Delhi Court February 2000 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Shri Jagdish Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: (2000)(69)ECC527
1. Shri Jagdish Kumar has filed this appeal with the request that the penalty imposed on him may be waived by setting aside the order imposing penalty.2. The facts of the case in brief are that a Bill of Entry was filed in the name of M/s. Sat Electronics by M/s. Shiv International.Investigations in the case revealed that there was no firm in the name of Sat Electronics at the address given. Investigations revealed that one Shri Jagdish Kumar had gone to Hongkong where he met one Rajinder Singh. Rajinder Singh and Jagdish Kumar struck a deal for importing certain products by mis-declaring them in the Bill of Entry. Jagdish Kumar returned from Hongkong but as he was not conversant with the customs formalities, he contacted his friend Bharat Bhushan who arranged with the assistance of Ajay Kumar for filing a Bill of Entry by M/s. Shiv International in the name of Sat Electronics.Investigations further revealed that the goods were highly under-valued. The value of the goods was Rs. 30 la...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Tony Electronics Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT139TriDel
1. Revenue has filed the above appeal against the order in appeal passed by the Collector (Appeals) who has accepted the assessees' contention that waste and scrap arising in the course of manufacture of audio video magnetic tape is not excisable since it is not marketable.According to the ld. DR, a similar product is being manufactured by J.K. Magnetic Tape who are clearing such waste and scrap on payment of duty under C.E.T. 3915.20/3915.90. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel contended that the assessees are not clearing the waste and scrap in question but throughout the proceedings, their stand is that waste and scrap of Audio Video Magnetic tape is not marketable and this stand has not been rebutted with reference to any satisfactory evidence by the Department.2. We have considered the submissions made by sides. We find that, although, the Assistant Commissioner has referred to the manufacture of Magnetic Tape and clearance of waste and scrap of such tapes by M/s.J.K. Magnetic Tap...
Veekay Poly Coats Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: (2000)(69)ECC282
1. The appellant have filed this appeal against denial of Modvat credit and confirmation of the demand and imposition of penalty under Section 11 AC and under Rule 173Q.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of PVC coated fabrics. They purchased yarn from the market took credit on this yarn and sent it to the job worker for conversion into gray fabrics. The Department alleged that the assessee did not follow the procedure under Rule 57J by following Notification No. 214/86. They alleged that since the appellant did not follow the procedure set out for this type of transaction under Notification No.214/86, therefore Modvat credit was not admissible to them.3. Arguing the appeal Shri K.K. Anand, Ld. Counsel submits that appellants had followed the procedure set out under Rule 57F(3) and 57F(4) and that this procedure was more or less the same as prescribed for the purpose under Notification No. 214/86. He submits that similar issue came ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Mohan Spg. Mills
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT934TriDel
1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 30-1-1995 passed by the Collector dropping the proceedings and discharging the show cause notice dated 12-8-1991, against the respondents.3. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of yarn falling under Chapters 52 and 55 of the CETA. They cleared 189054 kgs. of acrylic yarn falling under sub-heading 5504.32 of the CETA, made out of 100% fabrics [acrylic fibres] during the period 1-2-1991 to 24-7-1991 at a nil rate of duty. They were served with a show cause notice dated 12-8-1991 for paying the short duty of Rs. 45,37,296/- under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. That notice was contested by them on the plea that in their classification lists effective from 1-3-1986 onwards they classified the product under subheading 5504.32 of the CETA, and those were approved and accepted by the successive Assistant Collector from time to time. Therefore, the demand raised through the show cause notice is not sustaina...
Modi Korea Telecommunications Ltd. Vs. Deptt. of Telecommunications
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)101; 2001(1)RAJ289
ORDERMukul Mudgal, J.1. This is a petition on behalf of the petitioner under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and under Section 10 read with Section 151 CPC, seeking the appointment of an arbitrator.2. On 24th July, 1995, a license Agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent by which the petitioner was granted license to establish Voice Mail Services for eight cities. Thereafter, differences arose between the parties and by its letter dated 25th January, 1999, the arbitration clause was invoked by the petitioner. The relevant portion of the letter dated 25.1.1999 reads as follows : 'We would request that an independent arbitrator, preferably TRAI, be appointed for a fair settlement under the Arbitration clause and that we should be given an opportunity to present our case to you in person. 3. The relevant portion of the arbitration clause reads as under : '20.1.1. In the event of any question dispute or difference arising under this lic...
Krishan Lal Vs. Mishri Lal Maurya and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: 2000VIAD(Delhi)105; 85(2000)DLT254
ORDERMadan B. Lokur, J. 1. The Petitioner, in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, had filed an application before the learned Additional Rent Controller under Order I, Rule 10 read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) for impleading him as a party to the eviction petition filed by the Respondent. 2. The tenant in the suit premises was none other the uncle (father's brother) of the Petitioner. 3. In the application filed under Order I, Rule 10 of the CPC, the allegation of the Petitioner was that the tenant had surrendered his tenancy and the Respondent had admitted him as a tenant and that the Petitioner and the Respondent had compromised their dispute by entering into an agreement dated 19th April, 1995. It was further alleged that the Respondent had issued rent receipts to the Petitioner for the months of February and March, 1995 and had also received two cheques totalling Rs. 90,000/- by way of security. 4. By an order dated ...
Ms. Gurcharan Kaur and Another Vs. Shri Raja Ram and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: 2001ACJ1200; 2001IIIAD(Delhi)19; 90(2001)DLT180
ORDERKhan, (J)1. One Baldev Singh, 25, was killed in a road accident on 17.6.80 when hit by a tempo. He was unmarried and helping his father in his cycle shop. His parents filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.2.40 lakhs and projected his earning at Rs.700/- per month and more if he had survived. Tribunal worked out his dependency at Rs.200 per month and applying a multiplier of 20 to it, awarded compensation of Rs.48,000/- with 12% interest made payable by Insurance Company which had pleaded its liability at Rs.50,000/- only.2. Appellants felt aggrieved of this and filed FAO No. 131/88 which was dismissed by one word order 26.7.1988. They have this LPA now claiming higher compensation on the ground that income of the deceased at the relevant time was Rs.700/- per month and that he would have earned more in future if he had lived, supplementing the multiplicand. It is also urged that a multiplier of 45 ought to have been applied considering that the age of the deceased was 2...
Om Parkash Sharma and Another Vs. National Capital Territory of Delhi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: 2000IVAD(Delhi)181; 86(2000)DLT533; 2000(54)DRJ142
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. These two writ petitions are filed against the same award rendered by Labour Court-III in I.D. 475 of 1983. Civil Writ Petition No. 3250 of 1996 is filed by the workman and Civil Writ Petition No. 4067 of 1996 is filed by the Management. By the impugned award the Labour Court held that the departmental enquiry conducted against the workman was valid and fair. However, in case of workman Shri Om Parkash Sharma punishment of dismissal is converted into that of discharge directing that he would be entitled to benefit of past service and consequential benefits up to the date of order of dismissal. In case of workman, Shri Ram Sanehi, Labour Court had held that the punishment of dismissal was shocking and disproportionate to the charges proved against him and this punishment is accordingly substituted by punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect. Direction is issued that he be reinstated and he would be entitled to 50% of the backwages as if he ...
Sudhir Singhal Vs. Neeta Singhal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)325; AIR2001Delhi116; 85(2000)DLT419; II(2000)DMC33; 2000(52)DRJ700; (2000)125PLR43
ORDERM.K. Sharma, J.1. The appellant herein filed a petition seeking for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent on the grounds of cruelty and mental disorder. It was alleged in the petition that the respondent after the solemnisation of marriage treated the petitioner with cruelty and that the respondent had been suffering from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that she could not be reasonable expected to live with the petitioner. 2. The parties got married on 2.5.1982 at Delhi according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Both the parties were divorcees at the time of their marriage. However, there is no child of the parties either from the present marriage or from the previous marriage. After marriage, the parties lived at Chandausi, District Moradabad, U.P., and the said divorce petition was originally filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Moradabad, U.P. in April, 1989. Under the orders of the Supreme Court, the case was transferred to the Courts at Delhi. 3. Af...
Hdfc Vs. Anil Laul
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)542; 85(2000)DLT343; 2000(56)DRJ226
ORDER1. The plaintiff had filed this suit for recovery of money under Order 37, CPC. Summons in Form IV Appendix B, CPC were served upon the defendants on May 14, 1999. In terms of Order 37, CPC, the defendant on receipt of summons is required to enter appearance within 10 days from the date of service of summons upon him. As the summons were served upon the defendants on 14th May, 1999 the appearance was required to be entered on or before 24th May, 1999. The defendants however, entered appearance only on 19th July, 1999 and have filed this application for condensation of delay in entering appearance. 2. The case set up by the defendants for condensation of delay in entering appearance is that in the summons itself it was mentioned that the suit will be listed again on July 20, 1999 before the Joint Registrar and because of this date appearing on the summons the defendants were misled and they remained under the impression that they had to enter appearance only on 20th July, 1999 when...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »