Delhi Court October 1997 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.
Dabur India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: (1997)(98)ELT674TriDel
1. In the above appeal which arises out of the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Ghaziabad, Modvat credit of Rs. 1,14,919.99 p has been denied on Roto pumps, Electric hoists, Cooling Vessels, Conveyor belts and stainless steel tanks on the ground that they are not capital goods within the meaning described thereto in the Explanation to Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. The learned Counsel Shri R. Chibber submits that Roto pumps, Electric hoists and Conveyor belts are in the nature of material handling-equipment in the plant for manufacture of Chyawanprash and are entitled to credit as held by the Tribunal in a series of orders.Regarding the other two items, he draws my attention to the order passed by the Adjudicating authority and submits that they are used during the process of manufacture of appellants' final product and therefore, are to be treated as capital goods used for producing or processing final product namely Chyawanprash.3. The lea...
Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT431TriDel
1. In their various price lists the appellants had claimed that 3% cash discount would be given by them to the buyers. On certain grounds, the price lists were provisionally approved. At the time of final approval, it was shown to the Assistant Collector that cash discount given was at two rates namely 3% and 5%. The Assistant Collector did not allow the higher rate of discount but finalised at 3%. He however, went on record to the effect that evidence has been produced by the Assessee to show that discount had been given to the buyers at these two rates. In disallowing the higher rate of discount he held that this was given for advance payment. The Collector (Appeals) upheld the order on the ground that cash discount made for payment prior to the delivery of the goods amounted to interest and was, therefore, not admissible. He also did not believe the assessee's claim that there was a typing error in the circular which itself specified cash discount at two different rates.2. We have ...
Delhi Lotteries Vs. Rajesh Aggarwal and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)529; AIR1998Delhi332; [1999]97CompCas758(Delhi); 69(1997)DLT543; 1997(43)DRJ448
Mohd. Shamim J. 1. This petition under article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by Delhi Lottery (hereinafter referred as the petitioner in order to facilitate the reference) against the judgment and order dated March 9, 1995, whereby defendant-bank/respondent No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 3 for the sake of convenience) was restrained from allowing the encashment of the bank guarantees (BG No. 1 of 1994, dated January 18, 1994, and BG No. 2 of 1994, dated February 4, 1994). It was further ordered that the securities furnished against the said bank guarantees be released. 2. The brief facts which led to the presentation of the present petitions are as under : that the plaintiff-respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 2 for the sake of brevity) filed a suit (No. 34 of 1995) for perpetual injunction on February 8, 1995, with the allegations that respondent No. 2 is the sales manager of Hanumant Sales Corporation, Inderpuri, New Del...
Surinder Singh Vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)333; 70(1997)DLT433; 1997(43)DRJ495; 1998RLR32
Usha Mehra, J.(1) Petitioner Surinder Singh was working as Class-IV employee with the Overseas Communication Services, Ministry of Communication, Government of India. He joined the said organisation in 1963. On 1st April, 1986 he was sent on deputation to Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (in short VSNL). Petitioner's services were regularised with the Vsnl on 2nd January, 1990. On 6th June, 1990 petitioner gave three months notice to the respondent and sought voluntary retirement. His offer of voluntary retirement was accepted by the respondent w.e.f. 5th September, 1990. This was so communicated to the petitioner by respondents vide letter dated 31st July, 1990. However, instead of paying the voluntary retirement benefits to the petitioner, the respondent on 2nd February, 1992 intimated to him that acceptance of his voluntary retirement stood withdrawn by the respondent-VSNL. That he was not eligible for pensionary benefits because he being an employee of respondent which is an autonomous...
Satya Pal Yadav Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: 71(1998)DLT68
Usha Mehra, J.(1) The petitioner joined as Constable in Central Industrial Security Force. On 23rd March, 1991 he fell sick, thereforee, was referred to the Central Hospital Katra for treatment. The said doctor advised him rest for 20 days and further directed him to take medicine and other treatment. On 28th March, 1991 petitioner requested his unit to permit him to go to his home in the village. Accordingly, the petitioner proceeded to his home as he was given 20 days medical rest. In the village, his doctor prescribed certain medicine and he became an outdoor patient in the Civil Hospital Kaninar (Haryana). On 12th May, 1991 fitness certificate was issued by the said hospital and when the petitioner reached his unit Along with the medical fitness certificate, he was allowed to join the duty on 23rd May, 1991. On 6th June, 1991 the petitioner was charge-sheeted for being unauthorisedly absent. On the basis of the charge-sheet he was removed from the service with immediate effect on 1...
Delhi Transport Corporation Retired Employees Association Vs. Union of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)282; 1997(43)DRJ497
Usha Mehra, J.(1) Present petition was filed by the Dtc Retired Employees Association through its Chairman beside three individuals S/Shri Hari Singh, R.R.Sharma and Sansar Chand. The main relief sought in this petition is that the respondent Delhi Transport Corporation (in short DTC) vide order No.16 dated 27th November, 1992 introduced pension scheme for its employees retiring on or after 3rd August, 1981 on the same pattern as applicable to the Central Government employees. (2) That when the said scheme was not implemented inspire of the assurance given to the Supreme Court, the petitioners filed contempt proceedings in the Supreme Court. During these proceedings the Dtc implemented the pension scheme. However, according to petitioners the same is rendered ineffective because the Dtc adopted unreasonable and illegal stand thereby asking the petitioners to pay interest on the amount of employer's contribution paid to the retired employees. The employees are prepared to refund the emp...
Collector of Customs Vs. Jindal Photo Films
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT445TriDel
1. In this departmental appeal, the order of Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay, dated 25-9-1991 has been called in question. The issue relates to interpretation of Notification No. 59/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987.2. The respondent, M/s. Jindal Photo Films Ltd. had imported a consignment of Signing Machine and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 59/87-Cus. Their claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector of Customs on the ground that the impugned goods were not used for production of any commodity as required under Notification No.59/87-Cus. In appeal, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) by the impugned order set aside the Assistant Collector's order and held that Signing Machine imported by the present respondents would be eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 59/87-Cus., Hence the Departmental Appeal.3. Shri A.K. Agarwal, SDR and Shri L.P. Asthana, Advocate appeared for the appellant Collector and the respondents respectively before us.4. On behalf of the Department it h...
Birla Vxl Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT452TriDel
1. The issue for determination in this appeal arising out of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Chandigarh is the eligibility of Deltamoist Portable Digital Moisture Meter and spares used by the appellants herein for measuring percentage of moisture regained at various stages in the processing of textiles such as woollen fabrics, man-made fabrics, etc., to the benefit of Modvat credit under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 - the Department has denied credit of Rs. 10,144/- on the ground that the item is neither used for producing or processing any goods or for bringing about any change in any substance for the manufacture of the final product and is, therefore, not capital goods within the meaning thereof as contained in Clause (a) of the Explanation to Rule 57Q(1).2. I have heard Shri R. Sudhinder, learned Advocate and Shri Y.R.Kilania, learned DR and carefully considered their submissions.3. The item in question is in the nature of testing inst...
Samurai Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT85TriDel
1. In both these appeals, common question of law and facts are involved, hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law.2. Both the authorities have rejected the refund claim of Rs. 78,694/-and Rs. 1,40,566.30 as not maintainable being barred by time under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The demands raised by the department in respect of these amounts which had been short paid in respect of product "Electronic Game Cartridges" was demanded and confirmed on the ground that the final product "Electronic Game Cartridges" fell under Chapter Heading 9504.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants had claimed benefit of Notification No. 96/86, dated 10-2-1986, which had been denied. On the basis of adjudication order, the appellants had agitated the previous adjudication proceedings at CEGAT which on appeal was allowed by remand. Those earlier matters pertaining to the same issue was on re-adjudication allowed in favour of the appellants...
Eacom'S Controls (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector Of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT83TriDel
1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Eacom's Controls (India) Ltd., the matter relates to the eligibility of the goods imported - Housing and Covers for the transmitters, positioners, recorders, indicators, etc.to the benefit of exemption Notification No. 69/86-Cus., dated 17-2-1986 as amended. The goods had been imported under B/E dated 4-7-1986 and the goods were cleared without the benefit of this exemption Notification. Subsequently, a refund claim was filed on the ground that the benefit of Notification No. 69/86-Cus. should be made available to the goods imported. The item "Housing" was a component of pneumatic transmitters and these transmitters were instruments used for measuring or checking the flow, level, pressure or other variables of liquids or gases. The "housing" was a carbon steel casting especially designed to house the internal parts of the transmitters. The 'covers' were declared to be the component of pneumatic positioners and that the positioners were for automatic reg...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »