise, Meerut.In these show cause notices, there was no allegation of suppression or for imposition of penalty., However, these show cause notices were supersede...

Daljit Singh Kang and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 60(1995)DLT717

M.K. Sharma, J. (1) In this writ petition filed by the petitioners in the nature of public interest litigation directions are sought for quashing the transfer of registration of the respondent No. 3 from Delhi to Punjab and also for quashing of nomination/election of the respondent No. 3 as a member of the Dental Council of India on the strength of such transfer of registration. Along with the writ petition, the petitioners also filed a stay application contending inter alia, that the transfer of registration of the respondent No. 3 from Delhi to Punjab is illegal and unjustified and that he has no right to continue as a member of the Dental Council on the strength of such illegal transfer of registration. In the stay application the petitioners seek for stay of the communication dated 23.8.1995 whereby the respondent No. 3 has been called to function as a member of the Dental Council by the respondent No. 2. (3) This Court on 18.10.1995 issued notice on both the writ petition and stay...

Green Roadways (Regd.) Vs. Nirmal Singh and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 61(1996)DLT114; (1996)ILLJ1099Del

M. Jagannadha Rao, J. (1) This appeal is preferred by M / s. Green Roadways against the order of the learned Single Judge allowing a review application (R.A.No. I of 1988 in Fao 85/1985 dated January 25,1989). The review application was filed on behalf of the Union of India and the Election Commission of India (respondents : 3 and 4 herein) seeking review of an earlier order dated October 27,1987 directing them to pay a sum of Rs. 22,680.00 towards the compensation, Rs. 10,000.00 towards the penalty under Section 4A(3), interest @ 6% p.a. from May 23, 1980 till the date of payment and at Rs. 892.73 per month half monthly wages for the period for which the workman was in hospital and a sum of Rs. 500.00 as costs and Rs. 1,000.00as costs in the appeal. (2) The review application was allowed under the impugned order by the learned Single Judge and the appellant M/s.Green Roadways were directed to pay the first respondent the workman the sum of Rs. 22,680.00 towards compensation; Rs. 10,00...

Rahul Int. Mkting P. Ltd Vs. Jai Gopal

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1996RLR30

Arun Kumar , J.(1) Originally petitioner took premises for 2 years u/S. 21 of Drc Act. On expiry of period landlord applied for possession against petitioner no. 2 who was residing in premises. Objection was that no. 2 was not tenant. Landlord then wanted to apply against Petitioner no. 1 but he was non-suited on the ground of limitation of 6 months. Landlord then filed instant petition u/S. 14(i)(e) of Drc Act against both petitioners No. 2 was M.D. of no. 1. Landlord was living in a tenanted premises at Daryaganj and his landlord had sued him for eviction. Tenant denied ownership of landlord contending that premises was let for residential-cum-commercial purposes and that premises was not bonafide required by landlord. Arc decreed landlord's claim and tenant filed CR.l After detailing above. Judgment is.(2) First let me deal with the question of ownership. According to the landlord the President of India had granted a perpetual lease in his favor with respect to the plot on which the...

Sawhney Export House Vs. Air France

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. This order seeks to deal with Miscellaneous Application No. 70/95 dated 16.3.95 u/Section 151 and No. 122/95 dated 22.5.95 u/Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. 2. Brief facts giving rise to both these applications may be shortly stated thus : 3. M/s. Sawhney Export House filed a complaint against Air France. The complaint was registered as C-521/92. The OP entered appearance and contested the complaint. The complaint came up for hearing on 7.10.94. Coram was not complete and accordingly it was adjourned to 17.11.94. On that day the complainant was present in person and no one appeared for the OP. Again the Coram was not complete and a learned Single Member of this Commission adjourned the case for arguments to 5.1.95. On the adjourned date namely 5.1.95 again only the complainant appeared. None appeared for the respondent. Arguments were heard and by an ex-parte order of the same date, the OP was directed to pay to the complainant US Dollars 7985.65...

Nitco Marble and Granite Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collr. of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT193TriDel

1. Appeal No. 476/95-A is by one party and the other two appeals are by a different party. The appeals are directed against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Bombay and the Commissioner of Customs, CFC, Sheva, Dist. Raigad (Maharashtra). Both the orders deal with import of rough marble slabs under DEEC Scheme on the basis of advance licences. Issues arising are similar and, therefore, we have heard them together and propose to dispose of the same by this common order.2. The two appellants herein are merely transferees of advance licences obtained initially by other exporters. Goods exported were finished products made out of marble slabs. The goods imported according to the declaration are raw marble slabs. Exports of finished goods have been made by the respective exporters taking advantage of DEEC [Scheme] which enables duty-free import of raw material components of the exported product and allows transfer of advance licences. When the import declarations were receiv...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. M.G. Shahani and Co.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT905TriDel

1. This is an appeal against the impugned order-in-original passed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents M/s.M.G. Shahani & Co. (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of Shampoos falling under sub-heading 3305.90 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The goods manufactured by the respondents bear the brand name "Halo" and "Palmolive" owned by M/s.Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd., Bombay (hereinafter referred to as C.P.). The respondents had been filing the price lists under Rule 173C in which they were declaring the purchase price of C.P. as mentioned in the purchase order. The price lists filed from time to time by the respondents were approved by the department. On the basis of intelligence that the respondents were evading duty by not including the advertisement and publicity expenses in the assessable value of Shampoos investigations were carried out by the department. These inve...

Jewels of India Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995IVAD(Delhi)585; 60(1995)DLT747a; 1995(35)DRJ439

M.K. Sharma, J.(1) The petitioners through this writ petition have sought for a direction to allow the petitioners to take part in the jewellery exhibition to be organized by the respondents at Abu Dhabi/Dubai from 1.10.1995 to 13.10.1995 and also at Kuwait from 16.11.1995 to 22.11.1995 with a further prayer for quashing the orders communicated by letters dated 28.7.1995 and 4.8.1995 declining the request of the petitioners to participate in the exhibition to be held at Abu Dhabi/Dubai and also at Kuwait. (2) The petitioners are dealing in jewellery for the past many years and are exporting Indian jewellery to various countries since 1981. The petitioner No.2 holds a valid jewellery license under the Gold Control Act. The respondent No.2, against whom the directions have been sought for in the present writ petition is a Government Corporation being an Undertaking of Government of India and is under the Ministry of Textiles. The Ministry of Commerce, Government of India, issued a public...

State Bank of India Vs. P. Abraham and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: I(1996)BC112; 62(1996)DLT287

N.G. Nandi, J. (1) By this suit, the plaintiff bank seeks to recover Rs. 7,72,488.93 paise with pendente lite and future interest @ 13% p.a. from the date of the suit till realisation with costs of the suit. The case set out in the plaint is that the plaintiff bank is a body corporate constituted by the State Bank of India Act, 1955, having its central office at Bombay and branches, amongst other places, at Najafgarh Road, Delhi, which is under the Administrative Control of local head office at NewDelhi; that defendant No. 1 carries on business as the sole proprietor in the name and style of M/s. Jasper India who manufactures electrical and mechanical equipments etc; that Defendant No. 2 is the guarantor/surety to the plaintiff for defendant No. 1 in respect of the dealings of defendant No. 1 with the plaintiff-bank; that defendant No. 1 got the account opened with the plaintiff-bank as the proprietor of M/s. Jasper India: that in the year 1973 defendant No. 2 as the sole proprietor of...