Delhi Court March 1998 Judgments

Anil Forging Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT252TriDel

1. This is an appeal filed by the Appellants against the Order-in-Appeal dated 13-4-1989 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay.1.2 The issue involved in this appeal is whether the forgings manufactured by the Appellants are classifiable under Heading 72.08 or sub-heading 7308.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act.2. Arguing on behalf of the Appellants, Shri B.N. Sharma, Manager (Legal) submitted that the assessee manufactures forgings by hammer process and the forgings so manufactured require further machining to convert them into identifiable machine parts; that their forgings are roughly shaped pieces of iron and steel which merit classification under Heading 72.08 of the Tariff. He relied upon the decision in the case of Aravali Forging Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 1994 (70 E.L.T. 693 (Tribunal) in which it was held that forgings of steel up to the stag of proof machining is not classifiable under Heading 7308.90 of the Tariff am that sub-heading 7208.00 is appropriate for su...

Vimal Organics Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(101)ELT526TriDel

1. Benefit of Modvat credit has been denied in case of un-saturated Polyester Resin Grade RPL and Glass Fibres and articles as they are not capital goods.2. Arguing on behalf of the Appellants the ld. Counsel submitted that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of goods falling under Chapter 38 i.e. activated bleaching earth falling under sub-heading 3802.00 of the Central Excise Act. This chemical was for refining of oils as a deodorising and decolorising agent. This item is manufactured by using two raw materials viz. Fuller's Earth (Bentonite ore) and Sulphuric Acid. Bentonite ore is first diluted in plain water - this forms neutral Slurry. The slurry is pumped into Digester. Digester is a special vessel. In this vessel, first they pump plain water, second, they pump sulphuric acid, third neutral slurry. Thereafter steam is passed in the Digester. Here the materials is cured for about 12 hours with continuous supply of steam. Once the materials ready fully cured and tested and ...

Ram Babu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. This Original Application filed on 3.10.1996 challenges an advertisement dated 16.8.1996 issued by respondent No. 1 by which the post of Joint General Manager-II (is short JGM-II) is sought to be filled in by transfer on deputation. The applicant also seeks a direction to treat the services rendered by him from 23.4.1985 on the feeder post of Deputy General Manager (in short 'DGM'/Regional Manager (in short 'RM') till 9.3.1994 as a regular service in the grade of Rs. 3700-5000; and this should enable him for consideration to the post of JGM-II in the scale of Rs. 4500-5700; in accordance with the recruitment rules. He wants a 'direction also that the post of JGM-II should be filled by promotion and not by deputation.2. The brief background facts are as follows--there are two posts of JGM-II, the first post is filled exclusively by the service officers of Defence of the rank of Brigadier and the other post is meant for promotion from the feeder grade of DGM/RM with five years of reg...

Om Parkash Vs. the State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1998IIIAD(Delhi)461; 1998CriLJ2625; 75(1998)DLT75; 1998(45)DRJ264

ORDERDalveer Bhandari, J. 1. The appellant Om Parkash was tried for the offence under section 307 IPC for having attempted to commit the murder of one Bir Singh at 8.30 P.M.on 10.3.1976 in village Sultan Puri, Delhi Brief facts necessary to dispose of this appeal are recapitulated as under:2. On 10.3.1976, around 8.30 p.m. the appellant Along with Jai Kishan and Dale Ram, had gone out for a walk in the village and when they reached near the 'Gher' of Ramji Lal. His other companion had gone for urinating and the appellant was there with 4-5 persons. On seeing the complainant: the appellant at that time, was standing with 4-5 persons by the side of a wall. The appellant came running and stabbed him on the left side of his chest with a knife. Jai Kishan and Dale Ram were a few steps away. The accused ran away from the scene of occurrence. The knife with which the injured was stabbed remained in his chest, and the injured himself took it out.3. Bir Singh, injured stated in his statement th...

i. Kovoor (Retd.)(Wg. Cdr.) Vs. Mahalakshmi Land and Finance

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1998(45)DRJ113

Dr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 30.11.1995 passed by the learned Single Judge in IAs 1495, 1496, 8487 all of 1994 and 8346/1995 in Suit No.1763/1984. By the aforesaid order the learned Single Judge dismissed the application filed by the appellant/plaintiff for amendment of the plaint. Under the said order the learned Single Judge has also dismissed the applications registered as I.A.s 1496/1994 and 8487/1994 filed by the appellant/plaintiff praying for calling the second defendant for further cross-examination & in addition for permission to cross-examine the counsel for the plaintiff. Consequently, the learned Single Judge also dismissed the application registered as I.A. 8747/1995.2. The appellant, as plaintiff instituted a suit against the defendants praying for a decree for specific performance of the contract to sell plot No. 53, Vikram Enclave, Ghaziabad, U.P. in favor of the plaintiff by defendant No.1 and also for payment of a sum of...

Asha Dhingra Vs. Shanti Devi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1998IIAD(Delhi)893; 72(1998)DLT461; 1998(45)DRJ210

Usha Mehra, J.1.Petitioner No.1 is the wife and petitioner No.2 & 3 are the daughters of respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 is mother and respondent No.3 brother of respondent No.2. Petitioner No.1's case in the suit was that the father of the respondents No.2 and 3 acquired a residential house bearing No.Z-5, Model Town-II, Delhi-110009, with the HUF funds. That in 1994 respondents forced her to bring money from her parents for raising construction on the second floor of the said house. That the petitioner No.1 brought gold ornaments weighing 15 Tolas of the value approx. of Rs.75,000/- from her parents. The said gold ornaments were sold and with proceeds of the same the respondents raised construction on the second floor. Subsequently under pressure from respondents her parents gave a further sum of Rs.20,000/- for completing the construction. Thus petitioner paid a sum of Rs.95,000/- with which construction of second floor was raised and completed on the house in question. With her mo...

Harash Talwar Vs. Rani Gadhoke

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 73(1998)DLT167; 1998(45)DRJ621

Manmohan Sarin, J.1. This is a petition under Section 38-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, moved by the petitioner for transfer of his pending appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi to another Additional Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi.2. The factual matrix of the case may be briefly noticed:(i) Petitioner preferred an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal against dismissal of his objections to the warrants of possession, issued under Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act. (ii) The appeal was last fixed for arguments on 15.5.1997, on which date petitioner's counsel was held up in the High Court. The Rent Control Tribunal did not accede to petitioner's request for a pass-over and for the case to be taken up at 12.30 pm. He proceeded to hear the respondent's counsel and, thereafter, fixed the case for orders on 9.7.1997. (iii) Petitioner's counsel reached the Tribunal at 2.00 pm., when respondent's counsel had already been heard...

U.P. Asbestos Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(101)ELT116TriDel

1. The Appellants are engaged in manufacturing Asbestos cement products. Modvat credit on the inputs contained on defective sheets has been denied to the appellants.2. Arguing on behalf of the Appellants the ld. Counsel submitted that Asbestos Fibre sheets during the process of manufacture are kept in humid condition under water spray for about 28 days for maturity. When these are matured they are shifted and staked in open space exposed to natural phenomena when some expansion and contraction taken place.After this, products are cut and trimmed and the damaged /defective and cracked sheets are salvaged in the next size. During the manufacture of cement products certain pieces of the product develop cracks and defects at various stages of manufacturing. These are not marketable.Subsequently they seek permission from the Commissioner for destruction of such waste products. Under Rule 57D such credit is not be revised.Moreover Tribunal in case of India Gypsum Ltd. v C.C.E., Delhi report...

Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Crescent Metal Processing Works

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(111)ELT841TriDel

1. This is a departmental appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) dated 27-7-1990.2. The question raised in the appeal relates to classification of slotted angles cleared by the respondents. Respondents had filed classification list classifying slotted angles under Heading 7210.20 and had claimed exemption under Notification No. 175/86 (as amended).The Asstt. Commissioner by the order-in-original classified the item under Chapter Heading 9403.00. In orderin-appeal the Collector (A) reversed the Asstt. Commissioner's order and held that the products would more appropriately be classifiable under Chapter 72.3. Ld. DR appearing for the department contends that in terms of Interpretative Rule 2(a) of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 reference to any item in knocked down condition or in unassembled condition, would include a reference to goods in complete or finished form provided the items in incomplete or unfinished form bear the essential character of fi...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Modern Transformers

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT314TriDel

1. This is an application filed under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 seeking reference of the following questions of law purported to have arisen out of Tribunal's Final Order No. A/978/97-NB, dated 14-7-1997 in which it was held that no process of manufacture was involved in the repairing/re-conditioning/re-making of damaged transformers brought into the assessees' factory: "(1) In the old transformers all the important parts and transformer oil are changed and it goes through all the processes involved in the manufacture of new transformer, this results in substantial increase in its cost which indicates that these processes involved amount to manufacture of new transformers. (ii) The question of law under reference is if an old transformer goes inside a factory requiring all the manufacturing processes from the very beginning and even important parts and oil are changed, the transformer that emerges and processes undertaken will not amount to manufacture under Secti...