Delhi Court November 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.
Jay Cylinders Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT233TriDel
1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Jay Cylinders Ltd., Sikandrabad, the Order-in-Appeal dated 12-7-1996 passed by the Commr., C. Ex. (Appeals), Ghaziabad on an application filed by the Asstt. Collector, C. Ex., Under Section 35E of the Act is under challenge.2. Shri C.L. Sawhney, Consultant appearing for the appellants submitted that the valuation of the gas cylinders of 32.5 kgs. was not an issue in the adjudication order dated 6-7-1993 passed by the Asstt.Collector, C. Ex., Ghaziabad and that the Commr., C. Ex. (Appeals), Ghaziabad had gone beyond his jurisdiction to pass the order relating to cylinders of 32.5 kgs. capacity. He also submitted that against the same Order-in-Original No. 39/93 dated 6-7-1993, the Revenue had filed an earlier appeal and the same had been rejected by the Commr., C. Ex.(Appeals) as time-barred. Against the same order again, the appeal was filed by the jurisdictional Commr., C. Ex., and certain directions have been given by the Commr., C. Ex. (Appeals) whic...
J.J. Enterprises Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT585TriDel
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-original passed by the Additional Collector, Customs, Bombay. In the impugned order, the Additional Collector, Customs, Bombay held that the appellant has misdeclared the goods and ordered confiscation Under Section lll(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and allowed to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1.5 lac. The Additional Collector, Customs also imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/-.2. The appellants made import of Tin Mill Black Plate (TMBP) uncoated and filed B/E claiming the classification under Customs Tariff Heading 7209.90. The respondent took the sample out of the imported goods and the sample was sent to Deputy Chief Chemist and the Deputy Chief Chemist opined that in appearance and presence of chromium on the surface would indicate that it would be Tin Free Steel (TFS). On the basis of this report, the impugned order was passed after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants.3. Ld. Couns...
Peunwalt (i) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT739TriDel
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay. In the impugned order the fin tubes imported by the appellants was held to be classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading No. 73.04.2. The appellant made import of 46 pieces of longitudinal fin tubes from Germany and claimed classification under Tariff Heading No. 84.19 as parts of heat exchanger and further claimed the benefit of Notification No. 172/89-Cus.3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the fin tubes imported by the appellants were cut to specific shape and size and were meant to be fitted directly without any fabrication to the heat exchanger, without any further processing, therefore these tubes are identifiable as parts of heat exchanger and are classifiable under Tariff Heading 8419.90. He further submits that these fin tubes have been specifically designed by their foreign . collaborators as per the drawing and specification for th...
Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Valsad Sahakari Khand Udyog
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT242TriDel
1. The respondents were the manufacturers of sugar. Notification No.99/81-C.E., dated 3-4-1981 provided for concessional rates of duty for sugar cleared under additional entitlement under the incentive scheme announced by the Director of Sugar. The notification covered production from the Sugar year 1980-81 and thereafter. The respondents in terms of this notification and on the basis of a provisional sanction by the Director of Sugar effected clearance at concessional rates. On 22-4-1982 the show cause notice was issued claiming that since the certificate was on provisional basis, and that since the finalisation would take time the assessee would not fulfil the requirements in Explanation (iii) of the subject notification. Therefore, the differential duty was calculated and demand for Rs. 13,76,049.97 was made vide the show cause notice. The Assistant Collector confirmed this demand. He also confirmed the demands of similar nature arising out of two other show cause notices. These th...
Chandra Synthetics Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: (1999)(107)ELT693TriDel
1. The appeal is against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Ghaziabad partially allowing the appeal filed before him by the appellant but retaining fine in lieu of confiscation of Rs. 40,000/- and penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on them. Originally the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad had, vide his order dated 12-9-1996 held that they had contravened the provisions of Rules 53 and 173G as they had stored excisable goods outside the approved bonded store room and has also not kept the statutory records properly as certain quantity of goods in packed condition were found unaccounted for in the records and which had been stored in the first floor portion of their factory premises in spite of being in the bonded store room situated in the ground floor. After show cause notice had been issued to the appellant countering these charges they replied to the same and the adjudicating authority held that the charges have been proved and appropriated a sum of Rs...
Subhash Gupta Vs. Delhi (Delhi Admn.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: 1998IAD(Delhi)437; 1998(44)DRJ305
ORDERAnil Dev Singh, J.1. By this petition the petitioner, a M.C.D. contractor, who is one of the accused in Sessions Case No. 75/97, FIR No. 340/96, P.S.Okhla Industri-al Area, under sections 364/302/201/216/411/120B/ 34, IPC seeks bail. The accusation against the petitioner is that he along with his associates, namely, Kamal Singh @ Shaily, Vibhor Singh @ Lovi, Vijay Mohan Sharma @ Minto, Dr. Hemant Kalra, Viney Kumar @ Vinu, Ravi Prakash @ Ravi @ Shard Gupta/Agarwal, Kamal Kumar @ Pinki and Jaindender Kumar Tyagi @ JK, were involved in the macabre crime in which three persons were murdered. The victims were Dr. Sunil Kaul, proprietor of Personal Point, and his two employees Sujata Saha and Deepa Sharma. The petitioner had known accused Ravi Prakash as he happens to be the brother-in-law of one Vijay Prakash who was posted as an Executive Engineer in the M.C.D. From January 1994 to October 1995. Ravi Prakash stayed in the flat of the petitioner at Greater Kailash Part II from March 9...
Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: [1998]232ITR639(Delhi)
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. This common order shall govern the disposal of IT Refs. Nos. 234 of 1978 and 235 of 1978, both at the instance of the assessed and arising out of two assessment years seeking opinion of the High Court on the following questions of law : Asst. yr. 1971-72 '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 4 lakhs debited by the assessed to deferred revenue expenditure technical know-how payment was expenditure of capital nature 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that the assessee-company was not entitled to depreciation in respect of the said amount of Rs. 4 lakhs 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessed was entitled to the development rebate amounting to Rs. 84,513 4. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the payments of Rs. 5,000 to Kreli (India) (P) Ltd. Rs. 11,000 to M. M. Bilaney & Co., and Rs. 3,000 to M.M. Consultanc...
National Research Development Corporation of India Vs. Synthite Indust ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: 1998IAD(Delhi)858; 4(1997)CLT605; 69(1997)DLT1005; 1997(43)DRJ601
J.B. Goel, J. (1) By this judgment I.A. Nos.4347/84, 7082/84 and Suit No.1142A/84 are being disposed of. Suit No.1142A/84 is a petition under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short the Act) for filing arbitrator's Award dated 21st May, 1984 in the court and for passing a decree in terms of the said Award, I.A. No.7082/84 are the objections against the said Award filed by the defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 had also filed another objection petition (IA No.4347/84) under Sections 30 and 33 of the Act, before the award was filed in court and notice was given to it. (2) Briefly, the facts are that the plaintiff a Govt. company, on 21st February, 1973 had entered into a license agreement with M/s. Arborites Private Ltd. of Cochin (for short Arborites) providing for disclosure by the former to the latter the use of the know how for the manufacture of spice oleoresins developed and invented by the Central Food Technical Research Institute, Mysore which they were entitled to...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Shri H.P. Mittal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Delhi192
ORDERM.S.A. Siddiqui, J.1. This judgment proposes to dispose of civil writ petition No.813/88 (M.C.D. v. H.P. Mittal & Ors.), CW 2309 2310/88 2309 2310/88 (MCD v. K.D. Madan), CW 1951/86 (MCD v. Munishwar Nath Sardana & Ors.) also. The challenge in these writ petiton is to the orders of the Additional District Judge dated 15-10-87, who, while accepting the appeals of the responders, has, inter alia, fixed the costs of land of Vasant Vihar at the rate of Rs.75/- per square yard and directed the Assessing Authority to redetermine the ratable value of the property in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order on the ground that it was not open to the learned Additional District Judge to fix rate of the land of Vasant Vihar on the basis of the schedule rates of L & D.O. The question involved in these cases is the rate of the land at the time when construction was commenced by the respondents for the purpose of determining the rateable value. It is now well...
Sachdeva Industries and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)995; 69(1997)DLT988
Arun Kumar, J. (1) Since a short point is involved, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the Counsel for the parties. THE Railway Electrification Directorate of the Railway Board floated a global tender for fabrication and supply of cadmium copper catenary wire in February, 1997. The last date for submission of the tenders was 11th March, 1997 up to 14.30 hours. The tender was with respect to the requirement for Railway electrification project during the year 1997-98 for a quantity of 1,072 kms. The tenders were to be opened at 15.00 hours on the same day. The petitioner submitted a tender only for a part of the quantity involved. Same was the case with respondent No. 6. Respondents No.8 and 9 submitted tenders for the full quantity of work.(2) According to the respondents since the petitioner and respondent No. 6 did not fall in the category of approved established suppliers, such suppliers were at best entitled to 20% of the work and in fact 20% of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »