Delhi Court March 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.
Ga Vs. Laboratory (P) Ltd
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT516TriDel
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-original No. 68/97 dated 29-10-1997 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi, wherein (i) benefit of Notification No.1/93-C.E. was denied for the period August, 1993 to January, 1994 and duties demanded, (ii) demand was confirmed in respect of COSMOS brand tooth paste for April, 1994 to October, 1994 and (iii) demand was confirmed in respect of AQUADENT Brand tooth paste for the period from April, 1994 to October, 1994.2. The short point to be considered in this case is whether on assigning the Brand name, an assignee i.e. the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Small Scale exemption in terms of notification No.1/93, dated 1-4-1993 or not.3. The appellants who are S.S.I, unit, manufacturing the goods of different brands. The Brand name 'COSMOS' was originally owned by M/s.Hindustan Rimmer and S.S.I, unit was transferred under an agreement dated 1-4-1992 to use the same on tooth paste manufactured by...
Cce Vs. Raymond Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(69)ECC518
1. Revenue has come up in appeal against the finding of the Ld.Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the assessee was entitled to Modvat credit as the same was claimed under the transitional Rule 57H even if it was taken beyond six months of the date of the duty paying document.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed a declaration under Rule 57H claiming Modvat credit on the basis of the documents which were issued beyond six months. The Asstt. Commissioner adjudicating the case held that the provisions of Rule 57G shall be applicable to the case of the assessee and since the assessee had taken credit on the strength of documents which were issued more than six months earlier than the date of taking credit. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) who after examining the provisions of Rule 57G and 57H concluded that there was no provision in Rule 57H which debarred the assessee to take Modvat credit on the strength of documents which were ...
Barnala Steel Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(69)ECC517
1. This is an appeal against the finding of the Ld. Commissioner holding that the changed capacity of the rolling mill shall be effective from 23.9.98 as against the actual changed capacity as claimed by the appellants to be effective from Jan. '98.2. Shri Alok Arora, Ld. Counsel submits that the appellants had filed an application with the Commissioner on 20.11.97. He submitted that in this application the appellants had indicated their intent to reduce the production capacity of their hot rolling mill. The proposed day shown was 24.12.97. He submitted that on 24.12.97 the appellants intimated that they had reduced the production capacity of their hot rolling mill w.e.f. today i.e. 24.12.97 and therefore, requested for verification of the same and passing orders in regard to the reduced annual production capacity. Ld. Counsel submitted that the appellants again on 6.1.98 wrote to the Commissioner indicating that they had reduced their capacity of the hot rolling mill w.e.f. the month...
Cc Vs. Raman Sood and ors.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(93)LC714Tri(Delhi)
1. Shri R.D. Negi, Ld. DR submits that in all these six appeals only one issue is for determination and that is the issue of demand of duty on goods confiscated but allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine without collecting the duty.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents imported these cars under Carnet-de-passage scheme wherein the imported goods are required to be exported within a period of six months or within the extended period permitted by the competent authority. Information was received in the office of the Director Revenue and Intelligence that certain cars imported under Carnet-de-passage Scheme have over-stayed and have not been exported. Accordingly, investigations were conducted, cars were seized and matter was adjudicated. The adjudicating authority allowed the cars to be redeemed on payment of fine and penalty. The Department has come up in appeal against these findings on the ground that in terms of Section 125 of the Customs Act, good...
Polar Marmo Agglomerates Limited Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(121)ELT739TriDel
1. These appeals are filed by the appellants, M/s. Polar Marmo Agglomerates Limited, involving a common issue therefore they are clubbed together and have been taken for disposal by the order.2. The point to be considered in this case is whether 'Agglomerated Marble' manufactured and cleared by appellants be classified under Chapter 25 as claimed by the assessee or under Chapter heading 6807.3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Polar Agglomerated Marbles. As can be seen from the records the manufacturing process undertaken by the appellants has been summarised as under : (i) Lumps/chips of natural marble are mutilated to the required dimensions and sizes. (ii) Certain additives, such as pigments (for colour), binders (cement or polyster resin) for binding and catalysts are mixed with the said lumps and chips. (iii) This is poured into moulds and subjected to vacuum compaction process, this results in the formation of marble blocks. (iv) The said marble blocks are then s...
Thankam Nair Vs. Directorate of Education
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)216
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged show cause notice dated 11th September, 1998 issued by the Directorate of Education. Petitioner is working as Vice Principal in the school run by Kerala Education Society. She was appointed in the school on probation as head Mistress (Primary) w.e.f. July 1976, and was confirmed to the said post on 7th August 1977 w.e.f. 1st may, 1979 school was recognised by Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as MCD, as short) as minor linguistic school when it was a primary school. On 1st May, 1987 the school was transferred to Delhi Administration from MCD and accordingly it came under the control of Directorate of Education, Delhi. it was accorded recoginition as middle school w.e.f. 1st My, 1987 in the pay scale of Rs.550-900/. School was ultimately granted grant in aid by the directorate of education from class I to Class VIII w.e.f. 31st August, 1989. After this grant in aid was given to the school, the p...
Bhim SaIn Gupta and ors. Vs. S.P. Rao and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)821; 85(2000)DLT148; 2000(53)DRJ427
ORDERMadan B. Lokur, J.1. The Appellants have filed a second appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter to as the Act) directed against the order dated 7th January , 1986 passed by the learned Rent Control Tribunal in R.C.A. No. 516/85. By the impugned order, the learned Rent Control Tribunal (for short the Tribunal) allowed the appeal filed by the Respondents and dismissed the eviction petition filed by the Appellants as being not maintainable. 2. The question involved in this appeal is quite narrow. But, before addressing the question, it would be essential to refer to the facts of the case which ultimately have a bearing on the issue raised. 3. The predecessors in interest of the Appellants entered into a perpetual lease deed dated 19th December, 1938 with the Government of India in respect of the suit premises. By virtue of the lease deed, they were entitled to use the suit premises for residential purposes. They were also entitled to subject the suit ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Uni Products
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT149TriDel
1. All these 4 appeals have been filed by the Revenue. In all the appeals common question of law is involved and as such have been taken up together.2. The issue involved in these appeals is regarding the classification of Carpets of the Floor Covering. The stand taken up by the Revenue is that the product is classifiable under Chapter Heading 5703.90 of the Tariff Act. While the respondents contention is that it is covered under Chapter sub-heading 5703.20 of the Tariff Act. This issue, in fact, stands already settled between the parties by the decision rendered by the Double Member Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Uni Products v. CCE, New Delhi, decided vide its final Order 44-47/2000-D, dated 11-2-2000 (Copy placed on record by the respondents) wherein it has been ruled that the product is classifiable under Chapter Sub-Heading 5703.20 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act and not under Chapter Sub-Heading 5703.90. In view of this judgment of the Tribunal, all the pr...
Metalman Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT79TriDel
1. The appeal is directed against confiscation of a consignment of 112.310 MT of Tin Plate Waste Waste sought to be cleared by the appellants vide bill of entry No. 6020, dated 14-6-1999. The impugned order confiscated the goods for violation of Sections 111 (m) & 111(d) of the Customs Act and gave the appellants an option to redeem them on a payment of Rs. 10 lakhs. A penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs was also imposed.The grounds for confiscation are that the weight of the consignment was misdeclared (as there was an excess quantity of over 9.5 MT) and that the goods had been mis-declared as tin waste strips in sheets and coil form while part of the goods only were strips and coil and the remaining were sheets. The order also holds that strips were eligible to be imported only at floor rate of US $ 545 PMT as against the import value of US $ 288.55.2. The appellants' explanation in defence, before the Commissioner as well as in the present appeal, is that the quantity covered by bill of ent...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Hindustan Coconut Oil Mills
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-2000
Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT561TriDel
1. This is an appeal at the instance of the Revenue. Question involved in this appeal is whether coconut oil extracted from copra is liable to levy of cess under the Vegetable Oil Cess Act, 1983 read with Rules made thereunder. The appellate authority, Collector of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta, took the view that coconut oil is not liable to cess. When the appeal by the Revenue came up before a Bench of two Members, that Bench referred the issue to a larger Bench on account of conflicting decisions of Allahabad High Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court relating to rice bran oil.2. Before dealing with the issue in detail, it is worthwhile to consider the various enactments that imposed cess on produce obtained in India. The first Act by which cess was imposed is the Produce Cess Act, 1966. Section 3(2) of that Act provided that there shall be levied and collected as cess on every produce specified in column 2 of the Second Schedule, a duty of excise at the rate notifie...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »