Delhi Court January 2000 Judgments

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Dewas Techno Products (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT182TriDel

1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the matter relates to the classification of the impugned goods, whether they should be classifiable under sub-heading No. 7216.20 of the Central Excise Tariff as claimed by the Respondents, M/s. Dewas Techno Products (P) Ltd. or under sub-heading No. 7308.30 as pleaded by the Revenue. The Asstt.Collector of Central Excise had observed that the assessee was manufacturing metal sections for doors and window frames and that the metal sections were specifically classified under sub-heading No.7216.20. The Revenue had filed an appeal with the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) who confirmed the view taken by the adjudicating authority. In appeal, the Revenue has pleaded that the Board vide Circular No. 46/90, dated 21-11-1990 had clarified that the cold rolled formed shapes and sections prepared for use in structures would be appropriately classified under subheading No. 7308.90 w.e.f. 1-3-1988.2. When the matter was called, no one appeared for th...

i.V.P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT715TriDel

1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s. I.V.P. Ltd. is whether the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act is invokable in the circumstances of the case.2. Shri Gopal Prasad, learned Advocate, submitted that they had filed a classification list No. 5/86 in which Aluminium products were classified by them under sub-heading No. 8485.90 and 8548; that this classification list was duly approved by the Asstt. Commissioner on 1-1-1986; that subsequently a show cause notice dated 11-2-1987 was issued for changing the classification to Chapter 69 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. He, further, mentioned that the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 541/98-D, dated 14-7-1998 has upheld the classification under Chapter 69. He also mentioned that a show cause notice dated 2-1-1991 was issued to the appellants for demanding duty for the period from 1-3-1986 to 26-2-1987 alleging misdeclaration by them. Learned Advocate submitted once that once ...

Shri Ved Pal Singh and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. The applicants are Junior Engineers working in the Civil Construction Wing of Directorate General, All India Radio. They claim to be senior to respondents 5 to 12, who were redeployed in the Civil Construction Wing of AIR on being declared surplus in Dandakarnya Project.2. The case of the applicants is that they joined the Civil Construction Wing as Junior Engineers on 23.6.1983 and 16.6.1983 respectively. Respondents 5 to 12 joined the Civil Construction Wing on various dates between 30.7.1988 and 17,8.1988. Applicants 1 & 2 were shown in the seniority list of Junior Engineers at serial nos. 168 and 165 respectively while respondent nos. 5 to 12 were shown respectively at serial nos. 454 to 461. The applicants say that by the impugned order dated 27:6.1995 respondents 5 to 12 have been shown as promoted with retrospective effect from various dates between 1988 and 1992 while the names of the applicants do not figure in the promotion list at all. They submit that they made vari...

Raghu Nath Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Applicant had filed this O.A, impugning respondents orders dated 6.5.97 (Annexure A-l) compulsorily retiring him from service w.e.f.5.5.97 under FR 56(j) upon attaining the age of 55 years. He also impugned respondents connected orders dated 26.5,97 (Annexure A-2): dated 17.9.97 (Annexure A-3); dated 19.9.97 (Annexure A-4): dated 19.9.97 (Annexure A-5) and dated 6/7.10.97 (Annexure A-6). He sought reinstatement, continuity in service with all consequential benefits including back wages and retention of Government accommodation.2. It is not denied that by respondents subsequent letter dated 21.1.99 a copy of which was shown to us during hearing and which has been brought on record, upon applicant's representation, he has been ordered to be reinstated in service. By Paragraph 2 of that letter dated 21.1.99 the intervening period between the date of applicant's premature retirement and his date of reinstatement has been ordered to be treated as eligible leave.3. It is this which is th...

Shri Satya Narayan Arora Vs. C.C.E., Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. When the matter was called, none appeared. In the instant case, I find from the records placed before me that the Stay Application had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 12.10.2000. On that date also none appeared for the applicant. The Tribunal in the interest of justice, directed the applicant to deposit the amount in question on or before 30.10.2000 and the matter was to be reported on 2.11.2000. On 2.11.2000 again none appeared. As a measure of justice, again the Tribunal gave further time to the applicant and to report compliance by 4.1.2001. Again no one has appeared. In the circumstances, it appears that the applicant is not interested in pursuing the appeal before the Tribunal. In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944....

S. Kumars Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT439TriDel

1. The appellants, M/s. S. Kumars Limited are engaged in the processing of fabrics, and processed fabrics are liable to Central Excise on ad valorem basis. Part of the above processing is carried out on their own, on grey fabrics belonging to them, and the remaining processing is undertaken on job work basis on grey fabrics supplied to them by others. The dispute involved in the impugned order, which covers the period of 1-9-1985 to 30-9-1989, is the valuation of the processed fabrics for the purpose of payment of Central Excise duty.2. The impugned order has demanded a differential duty of over Rs. 3.8 crores as against the amount of Rs. 4.8 crores demanded in the show cause notice. In addition, the impugned order also has demanded interest on the duty demanded. In respect of the liability to penalty the impugned order states that this position would be taken up separately, if need be, at the appropriate time.3. The demand made in the order is on the basis that several firms constitu...

Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Indo Schottle Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT836TriDel

1. The Collector has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the decision of the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) had in his order observed that "I find that the department has not given any ground for changing the classification of the respondents' goods except for saying that once the respondents have themselves claimed their goods as parts of I.C. Engines and classified the same under chapter 8409.00, the same should have been accepted by the Asstt. Collector. The Asstt. Collector on the other hand has passed a reasoned order stating as to why he does not accept the classification claimed by the respondents and considered that the goods manufactured by the respondents were of general use and were therefore classifiable under chapter 7318.90. The department in its appeal has not advanced any reasoning for classifying the respondents' product under chapter 8408.00 and for negating the reasonings given by the Asstt. Collector. In view of this, I dismiss the appeal as being un...

Multi Chemicals Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)76ITD367(Delhi)

1. The appeal has preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 24-7-1992 pertaining to the assessment year 1989-90. The issue has arisen out of orders dated 15-7-1999 in MA No. 124/Del/99 arising out of ITA No. 8014/Delhi/92 pertaining to the assessment year 1989-90.2. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing copper wire out of non-ferrous metal purchased from MMTC and HCL. In his assessment order the Assessing Officer has inter alia made an addition of Rs. 6,20,000 on account of unexplained credits under section 68 of the Income-tax Act. On appeal the CIT(A) set aside the issue and restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass order afresh. Against setting aside the order by the CIT(A) the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. In respect of this issue the assessee has raised two grounds before Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, In ground No. 1 the assessee had objected to the CIT(A)'s order in setting asid...

R.K. Bali (Dr.) Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000IIAD(Delhi)673

ORDERK. Ramamoorthy, J.1. In the above writ petition the election to the Presidentship of the Dental Council of India was challenged by the fourth respondent before the Govt. of India and the Govt. of India allowed the representation by order dated 6.11.1997. The fourth respondent challenged the election before the Central Government under Section 5 of the Dentists Act, 1948.2. The matter was argued at length by the learned counsel for the parties. The facts necessary for the appreciation of points raised by the parties could be noticed thus:There were 65 Members on the roll of Dental Council of India as on 6.11.1995. Election had to be held for the purpose of electing the President and Vice President of the Dental Council of India. The election was to take place on 6.11.1995 in the meeting of the General Body. Before that date, in or about October 1995 three Doctors: (1) Lt. Col Dr. Daljit Singh, (2) Dr. Manjit Singh, and (3) Dr. R.P. Vaish instituted C.W.P. 3878/95 as a public intere...