Delhi Court March 1998 Judgments

Public Works Department Vs. T.R. Nawal

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. This order will dispose of miscellaneous application dated 29.1.1997 made by the respondent seeking setting-aside of ex parte order in Appeal No. A-68/94 dated 2.8.1996. Briefly stated the material facts are that Mr. T.R. Nawal and Mrs. Sudesh Nawal filed a complaint against, (i) Union of India through its Chief Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, New Delhi, and (ii) Delhi Administration through its Chief Secretary (Rent Recovery Cell), Land and Building Department, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi. A written statement was filed by the Under Secretary (PWD), Delhi Administration, Delhi. On a consideration of the matter District Forum- 1 dismissed the complaint by order dated 18/ 25.1.1994. The complainants preferred appeal before this Commission which was registered as A-68/94. Notice was issued to the respondents in the appeal, the description and addresses being those of the opposite parties before the District Forum. None appeared for the respondents. The o...

M.L. Chadha Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1998IVAD(Delhi)446; 74(1998)DLT600

1. The petitioner was working Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in the first respondent administration. On 23.08.1976 his juniors were promoted as Assistant Engineer and his case was not considered for the post of Assistant Engineer. A seniority list was prepared. He instituted a suit claiming the relief that his case had not been considered as on 23.08.1976 and that his position in the seniority list be recognised and he should be fixed accordingly. On 04.02.1986 the suit was decreed. In November 1987, the DPC was held for considering those persons in the seniority list for the post of Executive Engineer but the case of the petitioner was not considered. On 08.05.1990 the first respondent realising the mistake committed and on the basis of the decree Datedd 04.02.1986, issued the revised seniority list putting the petitioner in the proper rank as Assistant Enbgineer. The proceedings Datedd 08.05.1990 reads as under:DELHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY UNDERTAKING(MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHINo.F/AO(...

Goodearth Engines (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (1998)62TTJ(Del)740

ORDERU.B.S. BEDI, JIM.This is a bunch of six appeals by the assessed relating to different assessment years i.e., 1980-81 to 1982-83, 1984-85 to 1986-87 involving identical issues, hence consolidated and being disposed of by single order for the sake of convenience.2. The first two common grounds read as under:1. That the CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi has grossly erred on facts and in law in holding that the business of the appellant company has been discontinued during the year.2. That the CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi has grossly erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the AO in treating the interest income of Rs. 42,206 as 'Income from other sources' instead of business income.3. In ground No. 2 in all these appeals, the interest income involved was to the extent of Rs. 42,205, Rs. 31,940, Rs. 41,543, Rs. 60,426, Rs. 37,965 and Rs. 16,259 for the asst. yr, 1980-81, 1981-82, 1982-83, 1984-85, 1985-86 and 1986-87 respectively.4. Facts relating to these grounds for asst. yr. 1980-81 a...

Medley Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT248TriDel

1. This is an appeal filed by M/s. Medley Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., being aggrieved with the Order-in-Original dated 16-3-1990 passed by the Add. Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad. The matter relates to the demand of central excise duty for the period from 1-7-1985 to 31-12-1985 in respect of the branded product Trosup Liquid' a food supplement. The appellants had claimed classification of the product under Item No. 1-B of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tariff'), while the Revenue had sought to classify the same under Item No. 68 of the said Tariff.2. The matter was posted for hearing on 29-1-1998, when Shri Jawahar Lal, Advocate, appeared for the appellants. Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR, represented the respondents/Revenue.3. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and have gone through the facts on record.4. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of patent or proprietary medicines and had a central excise lice...

Coolair Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT736TriDel

1. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original dated 20-2-1995 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi confirming a duty demand of Rs. 1,21,080/- in respect of 14 air-conditioners and a further duty demand of Rs. 57,960/- in respect of another seven air-conditioners and a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- against them, present appellants have filed this appeal.2. Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of air-conditioners and coolers falling under Chapter heading 8415.00 and 8479.00 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985. They were also availing duty exemption under Notification No. 75/87-C.E., dated 1-3-1987.3. On a visit to the appellants factory by the officers of the Anti-Evasion Branch of the Delhi Collectorate of Excise on 27-4-1992 and on scrutiny of the records and physical verification of goods and raw-materials, the officers found that there was a shortage of seven air-conditioners of 1.5 tonnes capacity ' valued at Rs. 57,960/- as well as three compressors on which Modvat credit of ...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Inalsa Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)LC436Tri(Delhi)

1. Respondent engaged in the manufacture of electric toasters, was manufacturing assembly of parts and captively consuming the same in the manufacture of toasters cleared to dealers. The dispute in the appeal relates to duty payable on toaster parts. According to the Department duty was being paid on the parts of toasters which were sold to wholesalers but duty was not paid on the parts of toasters captively consumed by the respondent. Accordingly show cause notice was issued proposing demand of duty on the goods captively consumed under Rule 6(b) (i) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975. Respondent contended that duty would be payable only under Rule 6(b) (ii) of the Rules. Additional Collector accepted this contention and confirmed the demand partly. This order is being challenged by the Department on the ground that where price under 6(b) (i) of the Rules is available that price should determine the assessable value. The copy of the show cause notice is not before us. It i...

Residency Foods and Beverages Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT693TriDel

1. The appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.145/CE/ALLD/92 dated 5-8-1992 passed by Collector (Appeals), Central Excise, Allahabad whereby the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of soda ash and filter paper used in or in relation to manufacture of aerated water was denied to the appellant. The Collector (Appeals) also remanded the case back to the adjudication authority in respect of eligibility of Modvat on glass bottles.2. The Counsel on behalf of the appellant submitted that appellants are engaged in manufacture of aerated water falling under Chapter 22 of CE Tariff Act, 1985. He further submitted that with effect from 25-7-1991 aerated water was included as specified final product under Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The appellants filed declaration on 8-8-1991 in respect of inputs under Rule 57A used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products.3. He further submitted that water is main ingredient in aerated water consisting of 90% of aer...

Prakash Strips Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT155TriDel

1. M/s. Prakash Strips Pvt. Limited, Jagadhari have sought reference of a question of law to the Hon'ble High Court, Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh on the following terms: "In view of the fact that there is no statutory requirement in Rule 57G(2) of CE Rules, 1944 that the credit can be taken on the Gate Passes consigned in the name of the Applicants, was the Hon'ble CEGAT justified in denying the said Credit when the duty paid character of inputs, their receipt and utilisation was not in dispute?" 2. Making submissions in support of the Reference Application, Shri J.S. Agarwal, ld. Counsel submitted that the present reference application has arisen from the Final Order No. A/936/97-NB, dated 5-9-1997 in the appeal filed by the present applicants against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Delhi denying them Modvat credit of certain amounts. One of the questions raised in the said appeal related to Modvat Credit claimed, by the appellants on the basis of GP1s issued by M/s. ...

Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Vijay Flexible Containers Pvt.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)LC12Tri(Delhi)

1. This appeal and two other appeals have been referred to the Larger Bench by Miscellaneous Order No. 90/95-C, dated 4-5-1995 since the referring Bench did not agree with the decision of the Tribunal in India Tobacco Co. - 1994 (71) E.L.T. 547. There was some difficulty in hearing the other two appeals and they have been delinked. They can be heard by the appropriate two Member Bench after this order is pronounced.2. The respondent is absent. Notice issued to the respondent has been returned. Shri Lakhinder Singh, JCDR states that the respondents factory seems to be closed. We have therefore heard Shri Lakhinder Singh, JCDR for the appellant-Collector. Shri R. Nambirajan, Advocate has assisted us with the case law.3. Respondent, engaged in the production of printed cigarette shells and slides as also hinged lid blanks (H.L. Blanks) and clearing the same to manufacturers of cigarettes for packing purpose, filed two classification lists dated 9-3-1982 and 22-3-1982 seeking classificati...

Ramesh Food Products Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(101)ELT65TriDel

1. These are two appeals; one filed by M/s. Ramesh Food Products and the other by M/s. Ramesh Biscuits Co., being aggrieved with the common order-in-appeal dated 19-3-1987 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. As in both these appeals common issue is involved for our consideration, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The matter relates to the determination of the aggregate value of clearances in respect of biscuits. The appellants had contended that the metal containers in which the biscuits were packed were eligible for exemption from payment of excise duty under Notification No. 34/83-C.E. and that for the purposes of calculating the aggregate value of clearance for the purposes of small scale exemption under Notification No. 83/83-C.E., the value of the containers was not to be taken into account. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) in para 4 of his order had held as under: "4. I have carefully considered the submiss...