Delhi Court February 1998 Judgments
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Sarabhai M. Chemicals Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)LC330Tri(Delhi)
1. The department is aggrieved by the order passed by the Collector (Appeals), Ahmedabad modifying order-in-original dated 11-9-1989 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Baroda.2. The bulk drugs manufactured by the respondent enjoyed the benefit of full exemption under Notification No. 234/82 till and including 28-2-1986. The notification ceased to be in force w.e.f. 1-3-1986.Therefore, appellant started paying Central Excise duty w.e.f.1-3-1986. By Central Duties of Excise (Retrospective Exemption) Act, 1986 (for short Central Act 45 of 1986) the above exemption notification as well as certain other notifications were brought back to force during the period 1-3-1986 to 2-4-1986, by declaring that the notification shall be deemed to have and to have always had, effect on and from 1-3-1986. Consequently respondent filed refund claims of Rs. 2,45,550/-and Rs. 1,26,671.25 respectively, seeking refund of the duty paid on bulk drug during the aforesaid period on the ground ...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Ideal Electronics Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT521TriDel
1. The Revenue has filed the above application in terms of Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 seeking reference of the following question of law arising out of Tribunal's Final Order No.A/890/97-NB [1997 (96) E.L.T. 94 (Tribunal)], dated 31-7-1997 to the jurisdictional High Court: "Whether the manufacturer was entitled to make payment of duty out of the consolidated RG 23 Part II if some of the inputs were not common inputs for all the final products as electrical stampings designed for ceiling fans cannot be utilised in room coolers or washing machines and capacitors for ceiling fans cannot be used for all final products such as washing machines, room coolers or cooler fans." 2. The brief facts leading up to the filing of the appeal are that the respondents herein are manufacturers of ceiling fans, room coolers, washing machines and domestic appliances falling under Chapter 84 and 85 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985 and were availing Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the C...
Tag this Judgment!Dewan Resins (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)(59)ECC630
1. The appeal is directed against order-in-original passed by Additional Collector of Central Excise, Meerut in terms of which he had directed the appellant to pay Central Excise duty "at the appropriate rate to be calculated by the proper officers on 5 drums found short", besides confiscating 30 drums containing plasticisers valued at Rs. 1,80,000/- which had not been accounted for, giving the appellant the option to redeem them on payment of redemption fine. Duty was directed to be paid at the time of removal from the factory. In addition penalty was imposed of Rs. 1000/- under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules and Rs. 10,000/- under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The demand of duty, confiscation and imposition of penalty was based on a finding that there was shortage of 5 drums of Resins in the Bonded Store Room (B.S.R) and unaccounted quantity of 30 drums of plasticisers in the finishing room of the appellant's factory when the Central Excise Officers carried out sur...
Tag this Judgment!Miles (India) Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)(60)ECC181
1. The appeal challenges the order passed by Collector of Central Excise, Baroda in terms of which he had-- (ii) appropriated security of Rs. 25,000/- furnished by the appellant for obtaining provisional release of 10 Ames Blood Analysers (ABAs) seized from the appellant's factory, and 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant. Shri Willingdon Christian stated that appellant is the owner of the brand name of ABAs. They had supplied nearly half of the parts required for their manufacture to another company, M/s. Digital Innovations Pvt. Ltd. (DIPL, for short) who themselves procured the remaining required parts and manufactured the ABAs. The parts were sold by the appellant to DIPL who in turn sold the product to the appellant. The ABAs had a label showing the appellant's brand name and their marketing by the appellant. The ABAs were cleared by DIPL on payment of duty. Show cause notice was issued to the appellant initially by the Superintendent and later on by the Collector. After appellan...
Tag this Judgment!Titan Watches Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1999)(110)ELT834TriDel
1. These are two appeals filed by M/s. Titan Watches Ltd., Bangalore, aggrieved with the two separate orders passed by the Collector of Customs, Bangalore. As common issues are involved in both the appeals, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. M/s. Titan Watches Ltd. were engaged in the manufacture of quartz analog wrist watches. They imported wrist watch cases with which bracelets were attached and sought their clearance as watch cases for the purposes of exemption under Notification No. 44/85-Cus., dated 28-2-1985 and Notification No. 65/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987. These exemption notifications provided for concessional rate of Customs duty to the specified parts imported for the manufacture of quartz analog wrist watches. Among the various parts, so specified for the purposes of applying the concessional rate of Customs duty, different components for the watch case as well as the complete watch cases for quartz analog wrist watches were covered. I...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Amrit Papers
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT75TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The point to be considered in this case is whether the wire mesh and felts are eligible as inputs.The Commissioner (Appeals) following the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Ors. v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. -1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.) and also decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Union Carbide of India and Ors. v.Collector of Central Excise -1996 (86) E.L.T. 613 - held that items are eligible inputs under Rule 57A of the Rules. It was also observed by him that these inputs were not excluded by virtue of exclusion clause (i) of the explanation to the Rule and accordingly, he accepted the contention of the party.2. Shri Sanjiv Srivastava, ld. JDR, appearing for the Revenue, reiterated the grounds taken by the Department.3. Party remained absent. However, it was submitted by them that the issue involved in this case has bee...
Tag this Judgment!Badri Prasad Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)LC159Tri(Delhi)
1. This is a Revision Application filed by the applicant under Section 82 of the Gold Control Act, 1968 against the order passed by the Gold Control Administrator, New Delhi dated 17-5-1977 by which primary gold of the value of Rs. 66,000/- was ordered to be confiscated and a penalty of Rs. one lakh imposed on the applicant.2. Brief facts of the case are that a certain quantity of primary gold was seized by the officers of the Central Excise, Kanpur Collectorate after a search of the applicant's residential premises at Etawah, U.P.The search was conducted between the last week of March, 1969 and April, 1969 and the gold seized under the provisions of Sections 8 and 16 of the Gold Control Act, 1968. A SCN was issued to the present applicant on 6-9-1969. In his reply to the SCN dated 15-11-1969 the present applicant challenged the validity and the legality of the search. The Collector, who adjudicated the matter, by order dated 5/18-12-1973 confiscated the gold and imposed a penalty of ...
Tag this Judgment!D and H Secheron Electrodes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT81TriDel
1. This is an application for waiver of duty demand of Rs. 2,45,243/- and a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh.2. The applicants are engaged in the manufacture of arc welding electrodes and working under the Modvat scheme. On 7-6-1991 the officers of Central Excise visited the factory of the appellant and inquired about the import of Nickel Powder which was used as inputs and the appellants were taking the benefit of credit on this Nickel Powder under the Modvat scheme. The adjudicating authority held that the appellants has wrongly taken the Modvat credit in respect of the 24 drums of Nickel Powder. The verification by the officers of the respondents in respect of 24 drums found in the production section reveals that these 24 drums of Nickel powder could not be correlated against the inputs on which the Modvat credit was taken. The chemical test of contents of these 24 drums confirmed that it contain waste of material which cannot be used for production. The adjudicating authority confirmed the d...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Shakuntala Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: 1998ACJ486; 1998IVAD(Delhi)279; 1998(44)DRJ815; 1998RLR212
ORDERUsha Mehra, J. 1. Appellant, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., in this appeal has primarily challenged tore that on 21st March,1981 at about 5.30 p.m. deceased Tej Ram, aged 33 years with Mr.Dev Karan who was sitting on the pillion seat were going from Janakpuri to Ballabhgarh on Mehrauli-Badarpur Road, when a Truck bearing No.DLG-6544 driven by Jeet Singh came in a rash and negligent manner from the opposite direction on wrong side hit the motorcycle driven by Tej Ram deceased. As a result of this accident both the driver as well as pillion rider of the motorcycle fell down. They were dragged by the truck for about 6-8 paces. They sustained serious injuries resulting in their death of both. Deceased Tej Ram as per claim petition was earning about Rs.40,000/- per annum through cultivation and agriculture. He left behind his wife, four sons and a mother. Legal heirs of deceased Tej Ram filed claim petition under the Motor Vehicle Act (in short the Act) claiming a sum of Rs.five lakhs a...
Tag this Judgment!Ajay Kumar Vs. Director of Education and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: 72(1998)DLT403; 1998(45)DRJ129
1. The challenge in this writ petition is against the action of the Principle of the Delhi Public School, Mathura Road, New Delhi in detaining the petitioner in class X during 1997-98 academic year.2. According to the petitioner he is a student of class X in the Delhi Public School, Mathura Road, New Delhi, a recognised unaided school. His father is a Tabla teacher the said school. The petitioner has been studying in the said school from the very beginning. Though he had failed in Mathematics in class IX he was promoted to class X. There were also other students who had failed in various subjects in class IX during 1996-97. Some had failed in as many as four out of five subjects. When they were summarily promoted, the petitioner was given promotion by Respondent No. 3, the Principal of the school, only after much persuasion and pleadings. It is alleged that Respondent No.3 had been forcing the petitioner to withdraw from the school on the ground of his poor performance in the first ter...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »