Delhi Court November 1996 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.
CamlIn Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-1996
Reported in: (1997)(90)ELT128TriDel
1. This appeal arises from order dated 21-3-1988 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay. The learned Collector confirmed the rejection of refund claim on the basis of the finding recorded by Assistant Collector, that the imported item namely, "Ferrules & Rubber Tips Setting Machine" for classification under Tariff Heading 84.59(2) and upheld the classification under Heading 84.59(1) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975.2. In his brief findings, the learned Collector has held that the ultimate commodity manufactured by the appellant is not a new one. The function of the machine to attach rubber tips to pencils fed to it, would not bring any new commodity but the article continues to remain as pencil in the market for all intense purposes. Thus no commodity is produced by the machinery.3. It is contended by the appellants in this appeal that the machine viz. 'Ferrules and Rubber Setting Machine' is designed for the production of a 'commodity'. They rely on the meaning given in the Webster...
State of Haryana and anr. Vs. Shimla Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC408
Usha Mehra, J.1. The State of Haryana and others have preferred this appeal against the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short Tribunal). The Tribunal gave the award on 17th January, 1995. The certified copy of the same was applied by the appellant on 1st February 1995. Copy was ready and made available to the appellants on 14th March, 1995. Whereas the appeal was filed on 3rd August, 1995, i.e. almost 65 days after the expiry of the period of limitation.2. With this appeal, the appellant has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condensation of delay for the period of 65 days in preferring the accompanied appeal.3. This application has been contested by the respondent inter alia, on the ground that neither the delay has been reasonably explained nor any details have been furnished in the application.4. To appreciate the contentions of the parties, the brief facts of the case are that on 13th January, 1986, Karan Pal, who was traveling on two...
Kasturi and Sons Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1996
Reported in: (1997)(92)ELT627TriDel
1. This Appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. Cus. 1235 to 1237/87, dated 11-3-1987 passed by Collector (Appeals), Madras.2. The appellants had imported two consignments of disc packs and one consignment of disc drive. They claimed for both these items classification under C.T.H. 8451.55 (2) as machines for transcribing the data into data media in coded form. There is no dispute in regard to classification as such. Their claim for concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 172/77 and subsequently a restricted claim under Notification No. 40/82-Cus. was rejected by the Authorities. Hence this appeal.3. Arguing for the appellants, ld. Counsel submits that disc drive they imported is actually a machine for transcribing the data into data media in coded form. To the extent disc stored data and converts into magnetic data as and when needed it is a machine for transcribing data on to data media. Therefore disc drive is fully entitled to exemption under Notification No. 40/82...
Perfect Sealing Systems Private Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1996
Reported in: (1997)(91)ELT205TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed against the order of Collector of Central Excise, Pune dated 29-11-1985.2. Learned Counsel stated that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of four types of filter elements bearing Nos. 158139, 256834, 3226018 and 3226019, according to the specifications and designs supplied by Kirolskar Cummins Ltd., Pune (KCL). The said filter elements are exclusively or in any event, for a maximum purpose, used in industrial products such as compressors, generating sets, marine propulsion, quarry equipment, standing power unit for radar installation, vacuum evacuating grains handling units, pressure evacuating cement handling units, rock crushers, concrete mixers, conveyor belts, draglines, backhole mechanical cranes, general fluid filtration, air filtration fuel/water filtration and generally for all predominantly industrial and non-vehicular usages.3. The appellants were enrolled under the Shops and Establishments Act.They had four workers (but increased to ni...
Bhushan Industrial Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1996
Reported in: 1997(40)DRJ235
M.K. Sharma, J.(1) This is a petition under Section 14,17 & 29 of the Arbitration Act filed by the petitioner seeking for filing of the award dated 11.2.1986 passed by the Arbitrator, respondent No.2 and upon such filing of the award to pass a decree in terms of the award Along with interest till actual payment at 18% per annum. (2) In response to the invitation of tender the petitioner submitted its tender for the supply of M.S.Rounds. The said tender of the petitioner was accepted by respondent No.1. However, disputes and differences having arisen between the parties the matter was referred to the sole arbitration of respondent No.2. The Arbitrator, after hearing the parties made/published his award on 11.2.1986. On filing of the aforesaid award in this court and in pursuance of the notice issued by this court, the respondent No.1 filed an objection within the statutory time limit under Sections 30 & 33 of the Arbitration Act. (3) The respondent No.1 is represented by Mr. Raman Kapoo...
Bengal Silk Trading Co. Vs. D.S. Bhalla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)298; 65(1997)DLT219; 1997(40)DRJ254; 1997RLR66
R.C. Lahoti, J. (1) This is a decree holder's revision feeling aggrieved by an order dated 15.5.87 passed by a executing court directing appropriation of payment made by the judgment debtor as against a decree for recovery of money by way of principal and interest and costs. (2) It appears that the decree holder has in his favor a simple money decree, the principal amount wherein carries interest pendente lite payable @ 6% per annum. Decree also directs payment of costs by J.D. to the decree holder. (3) The judgment debtor made a payment. The executing court has directed the decree holder to appropriate the payment first in payment of principal and the remaining amount to be adjusted in payment of interest and then towards the costs. (4) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the impugned order is not sustainable in law. Sections 59 to 61 of the Contract Act lay down the general rules as to appropriation of payment in a case where a debtor owes sever...
Super Refrigeration Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Super Sales Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1996
Reported in: 1996VAD(Delhi)570; 1997(1)ARBLR230(Delhi); 1997(40)DRJ263
S.K. Mahajan, J. (1) The partnership firm under the name and style of M/s.Kumar Metal Industries of which Sh.Satish Maini was one of the partners was engaged in the manufacture and sales of refrigeration goods and adopted a trade mark 'Super' for the said goods. The plaintiff company was incorporated on 14th February, 1986 and is alleged to have acquired a running business of the aforesaid firm. It is thereforee, stated that the plaintiff No.1 and its predecessors have been using trade mark 'Super' for its goods continuously and extensively and without any hindrance from any quarter since 1965. It is also alleged that said trade mark 'Super' had been widely advertised by the plaintiff and the word 'Super' also forms key portion of the plaintiffs trade name. This trade mark 'Super' is alleged to have acquired enviable reputation in the minds of the purchasing public and the trade because of its alleged excellent quality and high standard during the past more than 28 years and has come t...
J.E. International Vs. S.K. Minocha and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1996
Reported in: 65(1997)DLT900
Usha Mehra, J. (1) M/S. J.E. International had filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte award dated 3rd March, 1994 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Delhi. This application by the impugned order was dismissed on 6th September, 1994, inter alia, on the ground that the Labour Court became functus officio, hence had not jurisdiction to set aside the exparteaward after 30 days lapsed since the publication of the award in Gazette or after the date when the award came into operation. (2) The legal point raised in this petition is whether the jurisdiction of the Labour Court to entertain such If like application ceased after the expiry of the period of 30 days of the publication of the award in the Official Gazette. In order to appreciate the legal point raised the brief and relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this legal point are that the respondent No. 2 workman made a claim against the Management i.e., present petitioner. That claim was referred for adjudi...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kamla Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)368; 1997(40)DRJ785
Manmohan Sarin, J. (1) ADMIT. (2) This letters patent appeal has been preferred by the National Insurance Company Ltd. against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in FAO.141/91 and CM.372/92 dated 9.5.1995, by which the learned Single Judge allowed the appeal filed by the owner/insured and held that the liability of the insurance company was unlimited and not limited to Rs.1,50,000.00 as held by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Mact had based on the policy of insurance and the documents filed on record, viz. the proposal form, insurance policy cover note, renewal endorsement, etc., held that the liability of the appellant insurance company was limited to Rs.1,50,000.00 . It may be noted that the appellant had earlier moved the learned Single Judge with an application for re- hearing, praying that the impugned judgment dated 9.5.1995 had been passed without hearing the appellant's counsel. The learned Single Judge granted the re-hearing, but vide its order dated 28.7.1995 he...
Indian Farmers Fertilizer Co-op. Vs. Collr. of Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-1996
Reported in: (1997)(92)ELT376TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against order in appeal No. 1067/89-BC, dated 9-6-1989. The appellants who are manufacturers of chemical fertilizers having their plant at Kalol in the State of Gujarat have, among other machines, installed one Reciprocating Type Carbon Dioxide Gas Compressor. They imported certain spare parts for this compressor and claimed assessment under CTH 88.14.90 read with 98.06. Customs Authorities, however, classified these goods under 84.81.80. Their refund claim for concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 69/87 read with Notification 132/87 was rejected since goods were held to be classifiable under CTH 84.81.80 and not under Heading 84.14.90 read with 98.06. The Collector (Appeals) upheld the order and hence this appeal.2. Arguing for the appellants, ld. Consultant submits that the Discharge Valves and Suction Valves imported by them are specially designed for fitment into the CO2 Gas Compressor installed in the factory of the appellant. These valves ar...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »