Delhi Court November 2000 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2000 Page 4 of about 261 results (0.010 seconds)D.M. Gears Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2001)(73)ECC278
1. These are four applications as under, for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of excise confirmed and penalty imposed by the Commissioner, Central Excise under the impugned Order No. 13/2000, dated 9-6-2000.(i) M/s. D.M. Gears Pvt. Ltd. - Rs. 27,63,467 - Duty - Rs. 3 lakh - Penalty(ii) Shri CM. Handa - Rs. 1 lakh - Penalty(iii) Shri D.K. Jain - Rs. 1 lakh - Penalty(iv) Shri R.K. Sharma - Rs. 50,000 - Penalty 2. Shri R. Pal Singh, Ld. Consultant, mentioned that the demand of duty has been confirmed and penalties have been imposed as the clearance of excisable goods effected by M/s. D.M. Gears and M/s Chandra Auto Engineers Pvt. Ltd. have been ordered to be clubbed by the Commissioner under the impugned Order. The Ld. Consultant emphasized that there was no financial flow back between these two units nor there was any allegation to that effect in the notice; that the statements relied upon by the Department do not bear the signature of any Central Excise Officer and as such these cannot be...
Tag this Judgment!Rajasthan Cylinders and Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2001)(73)ECC633
1. The dispute is with regard to assessment of gas cylinders captively consumed by the appellant, for filling LPG gas. Original duty payment was based on the assessable value of Rs. 531 per cylinder. However, this price was found to be in respect of export to Nepal. Accordingly, demand has been confirmed, taking the assessable value of Rs. 710 per cylinders. On re-assessment, short levy of Rs. 2,38,277 has been confirmed. Further, penalties of Rs. 2,38,277 and Rs. 1,00,000 have also been imposed on the appellant.2. Arguing for the appellant, Ld. Counsel submitted that duty calculation has not been done correctly. The period of duty demand was between 30th September, 1995 to 31st March, 1988 (sic) [1998]. The demands are with regard to captively consumed goods. Therefore, their assessable value should have been fixed at the price of comparable goods. The Rs. 710 which has been adopted by the Central Excise authorities was the value of 17 kgs. capacity cylinder, while the cylinder invol...
Tag this Judgment!Vallabh Alloys Ltd., Shri B.K. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC535
1. These four appeals are directed against the same order of adjudication. Accordingly, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.2. The main appellant M/s Vallabh Alloys Ltd. is a small scale industry established in 1991. The other appellants are its officers. M/s Vallabh Alloys took a Central Excise registration in June 1992 for manufacture of copper/brass sheets, which are liable to Central Excise duty. On 2.4.93, this registration was surrendered. On 21.8.97, Central Excise Officers inspected the appellant's factory and seized goods valued about Rs. 19 lakhs. After further investigation, Show-cause Notice was issued on 18.2.98 alleging that the appellant had been clandestinely manufacturing and clearing copper/brass sheets without payment of duty.The Notice, therefore, proposed to demand the alleged short levy and imposition of penalties. This Notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi in May 1998, confirming a duty demand of over R...
Tag this Judgment!Subh Timb Steels Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT556TriDel
1. The applicants filed this application for waiver of duty of Rs. 3,28,1507- and penalty of Rs. 80,000/-.2. The Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants on the ground that they had not complied with the directions given in the Stay Order.Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the applicants, submits that against the adjudication order, the applicants filed an appeal before the Commissioner alongwith an application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty. He submits that in their absence, the application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty was decided by the Commissioner (Appeals). His submission is that no order, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on their application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty, was served upon the applicants. He submits that as no order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is ever served upon the applicants, the dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of the stay order is unsustainab...
Tag this Judgment!Fibre Glass Insulation Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT591TriDel
1. Under Stay Order No. 57-59/2000-D, dated 19-9-2000 the appellants M/s. Fibre Glass Insulation were directed to pre-deposit Rs. 1,50,000/-. Under their communication dated 6-11-2000 the appellants have submitted that they have debited the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- vide RG, 23-A/Pt. II Debit Entry No. 44 dated 30-10-2000.2. When the matter was called no one was present from the appellants.Shri S.N. Singh, SDR submits that the issue did not relate to modvat credit and it was the issue relating to the classification. He submitted that the debit in RG. 23-A/Pt. II was not a proper compliance of the Tribunal's stay order and the appellants should deposit the amount in cash or through PLA. As it has not been done, he prays that the stay order has not been complied.3. We have carefully considered the matter. We find that as the matter related to the classification and did not relate to Modvat credit the appellants should have deposited the amount either in cash or through PLA. As it has not be...
