Delhi Court September 1995 Judgments

H. Guru Instruments (North India) Vs. C.C.E.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT846TriDel

1. The above captioned appeals involve common issues. They are therefore being disposed of by this common order. A. No. E/942/93-B : M/s. H. Guru Instruments (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the founder company) having their factory at Calcutta are engaged in the manufacture of scientific instruments. In 1981, the founder company acquired an industrial plot in Sahibabad from U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation with the intention of setting up another factory for the manufacture of scientific instruments. In the year 1983, a new company under the name of H.. Guru Instruments (North India) Pvt. Ltd was incorporated with different shareholders but with Shri G. Hazra as Managing Director who was also the Managing Director of the founder company. With the intention of transferring the new factory at Sahibabad together with its assets and liabilities to the new company, a sale deed dated 16-10-1983 was drawn up by the founder company but on account of the objections raised by ...

Hasina Khatoon Vs. Competent Officer and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1995(35)DRJ158

Usha Mehra, J. (1) Petitioner, Smt.Hasina Khatoon wants to amend her prayer clause in the writ petition, inter alia, on the grounds that in the prayer clause (ii) she has given property number, but inadvertently the place where it is situated has not been mentioned. Hence by amendment in prayer clause (ii) she wants to add the location of the property situated.(2) So far as this amendment in the relief clause is concerned, counsel for the respondent has no objection. Hence, amendment pertaining to relief number (ii) indicating the location of the property in question is hereby allowed.(3) As regards the second amendment sought, the main contest by the respondent is that it amounts to setting up a new case. Moreover, it is beyond the case set up by the petitioner in the main petition.(4) The petitioner wants to add that the respondent concealed from this Court that he has got a sister, who has share in the property. By concealing these facts respondent committed a fraud. Respondents 4 a...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunil Kumar and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: II(1995)ACC699

C.M. Nayar, J.1. The present judgment will dispose of F.A.O. No. 179/82 as well as Cross Objections, C.M. No. 3317/82 filed by the respondent/claimant. The brief facts of the case are that Sunil Kumar, aged about 22 years was driving the Ambassador car bearing Registration No. UPH 6922 going from his residence to Nangloi at about 9.30 a.m. on 27th June, 1973. When he reached Ring Road, Oil Tanker bearing Registration No. DHG 728 driven by respondent No. 2, Suraj Prasad and owned by respondent No. 3 came from the opposite direction at a fast speed without blowing any horn and dashed against the car of the respondent/claimant. It was alleged that the tanker came at such high speed that its driver could not control it even after the impact and stopped it at some distance from the place of the accident and the respondent received multiple injuries on his body and his left hand received long and deep cut injuries. The respondent was removed to Delhi Nursing Home where he remained admitted a...

Delhi Development Authority Vs. I.S. Narula

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. This order would dispose of application for condonation of delay. The material dates are; the District Forum-II rendered its order on 4.5.94. Certified copy of the order was received by the DDA, appellant, by post on 13.7.94, The appeal was filed on 28.9.94 alongwith application for condonation of delay. Better particulars in regard to this application were furnished later. Reply to the application has been filed. According to the appellant decision to file the appeal was taken on 9.8.94 and the file was sent to the Lawyer to do the needful on 12.8.94. There were public holidays from 13 to 15th August '94. The appellant furnished better particular with regard to the delay from 16,8.94 to 27.9.94. In the better particulars it was stated that there was strike in Tis Hazari Courts and the appellant's Counsel could not get the grounds of appeal typed whereafter grounds of appeals were sent and the same were signed by the Competent Authority and ultimately the a...

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Hamesh Madan

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that Hamesh Madan, respondent, has Industrial Power (IP) and Industrial Light (IL) connections in his name. These connections are being used in a factory which is allegedly owned by Madan Lal Madan, father of Hamesh Madan. On 14.10.1992 Enforcement Staff of DESU conducted a surprise visit and found that the electric connections were being mis-used and the same had been sub-let. Electricity bills were therefore raised alongwith surcharge on the ground of misuse and sub-letting. The consumer, Hamesh Madan, approached District Forum by filing a complaint. The complaint was allowed and it was directed that the O.P. shall not demand surcharge on account of mis-use or sub-letting on the basis of the inspection dated 14.10.92. The O.P. was also directed to replace the meter with one month and to pay Rs. 1,000/- as compensation for the harassment caused to the complainant. The O.P. has preferred this appeal. The view taken...

Parenteral Drugs (i) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)(81)ELT533TriDel

1. Arguing on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of differential duty of Rs. 1,67,20,587/- confirmed by the adjudicating authority, learned Counsel Shri H.A. Ahmadi, submits that this demand has been confirmed on the ground that the applicants have not satisfied clause (b) of Notification 171/90, dated 16-5-1990 in that the Aseptic Form Fill Seal Machine used by them was not a composite or integrated machine capable of performing the functions of filling, forming and sealing, but had used separate machines for the manufacture of aseptic packaging material for packing of pharmaceuticals. He submits that there is no finding in the impugned order that aseptic packing materials has not been manufactured and the case of the Department is only that more than one machine and manual handling have been used for such manufacture. His submission is that even clause (b) of the Notification specifies that a manufacturer can possess machine/machines and, therefore, this would mean that it is...

Prem Kumar Chadha Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)LC418Tri(Delhi)

1. This Appeal is directed against the order-in-original passed by the Additional Collector who ordered for absolute confiscation of 15 kgs.heroin valued at Rs. 75,00,000/-, 29 kgs. Hashish valued at Rs. 87,000/- under Section lll(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. He has also imposed personal penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on the appellant and on an other person namely Upkar Singh Sandhu under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appeal of Shri Upkar Singh Sandhu is not before us. The appellants have not challenged the absolute confiscation of the impugned goods but has challenged the imposition of personal penalty of Rs. 20,000/-. The case against the appellant is based on the recovery of a chit which contained a name of Shri Prem Pathan said to have been recovered from the site of encounter alongwith the goods under seizure.The Department conducted the investigation and a show-cause notice was issued to the appellant and Shir Upkar Singh Sandhu on 15-6-1990. The same was not served on them...

Jayalakshmi Cotton and Oil Vs. C.C.E.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)LC187Tri(Delhi)

1. This appeal has been filed against Order No. 184/87(0), dated 30-11-1987 passed by the Collector Central Excise (Appeals), Madras confirming the order dated 27-5-1987 passed by the Assistant Collector confirming the demand of Rs. 1,16,321.50 on account of Cess in terms of Section .3 of the Vegetable Oil Cess Act, 1983, on a quantity of 23, 264.30 quintals of Cotton seed oil extracted by the appellants during the period 1-3-1986 to 30-9-1986.2. The appellants have filed written submissions and have prayed that the appeal may be decided on merits. In their written submissions the main points raised by the appellants are that (1) Since the Hon'ble Finance Minister in his Budget Speech on 28-2-1986 had declared that Cess on Cotton, Copper and Vegetable Oils will be dispensed with, the concerned Ministries were expected to take necessary measures in this regard and on account of the promise made by the Finance Minister the Department was estopped from recovering Cess in this case on cot...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Bhagsons Paints Ind. (India)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(61)LC11Tri(Delhi)

1. This appeal is directed by the Revenue against the impugned Order-in-Appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents filed their refund claim for Rs. 56,681.86 on the ground that they paid the said amount by way of duty on their products for the period from 4.5.1982 to 31.3.1983 whereas they were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 80/80 dated 19.6.1980. However, the Assistant Collector rejected the same on the ground that their value of excisable goods for the year 1981-82 exceeded Rs. 15 lakhs which was a pre-condition for availment of exemption under Notification No. 80/80, negativing the defence of the respondents that the total value of clearances includes the value of Putty a sort of thinner or preservator which was exempted from payment of duty under Tariff Item 68 and was not to be clubbed with the total value of clearances for the year 1981-82. On appeal by the respondents the Collector (Appeals) set ...

Baldev Krishan Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT108TriDel

1. Arguing on the application for modification of the stay order by which the applicants wsere directed to deposit Rs. 75,000/ out of the total penalty amount of Rs. 2 lakhs, Sh. M. Ganeshan, learned Counsel submits that the applicant is suffering from a type of cancer and is undergoing regular Medical treatment in hospital at Patiala and it is also extremely difficult to meet the medical expenses. He refers to the medical certificate and prescriptions filed alongwith the Misc.application. He offers house property at Patiala standing in the name of the applicant to cover the balance of Rs. 50,000/ as Rs. 25,000/ has already been deposited by the applicant. He therefore, prays that either the Bench dispense with the requirement of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs.50,000/ or modify the order so as to accept the security in the form of house property in the name of the applicant.2. The learned DR Sh. Das strongly opposes the modification of the order on the ground that illness of the applica...