Delhi Court May 1997 Judgments

Precision Drilling Equipments (India) Ltd. Vs. New India Assurance Co. ...

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. M/s. Precision Drilling Equipments (India) Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the complainant, is engaged in the manufacturing of Rock Roller Drill Bits used for drilling purposes in Mines and Oil Research Organisations. Among others, the complainant had been marketing the said RF Drill bits to ONGC. The complainant obtained a Marine Insurance Cover from M/s. The New India Assurance Company Limited, opposite party-1 from year to year for the last eight years. The policy obtained was an open policy for value of Rs. 1.00 crore and there was not even a single occasion when the complainant had to lodge any claim with the Insurance Company. The policy was last renewed for the period 15.6.1991 to 14.6.1992. Further case of the complainant is that in pursuance to an order placed by ONGC, the complainant booked a consignment containing 22, 8 Diameter Tricone RR Bits vide their Invoice No.607 dated l3.12.1991 to ONGC, Baroda with M/s. ABC India Ltd., opposite party-2. ...

Mafatlal Plywood Industries Ltd. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(95)ELT86TriDel

1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original dated 8-2-1988 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore.2. Appellant, engaged in the manufacture of Plywood at the factory in Bangalore was filing price lists from time to time and on approval of the same was clearing goods on payment of appropriate duty. Appellant claims to have 27 dealers of whom 3 were in Bangalore city itself. The dispute in the appeal relates to the period from July 1982 to October 1983. On 1-6-1987 officers of Preventive Wing visited the factory and found from the books that appellant had raised debit notes on the 3 local dealers and collected a sum of Rs. 26,12,621.00 as handling and service charges. This was verified from the debit note register also.On the basis of debit notes, it was inferred that appellant had suppressed that real value of plywood in the price lists and paid duty on the reduced value and recovered differential value in the guise of handling and service charges on debit not...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Jagajit Cotton Textile Mills Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(94)ELT339TriDel

1. The respondents were a composite mill. When the cotton yarn from spindle stage were processed for weaving by way of being coned, reeled, or put on beams, some wastage occurred. The department on the interpretation of Notification No. 224/27 contended that duty on yarn issued for weaving was leviable at the spindle stage and, therefore, the wastage which occurred in me subsequent processes but prior to weaving was not capable of benefitting under the exemption notification. In this belief for such waste occurring between the period 15-7-1977 to 31-5-1980, duty was demanded vide show cause notice dated 16-8-1980. The Assistant Commissioner in his order dropped the demand dismissing the claim that duty on yarn in composite mill was leviable at spindle stage. He also observed that demand was barred by limitation. The Collector (Appeals) upheld the lower order resulting in present appeal being filed before us by the Revenue.2. When the case was posted for hearing on 12-12-1996 the Bench...

Gajra Bevel Gears Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(94)ELT317TriDel

1. Order dated 31-3-1989 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Indore is under challenge in this appeal.2. Appellant, engaged in the manufacture of Automobile Gears, was filing price lists from time to time and was paying duty on the approved value of clearances of the goods. The dispute in this appeal relates to the period 1-4-1987 to 30-9-1987. In the course of inspection and physical verification on 23-12-1987, it was found that gears valued at Rs. 5,225.00 were in shortage, gears valued at Rs. 17,295.00 and Rs. 1,21,965.00 were not accounted for, gears valued at Rs. 4,900.00 had been cleared without observing central excise formalities and without payment of duty. It was also found that over and above the price declared in the price lists, appellant had collected Rs. 12,54,073.00 from various buyers as per debit notes No.43 to 55, dated 30-11-1987 as sales promotion expenses incurred by the appellant in the territories of the respective buyers. The Department was o...

Cmc Commutator Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(95)ELT112TriDel

1. In this appeal filed by M/s. CMC Commutators (P) Ltd., the matter relates to the availment of Modvat credit in respect of the phosphor bronze in which tin content was 10% and phosphor content was 0.60% and the rest was copper. The appellants sought to classify their product called phosphor bronze Heading No. 74.01 of the Tariff and claimed deemed Modvat credit. The deemed Modvat credit was denied on the ground that the goods were correctly classifiable under Heading No. 74.03 and for the goods classifiable under Heading No.74.03 no deemed Modvat credit was available. On appeal, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, held that the goods were classifiable under Heading No. 74.01 as claimed by the assessee and also ruled out the classification under Heading No. 74.13, but had held that it was not necessary to determine the correct classification and as the goods were not classifiable under Heading No. 74.01, no deemed Modvat credit was available.3. Shri A.K. Agarwal, SDR, ...

Ms. Mohini Rautela and Others Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and O ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 67(1997)DLT469; 1997(42)DRJ401; (1997)IILLJ340Del

1. The petitioners were working as Assistant Teachers on regular basis in Nehru Adarsh Primary School. The petitioners were declared surplus in Respondent No. 3 School and were transferred to the M.C.D. Primary School on December 1, 1987 and since then, they have been working as Assistant Teachers in one or the other M.C.D. Primary School, till date. 2. It is stated in the petition that the M.C.D. is paying only 95 per cent of the salary to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention to Rule 47 of the Delhi School Education Rules. Rule 47 reads as under :- '47. Absorption of surplus (employees) etc. (1) Where as a result of :- (a) the closure of an aided school or any class or classes in any aided school; or (b) withdrawal of recognition from an aided school; or (c) withdrawal of aid from an aided school, any student or employee becomes surplus, such student or employee as the case may be (may be absorbed) as far as practicable, in such Government sc...

Kavita Tara and ors. Vs. Karam Kaur

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997IVAD(Delhi)525; 68(1997)DLT270

Usha Mehra, J. (1) Smt. Karam Kaur, widow of Shri Moti Ram, resident of 4-A/60, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi felt short of accommodation. She, thereforee, filed a petition for eviction as a classified landlord under Section 14-D of Delhi Rent Control Act (in short the Act) against this petitioner. Her case as set up in the petition was that the house in question is built on 85 sq. yards of land. Her family consists of three married sons and two married daughters besides one unmarried daughter who is living with her. That daughter is insane. Her each of the three married sons have got their children. At the time of filing the petition, the eldest and middle son had two children each. The youngest had one child but during the pendency of the petition the third son also got another child. The three rooms on the first floor are in occupation other three married sons. On the ground floor there is only one room which is being used by them as drawing room. She Along with her daughter sleep i...

Malkhan Singh Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. Malkhan Singh, complainant No. 1, purchased truck bearing registration number DDN 3447, 1989 model with the financial assistance of complainant No. 2. The truck was insured with New India Assurance Company Limited for the period 16.2.90 to 15.2.91 for a sum of Rs. 2,20,000/- with inter-purchase endorsement in favour of complainant No. 2. The truck met with an accident between Mainpuri and Dannahar on 25.12.90. It was badly damaged. The Insurance Company appointed Mr. A.K. Shankdhar, Surveyor who carried out spot survey on 28.12.90 and submitted his report-dated 12.1.91. In addition to complainant No. 1, complainant No. 2 also continued to follow up with the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company informed complainant No. 2 that assessment was regarding total loss being accepted and the final approval was being awaited. There was a lot of correspondence between the Regional Office, Kanpur and its counter-part in New Delhi. One of the facts which came to ...

Samtel India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)LC677Tri(Delhi)

1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal dated 4-2-1991 of Collector of Customs (Appeals).2. The appellants imported parts of electron guns in SKD/CKD condition.They claimed benefit of Notification No. 345/86, dated 16-6-1986. This was denied to them as they were found eligible to exemption only under Notification 188/87-Cus., dated 29-4-1987 which mentions "Electron Guns".2. Arguing for the appellants, ld. Consultant submits that they imported parts of electron guns in CKD conditions. There is no doubt that by virtue of rules of interpretation, they would be classifiable under Chapter 85 as electron guns. This interpretative rule however, cannot apply to exemption Notification 345/86 which refers to parts of electron guns. The goods imported by them are parts in CKD conditions and would be fully covered by this expression.3. Ld. DR reiterates the departmental arguments and submits that even if for the purpose of notification goods in CKD conditions have to be considered onl...

Advance Steel Tubes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(93)ELT473TriDel

1. Arguing the stay petition, Shri R. Nambirajan, learned Advocate appearing for the applicants narrating facts of the case submits that the applicants are engaged in the manufacture of galvanised steel tubes, pipes and structural. They were getting steel sheets from the market and using the same for the manufacture of finished products. The applicants claimed the benefit of Notification No. 202/88-C.E., dated 20-5-1988 and submitted that the steel sheets were of thickness not exceeding 5 mm. However the departmental authorities examined from their purchase invoices and found there some steel sheets where thickness was more than 5 mm. The department therefore alleged that the applicants were not entitled to the benefit of Notification No.202/88-C.E. on this quantity of inputs where the thickness was more than 5 mm. Accordingly it was held by them that the applicants were to pay duty amounting to Rs. 11,17,992.50 and that since the amount of duty was not paid a penalty of Rs. 4 lac was...