Tag this Judgment!Shaw Wallace Gelatines Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2001)(128)ELT182TriDel
1. The applicants filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 1,08,019/- and penalty of Rs. 20,000/-.2. In this case, the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of Di-calcium Phosphate is denied to the applicants on the ground that it is a final product in itself and it is exempted from payment of duty.3. Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the applicants, submits that in respect of subsequent period, a show cause notice was issued to the applicants on the same ground for denial of Modvat credit and the adjudicating authority vide adjudication order No. 74/DEC/2000 dated 31-7-2000, dropped the show cause notice by admitting that this di-calcium phosphate is by-product and allowed the benefit on some as inputs under Rule 57D of the Central Excise Rules. Ld. Counsel, therefore, submits that as the revenue, in respect of subsequent period accepted their claim, they are, entitled for waiver of pre-deposit.4. Heard ld. D.R., who ...
Tag this Judgment!Government of Nct of Delhi Vs. NasiruddIn (Father of Deceased Mohd. Ya ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2002ACJ1530; 2001CriLJ4925
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. This appeal under Clause 10 of Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.12.1997 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 585 of 1996 directing the State to pay compensation of Rs. 2.5 lacs to the respondent for the custodial death of his son Mohd. Yasin (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). Grievance of the appellant is that the conclusions about custodial death are erroneous, contrary to materials and facts on record and, in any event, the compensation as directed to be paid is extremely high and unreasonable.2. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short, 'the Constitution') was filed by the respondent with the following prayers:-(i) to direct the respondents to produce the relevant documents relating to the case and to register the case against the accused persons, (ii) to direct the respondents to produce the accused persons before this Hon'ble Court, (iii) to grant compensati...
Tag this Judgment!Schneider Electric Industries S.A. Vs. Telemecacique and Controls (Ind ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2000(56)DRJ539
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This is an application for interim injunction in a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for infringement of its registered patents and designs in respect of electric contactors and its accessories known as 'D2' range. The plaintiff has submitted that the law of patents and design does not permit a third party to claim a concurrent user or even a bonafide user in respect of an infringement of a patent or design. The plaintiff is a French Company manufacturing electrical equipment. The present suit is filed by the plaintiff alleging infringement of its patents in respect of various items including contactors and overload relays.The defendant in reply to the interim application has pleaded as under:-a) The plaintiff does not have the locus standi to institute the presentproceedings. ,b). The design registrations relied upon in the plaint have lapsed.c) Functional shapes or mechanical devises cannot be the subject matter of design registration.d) The patents...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Hari Krishan Gupta
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [2001]117TAXMAN214(Delhi)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.Our judgment will govern all the three ITRs.2. For the assessment year 1968-69, the following questions have been referred for opinion of this court by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench A, under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the firm-Victor Cable Corporation could create a goodwill in its books of business on 18-6-1966 and evaluate the same at Rs. 4 lakhs ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that each partner of the firm could be given credit of 1/5th share in the amount of that goodwill in the firms books ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amounts of goodwill and the capital investments of the partners in the said firm could be in printed with the character of the respective Hindu Undivided F...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: (2001)165CTR(Del)387
D.K. Jain, J.At the instance of the revenue , the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D' (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal'), has referred, under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), the following questions, arising out of its consolidated order in ITA Nos. 5422 and 5289/1972-73, for our opinion:'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,75,709 (Rs. 1,47,109 + Rs. 3,600 + Rs. 25,000) maintained by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for the assessment year 1967-68 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in entertaining the additional ground of the assessed before them in respect of Rs. 1,868 and Rs. 19,157 representing profit under section 41(2) and capital gains, respectively ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sums of Rs. 1,868 and Rs. 19,157...
Tag this Judgment!