Delhi Court February 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.
Super Sun Lamination and Plastics Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1996
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT55TriDel
1. The appeal is against a decision taken by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Allahabad, holding that Modvat credit is not admissible on the strength of triplicate copy of bill of entry which the appellants had produced before the departmental authorities for availment of Modvat credit of countervailing duty paid on imported goods.2. Shri B.B. Gujral, learned counsel for the appellants took me through the impugned order-in-appeal where the Collector (Appeals) had observed that the provisions of Rule 57G(4) are crystal clear and it had been provided in most unambiguous words that the manufacturer will submit the original documents evidencing payment of duty. He had gone on to observe that no exception had at all been made in this regard by law that even duplicate or triplicate or certified copies can be used as a substitute for the original duty paying documents. He has also recorded an observation that it had been admitted by the appellants that they are not in a position to...
Laxmi Cements Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1996
Reported in: (1996)(63)LC645Tri(Delhi)
1. The issue involved in this appeal is whether Modvat credit is admissible in respect of explosives which are used by the appellants in their mining process for obtaining limestone which is then transported by them to their cement factory for use there as an input in the manufacture of cement. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi held that the Modvat credit is not admissible for explosives as they are not inputs in the manufacture of cement. He has observed in his order that extraction of lime stone is not a necessary or committed step in the manufacture of cement and the process of manufacture of cement cannot be said to start with the extraction of lime stone in the mines.2. Shri Amit Prabhat, learned Advocate refers to the Tribunal decision in Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. CCE and Indian Rayon Industries Ltd. v. CCE . In fact, the latter decision has referred to the earlier one. Both the decisions had, inter alia, relied upon the Supreme Court decision in India Cop...
Jai Chand Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1996
Reported in: 1996IAD(Delhi)576; 1996CriLJ2039; 1996(3)Crimes160; 1996(36)DRJ424
1. On April 15, 1991 at about 9-45 p.m. the Operation Theatre of the Guru Nanak Ry. Centre was a mute witness to an unfortunate incident. Involving Kumari Kiran Sharma and the present appellant Jai Chand. They were no strangers to each other. Whereas Kumari Kiran Sharma was employed in the said Centre as a Staff Nurse. Jai Chand was working there as a Nursing Orderly. This is how the prosecution witnesses unfold the events. 2. Kumari Kiran Sharma was on duty from 9 p.m. to 7-30 a.m. in the Operation Theatre. Jai Chand too was on duty on that very day. His duty hours were from 8 p.m. to 7-30 a.m. At about 9-45 p.m. after Ms. Sharma had finished her routine work she came to the Post Operation room of the Theatre. Jai Chand also arrived there and after catching hold of her, forcibly laid her down on the bed, broke the string of her Pyjama, gave a tooth bite on her left cheek and turned, her underwear. He even removed her sanitary pad. Ms. Sharma, however, did not give up. After giving him...
State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Gujarmal Modi Hospital and Research C ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1996
Reported in: 1996IAD(Delhi)608; I(1996)BC341; 61(1996)DLT614; (1996)112PLR48
S.K. Mahajan, J.(1) This suit has been filed by the consortium of plaintiff banks for recovery of Rs. 13,81,41,611.29 paise being the loan advanced by the banks. The defendants by way of securing the aforesaid loan mortgaged their properties in favor of all the banks. Original title deeds of the properties were deposited with the plaintiff No. 1 pursuant to a Resolution passed by the Governing Body of the said defendant, creating an equitable mortgage of the properties by way of a security for repayment of the term loan granted by the plaintiff-bank. The loan was not returned and the plaintiffs, thereforee, filed the present suit for recovery of the said amount. The amount was sought to be recovered by sale of the mortgaged properties mentioned in the plaint. (2) On the establishment of the Tribunal under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (in short referred as 'The Act'), no Court or other authority had any jurisdiction, power or authority (except ...
S.C.L. Malik Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1996
Reported in: 1996IAD(Delhi)644; 61(1996)DLT661; 1996(36)DRJ404
R.C. Lahoti, J.(1) The petition seeks quashing of the levy and demand of the General Tax on the farm house premises of the petitioner situated over khasra Nos.487 and 2226/489 of Village Khirki, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi-known as.36, Sainik Farms, New Delhi.(2) The location of the petitioner's property is not in dispute. According to the petitioner, the annual rateable value of the property was fixed in the year 1990 at Rs.4880.00 w.e.f. 1.4.83. The petitioner has paid the general tax payable on the property up to the year 1993-94. The petitioner has now received a bill dated 30th September, 1994 by which the petitioner has been asked to pay a sum of Rs.33,592.00 to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi by way of arrears of gen (3) The respondent-MCD has in its brief counter placed reliance on various relevant provisions of the Act, the Notification issued and the bye-laws framed there under to submit that not only the petitioner's property is liable to tax but it has been taxed correctl...
Shakuntala Devi Vs. Ashok Kumar Bajaj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1996
Reported in: 1996IAD(Delhi)717; 61(1996)DLT741; 1996RLR122
C.M. Nayar, J. (1) The present petition is directed against the judgment dated September. 5, 1991 of Shri K.S. Khurana, Additional Rent Controller, Delhi. The learned Judge rejected the petition for eviction filed by the petitioner under Section 14D of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). (2) The eviction petition was moved on the ground that the petitioner was the widow and the premises in question were let out to the respondent for residential purposes on August 1, 1981 and were now required by her. The husband of the petitioner died on January 26, 1984 and the petition was filed in the year 1989. The family of the petitioner consists of herself, her son Gurdeep Singh and his wife Smt. Anita and two minor children, a daughter and a son who are now aged about 11 and 41/2 years respectively. Apart from the above members of the family, the petitioner has five married daughters as well as grand children and they visit her but do not stay over night due to pa...
Cellulose Products of India Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-1996
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT154TriDel
1. The issue which falls for determination in these Appeals is whether ethyl alcohol is leviable to Central Excise Duty under Tariff Item 22.04 of Central Excise Tariff Act.2. Arguing for the appellants, the Ld. Advocate submits that their product, rectified Spirit, is made up of 94-95% alcohol and the remaining percentage is only water. This product as such is not suitable for use as fuel either by itself or in a mixture with other substance. The product, therefore, is not leviable to any duty under Central Excise Tariff Item 22.04. He submits that in their own case which was heard as Appeal No.: E/4508/93-D along with other Appellants, the Tribunal in the case of Cellulose Products of India Ltd. and Ors.v. Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara - 1996 (82) E.L.T. 147 (Tri.) held that rectified spirit is not leviable to duty as it is not suitable for use either by itself or in at a mixture with any other substance as fuel. In that Appeal the demand related to the period July, 1983 to ...
Hindon River Mills Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-1996
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT160TriDel
1. Smt. Anuranjan K. Singh, learned Advocate is present on behalf of the appellants. On the Bench pointing out at the outset that the appeal has been filed against an order-in-appeal passed by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) relating to a question of rebate of excise duty for goods which have been exported out of India which type of cases stand outside the purview of the Tribunal in terms of Proviso (b) to sub-section (1) of Section 35B of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, she fairly concedes the position as pointed out. She, however, states that in the impugned order-in-appeal the covering firming part thereof had advised them to file an appeal to the Tribunal in Form EA.3 and accordingly they filed the appeal in good faith as per the notes for guidance given along with the order-in-appeal.2. Shri D.S. Mallick, learned Departmental Representative has no particular comments in the matter. As the legal position is clear which has been referred to above, the order-in-appeal shou...
Afro-asian Agro Products Singapore Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Fertilisers ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-1996
Reported in: 62(1996)DLT10; 1996(36)DRJ742
K. Ramamoorthy, J. (1) The petitioner has filed the present suit under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for the appointment of an arbitrator. Pending the suit the petitioner in I.A.9435/95prays for injunction restraining the first respondent from encashing the Performance Guarantee Bond No. 86 of 95 dated 23rd of June 1995 and restraining the second respondent from making payment to the first respondent on the basis of the Performance Guarantee Bond. (2) The case of the petitioner briefly stated is this. The petitioner Co. is incorporated in Singapore under the Singapore Companies Act. It is engaged primarily in commodity trading in the global commodity markets. First respondent National Fertilisers Ltd. in the month of June 1995 had floated a global tender for the supply of 100,000 M.T. of Di-Ammonium Phosphate (hereinafter referred to as 'DAP'). The tender stated that intending bidders could offer to supply such quantities that they are capable of and they can also quote their...
The Motor and General Finance Ltd. Vs. Ram Niwash Sharma and Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-1996
Reported in: 61(1996)DLT848
S.D. Pandit, J. (1) This suit is a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act 1940. Plaintiff is a financial company. On 3.4.1987 respondent No. 1, Mr. Ram Niwas Sharma, approached the petitioner and entered into a hire-purchase agreement for hiring a Mahindra Jeep Model 1987. Defendant No. 2 agreed to stand surety to defendant No. 1 and hire-purchase agreement was executed between the parties on 3.4.1987 by which the respondent No. 1 took Mahindra Jeep 1987 Model bearing Engine No. 45-69928 Chassis No. 49-69928 and registration No. Bpz 7656. The respondent No 1 had agreed to pay Rs. 2,600.00 as first Installment and further 29 installments of Rs. 4,000.00 each and interest from time to time. But respondent was irregular in paying the installments and, consequently, his dues were increasing day by day. Out of the total dues of Rs. 1,18,600.00 he had paid only Rs. 32.100.00 . On 3.10.1989 respondent No. 1 was owing Rs. l,38,655.00 . Though legal notices were served on respondents ...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »