Delhi Court August 1998 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1998 Page 17 of about 237 results (0.018 seconds)Collector of Central Excise Vs. Metasulf (i) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1998)(104)ELT518TriDel
1. The issue involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the EXO Gas is classifiable under sub-heading 2804.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act as claimed by the Respondents and approved by the Additional Collector in the impugned order or under S.H. 3823.00 as prayed by the Revenue in appeal petition.2. We heard Shri H.K. Jain, ld. S.D.R. and Shri H.C. Joshi, ld. Counsel for M/s. Metasulf India Ltd., Respondents.3. The Respondents manufacture insoluble sulphur of various grades.According to the Respondents, for manufacturing insoluble sulphur they need inert gas; they had set up a plant which consists of a combustion chamber where the atmospheric air is fed into a coil flame and the resultant gas is cooled and put into holding tank from where it is distributed to the plant through pipelines. The gas is entirely consumed captively. The EXO gas comprises of Nitrogen (79.70%), Carbondioxide (4.40%) and other gases (15.90%). The Additional Collector treated the...
Tag this Judgment!Nicco Batteries Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1999)(106)ELT132TriDel
1. The assessee being aggrieved by Order-in-Appeal No. 116-CE/MRT/93 passed by Collector (Appeals), Ghaziabad, confirming the Order-in-Original No. 111/90 dated 25-4-1990 passed by Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ghaziabad approving the price list in Part I filed by the appellant in respect of storage batteries manufactured by the appellant in the brand name 'Nicco Crompton Greaves' has filed the present appeal.2. Appellant commenced manufacture of storage batteries in the composite brand name of the appellant and M/s. Crompton Greaves Ltd. (for short CGL) and also entered into an agreement dated 22-2-1986 with CGL whereunder CGL agreed to purchase a quantity of batteries equal in number to the quantity of batteries sold by the appellant in the market and to receive trade discount of 35% as against trade discount of 17% allowed to wholesale dealers. Show cause notice dated 2-8-1988 was issued to the appellant stating that 35% trade discount allowed to CGL was not the normal tra...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Ram Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corporation
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1998VAD(Delhi)353; 75(1998)DLT266; 1998(47)DRJ90
ORDERC.M. Nayar, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the order passed by Shri J.K. Pali, Senior Sub Judge Delhi in ESIC case No.193/89. The appeal was directed against the order of Medical Appellate Tribunal dated June 30, 1989 on the ground that the appellant during the course of his duty on January 11, 1989 suffered injury in his left index finger, thereby his left index finger at terminal phalanx was amputated. He remained under treatment from January 11, 1989 to February 10, 1989 at ESI Hospital, Basai Darapur and ESI Dispensary, Shakti Nagar, Delhi and became fit to join duty on February 11, 1989. The appellant obviously suffered amputation with loss of bones. The injury was classified at item No. 35 in Part II of Schedule II, and, thereforee, he was held entitled to disability benefit 9% instead of 1%. The medical board found that the injury to the left index finger recovered completely and the assessment of earning capacity was held nill. 2. The appellant preferred an ap...
Tag this Judgment!O.P. Gupta Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1998VIAD(Delhi)435; 75(1998)DLT560; 1998(47)DRJ808
ORDERK. Ramamoorthy, J. 1. The petitioner, who was working as Depot Manager(Assistant Engineer(M) was chargesheeted and ultimately by order dated 13.11.1991 he was dismissed from service. He preferred an appeal and the decision of the Board of the respondent DTC, was communicated to him vide order dated 12.3.1992 confirming the order of dismissal.2. The charge-sheet dated 17.7.1989 is as follows:-'Shri O.P.Gupta, Asstt.Engineer(M) is required to explain as to why disciplinary action under Clause 15(2) of the D.R.T.A.(Conditions of Appointment & Service) Regulations, 1952 read with Section 4(e) of the Delhi Road Transport Laws (Amendment) Act, 1971 should not be taken against him for the following irregularities committed by him during the course of his employment in this Corporation:- 1. He, while functioning as Depot Manager, Nand Nagri Depot, misused his official position with ulterior motive & to fabricate disciplinary case against Shri Hari Ram, Assistant Foreman, by pressuring & C...
Tag this Judgment!G.L. Bhatia Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1998VAD(Delhi)869; 1998(47)DRJ103
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition assailing the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal by which the original application (O.A.) filed by him against the rejection of his claim for family pension was dismissed. 2. Petitioner claims to be the husband of deceased, Mahesh Kumari Bhatia, who was employed with MTNL and had retired on 30.4.1985. She died on 26.9.1993. Respondents rejected the claim of the petitioner for family pension on the ground that the deceased did not nominate the petitioner and, in fact, had nominated her two sons as the original nominees and her daughters as alternate nominees. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, urged before us that deceased was the legally wedded wife of the petitioner till her death. The marriage had not been dissolved by any Court of law. Petitioner being the widower, was the sole legal heir of the deceased employee, entitled to receive the family pension under the Central Civil Services (Pen...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Prem Nath Motors Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 100(2002)DLT357; [1999]238ITR414(Delhi)
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. This is a petition under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, arising out of the assessment year 1987-88 whereby the Revenue seeks a mandamus to the Tribunal for drawing up a statement of case and referring the following question for the opinion of the High Court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the investment of Rs. 14,91,874/- in an incomplete and unfinished factory building is not liable to be included in the wealth of the assessee-company?'2. The questions calls for interpretation of Section 40 of the Finance Act, 1983. The assessed was constructing a building. The value of investment made therein was sought to be included in the assessable wealth of the assessee. Section 40(3)(vi) which is relevant for our purpose reads as under:'(3) The assets referred to in Sub-section (2) shall be following, namely: (vi) building of land appurtenant thereto, other tha...
Tag this Judgment!Haryana Engineering and Foundry Works Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1998(47)DRJ172
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge holding that the decree holder is entitled to the principle sum of Rs. 5,37,622/- and interest thereon w.e.f. 1st November, 1991 @ 15% per annum till the date of deposit in Court in addition to Rs.26,489/- only on unpaid interest. The only grievance of the appellant in this appeal is against the direction that the appellant is entitled to interest @15% per annum till the date of deposit in Court which in other words means that the appellant would not be entitled to interest till the date of payment.2. From the facts on record it appears that in terms of the order of Division Bench dated 19th March, 1996 passed in FAO(OS) No. 84/96 the respondent deposited in this Court a sum of over Rs. 13.00 lacs. The said order inter alias directing that the amount so deposited shall not be disbursed to the decree holder unless permitted by the Court. Thereafter the matter was referred to Mr. Justice P.K. Bahri, a ...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Kavisha 3-dimension Pictures P.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1998)(104)ELT530TriDel
1. M/s. Kavisha 3-Dimention Pictures P. Ltd. manufacture PVC printed two or three dimensional multi colour moving and running pictures in sheets or cut into sizes of postcard, stickers and key chain, etc. The issue involved is whether the product is classifiable under Heading 4901.10 as claimed by the Department or under Heading 4901.90 as claimed by the respondents and approved by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order.2. Notice of hearing sent to the respondents has been received back with the remark of the postal authority "left". We heard Shri H.K.Jain, learned SDR. At the outset he requested for condonation of delay of 6 days in filing the appeal. On merits he reiterated the grounds of appeal contained in the appeal memorandum and contends that the processes carried out by the respondents were transfers classifiable under Heading 4901.10.3. After considering the submissions of the Department, we condone the delay of six days in filing the appeal. We find that the Commis...
Tag this Judgment!Flance Proof (Gears) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1998)(104)ELT652TriDel
2. The appellants herein imported certain goods. They filed an application for registration for contract under the Project Import Regulations, 1986 and claimed the benefit of tariff Heading 98.01 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The original authority viz. Assistant Collector of Customs rejected the application of the appellants herein for registration of the contract under the said Regulations. The appellants there after filed an appeal before the Lower Appellate Authority. The said authority asked a question from the appellants 'whether the goods imported by them have already been cleared or not.They replied in the affirmative stating that they have cleared the goods. On this score alone learned Lower Appellate Authority rejected the appeals of appellants herein stating that the appeal has become infructuous since the appellants are ineligible for availing of the concession under the said Regulations. For this reason the Lower Appellate Authority did not go into the merits for rejection...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Cotton Mills Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT838TriDel
1. Matter called. None for the appellants. There is, however, an application from the Advocate Shri Ajay Majithia praying on instructions from the Advocate for the appellant and as a proxy Counsel, for transfer of the present Appeal to the Bench at Bombay for expedition and avoidance and curtailment of legal expenses by the parties.2. We observe that in this matter the arguments on the appeal had started as early as 24-2-1998. After some argument, ld. Advocate Shri P.V. Patankar sought time to produce copies of Bill of Entry and other documents. The matter was adjourned on 17-4-1998. It could not be taken up on that date because the matter could not be reached. On 3-6-1998 to which the matter was adjourned nobody appeared for the appellants.Therefore, in the interest of justice another date was given i.e. for today. We have received the request from Shri Ajay Majithia, Advocate as mentioned above. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances, we are unable to understand the reques...
Tag this Judgment!