Delhi Court September 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.
Birla Ericson Opticals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT498TriDel
1. This Appeal is directed against the order dated 28-2-1996 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The issue that falls for determination relates to admissibility or otherwise of Modvat credit on cable fault locator, 250 KVA transformer, insulated wires and cables and control panels. Commissioner (Appeals) held that these electrical goods testing equipment used for high voltage current and to locate fault in cables and are nowhere used in manufacturing and processing the goods and therefore the benefit of credit as capital equipment cannot be extended to them.2. Arguing on behalf of the Appellants the ld. Counsel submits that the matter in regard to the benefit to each of these goods is already covered in their favour. In case of transformers the Tribunal has allowed the benefit in case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. R.K.Marbles Ltd. reported in 1997 (92) E.L.T-276 (T). Credit can again be allowed on electrical panel which regulate electric supply vide Tribunal's order in case o...
Metlex (i) P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: (1997)(95)ELT428TriDel
1. This application seeks stay of recovery and waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty of Rs. 10 lakh imposed on the applicants in the impugned order.2. The applicants were engaged in manufacturing and exporting of metallised polyester films. The raw materials, namely, polyester film was being imported by them under DEEC. On 11-6-1992, their office and factory premises were searched. Officers found that there was a total shortage of duty-free raw materials to the extent of 21,892.74 kgs. and a show cause notice was issued. Before the adjudicating authorities, the plea taken was that the assessees had fulfilled export obligation for all imports made under DEEC. It was claimed that the goods imported under one advance licence could be utilised for production of goods to be exported against another advance licence. In support of the first claim, copies of the shipping bills were also produced before the adjudicating authority. The Deputy Collector in the impugned order has held that the tra...
Super Seals (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT54TriDel
1. In both these stay applications, common question of law and facts are involved, hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law.By common order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the plea of the appellants on the availment of Modvat credit in respect of duty paid and inputs received in the factory for use in or in relation to the manufacture of their final product namely, Oil Seals and Flexible Hoses falling under Chapter Headings 4016.90 and 4009.92. The Asstt.Commissioner had issued the appellants with two show cause notices which were adjudicated and finally a demand for Rs. 83,991.16 in one case and another amount of Rs. 1,11,462.89 were confirmed on the ground that the invoices have been issued by a person who is not registered as an agent besides the allegation as specified in the Notification No.15/94 has not been spelt out in the invoices. While dealing with the matter both the authorities have given a finding that there is no dispute with regard to the duty ...
R.C. Garg and Sons Capital Services Ltd. Vs. National Stock Exchange o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)125; [1998]92CompCas620(Delhi); 71(1998)DLT189; 1997(43)DRJ402
Dalveer Bhandari, J.(1) The petitioner who is a registered member of the National Stock Exchange of India Limited, (for short NSE), has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal against the order dated 27.8.97, by which the appellant's writ petition was dismissed in liming by the learned Single Judge. (2) The appellant is a registered Trading Member. Trade Members have to abide by the Bye-laws., Rules and Regulations of the Exchange. Clause (2)(a) of the Byelaws of the Nse of India Limited reads as under:- (2)(a) Trading member shall adhere to the Bye Laws, Rules and Regulations of the Exchange and shall comply with such operational parameters, rulings, notices guidelines and instructions of the relevant authority as may be applicable. (3) Admittedly, the total Base Capital deposited by the appellant with the Exchange and Clearing Corporation is Rs. 70 lakhs and as per the circular of the Exchange NSCCL/CM/C&S;/0011 dated 1.10.96, the gross exposure at any time should not exceed Rs. 7 crore...
Soni @ Anita Vs. M.G.House and Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: (1998)118PLR4
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 24.2.1997, by which the learned Civil Judge rejected the application moved under Section10 read with Section151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has filed the present revision petition.2. The bare essential facts leading to be filing of the present revision petition may be briefly noticed:(i) The petitioner had booked an office flat at M.G. House I, 2 Community Centre. Wazirpur Industrial Area. Delhi. It is the petitioners case that the full consideration was paid and an agreement of sale was executed in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner dissatisfied with the maintenance service and other common facilities filed a complaint bearing No. 1962/93 against the respondent before the District Consumer Form on 6.8.1993. The respondent filed a suit for recovery in the month of December,1994 against the petitioner bearing No.481/94, for a sum of Rs. 5,053.67 towards the maintenance charges, ground rent and interest of late payment...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. O.P. Dwivedi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)240; 69(1997)DLT465
M.S.A. Siddiqui, J.(1) The challenge in this writ petition is the order dated 22.10.1995, who while accepting the appeal has remanded the case to the Assessing Authority for refixing the ratable value of the property bearing No. 65/1, New Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. (2) The respondent No. 2 Along with her husband purchased a plot of land under the registered sale deed dated 17.31.1976 for a consideration of Rs. l,15,000.00 .The construction on the plot was commenced in the same year and was completed in September, 1978 at the cost of Rs. 3 lacs. On 1.9.1978 basement and ground floor of the said premises were let out to the State Bank of India on a monthly rent of Rs. 8,000.00 . The petitioner then issued a notice, under Section 126 of the Dmc Act to'the respondent No. 2 proposing enhancement of the ratable value to Rs. l,12,130.00 with effect from 1.9.1978. The respondent No. 2 filed objections and after considering the said objections the Assessing Authority determined the rat...
P.S. Srinivasan Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: 1998IIIAD(Delhi)571; 72(1998)DLT280
K. Ramamoorthy, J. (1) The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs : (A)allow this writ petition of the petitioner with cost; (B)issue appropriate order or orders, direction or directions- (I)declaring the letter dated 4th July, 1991 from Apeda (Ann.P.1) as illegal and void in law; (II)setting aside the letter dated 4th July, 1991 being illegal and void in law; (III)declaring the petitioner to be entitled to continue to draw pension for the months from June, 1991 onwards; (IV)directing the respondents to continue to pay pension to the petitioner from June, 1991 onwards; (V)directing the respondents to pay arrears of pension to the petitioner from June, 1991 onwards with 18 percent interest thereon; (VI)directing that if the Pension Scheme is not considered to be applicable to the Apeda, the petitioner may in any case be given relief by paying his pension for the period from August, 1956 to November, 1970 when his service was under the Central Government and for the period from ...
Suzuki Motor Corporation Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)1; 1997(2)ARBLR477(Delhi); [1998]93CompCas771(Delhi); 68(1997)DLT827; 1997(43)DRJ253
C.M.Nayar, J. (1) The present petition is filed under Section 9(ii)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim measures of protection by the petitioner against the respondents as specified in the prayer clause. (2) The petitioner entered into Joint Venture Agreement with respondents 1 and 2 on October 2, 1982. This Agreement was amended on June 2, 1992. The controversy between the parties arose as a consequence of the Board Resolution allegedly passed in its meeting held on August 27, 1997 to nominate Mr. R.S.S.L.N. Bhaskarudu, Joint Managing Director as Managing Director of the Board of Directors of respondent No. 2, Maruti Udyog Limited with effect from the same date. The Communication in this regard reads as follows: 'GOVERNMENTOF India Ministry Of Industry Department Of Heavy Industry No. 2(8)/89-PE.VI Dated 27.8.1997 To, Shri Abhijit Mukhopadhyay, Company Secretary, Maruti Udyog Limited, 25, K.G. Marg, New Delhi Subject : Appointment of Managing Director in Marut...
Hyderabad Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT383TriDel
1. This Appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal dated 10-11-1989 passed by Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras.2. The Appellants imported carbide tipped circular cutter and claimed classification under C.T.A. 82.08 read with 84.74 as Knives for machinery used in shaping or moulding ceramic paste, stones, hardened cement etc. The claim was rejected by the Collector (Appeals) on the ground that knives are not parts of composite machine which is employed in shaping or moulding of the goods specified under C.T.A. 84.74. These on the other hand are meant for fitment into separate machine with motor for cutting hard materials like Asbestos cement etc.3. Arguing for the Appellants the ld. Counsel vehemently contests the findings arrived at by the Collector. He submits that these knives are not fitted into machine for cutting hard materials. The knives are fitted into machine for cutting wet absestos pastes to give it a shape.In this view of the matter therefore these knives cannot be c...
Collector of Customs Vs. Mysore Paper Mills Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT118TriDel
1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the issue for our consideration is the eligibility, of the "Doctors Blades" imported by the respondents M/s. Mysore Paper Mills Ltd. to the benefit of exemption Notification No. 156/86-Cus., dated 1-3-1986 as amended. The importers had cleared the goods out of the Customs charge without claiming the benefit of this exemption notification. Subsequently, they have filed a refund claim on the ground that the goods were eligible for the benefit of the said Notification dated 1-3-1986. The Asstt. Collector (Customs) rejected the refund claim on the ground that as per the catalogue produced it was not possible to arrive at whether the 'Doctors Blade' imported were meant for paper machine or printing machine. He referred that as per the import document (invoice), 'Doctors Blades' were meant for printing machine. The benefit of Notification No. 156/86-Cus. was denied. On appeal, the Collector, Customs (Appeals) came to a finding that blades imported wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »