Delhi Court May 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.
Nervy Lock Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT579TriDel
1. Commissioner, Central Excise, Kanpur, issued demand-cum-show cause notice, dated 4-2-1997. For a proper understanding of the show cause notice and the grounds alleged therein, we read paragraph 2 of that notice :- "And whereas during the scrutiny of the balance sheet for the financial year 31-3-1994 it has been observed that the expenses incurred on commission paid to the Agents, advertisements, publicity and replacement of rejected goods within warranty period which should have been included in the assessable value under Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 and are liable to pay duty have not been included in the assessable value of goods as manufactured by the party." Commissioner then issued a corrigendum, dated 12-6-1997 requiring the manufacturer to show cause to the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Kanpur, for purposes of adjudicating the issue raised in the earlier show cause notice.2. In reply to the show cause notice, manufacturer, a SSI unit, raised a contention ...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT578TriDel
1. Appellant, M/s. BHEL, Bhopal, are engaged in the manufacture of 'High Voltage & Extra High Voltage Large Power Transformers'. Those transformers are installed at hydro/nuclear power generating stations for stepping up the voltage for reducing power loss in long transmission lines. At the other end of the lines, they are again used for stepping down the voltage for distribution. For the smooth working of these transformers, oil supplied by refineries run by oil companies is required. These refineries supply oil at the site where these transformers are installed. While the transformers were removed from the factory, they were not filled with oil. So, in' computing the duty payable on the transformers, its value without that of the oil was taken as assessable value of the produce. Excise Department took the view that value of oil filled in the transformers must also be added to find out the assessable value. For the said purpose, show cause notices were issued demanding differenti...
S.L. Suri Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: (2000)68TTJ(Delhi)846
This is assessee's appeal directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) 17, New Delhi, dated 26-11-1996, relevant to assessment year 1991-92 and following grounds have been raised by the assessee: "(1) That the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the inclusion of a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs received by the assessee on surrender of tenancy rights. The aforesaid inclusion is totally against the ratio laid down by their Lordships of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Bawa Shivcharan Singh v. CIT (1984) 149 ITR 29 (Del).(2) That the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that the receipt in question is taxable as casual and non-recurring receipt under section 10(3) and the provisions of sections 2(24) and 45 of the Act are inapplicable in respect of such receipt, is totally misconceived and is based upon incorrect interpretation of the relevant provisions of law.(3) That the further finding recorded by the learned Commissio...
Ramaswamy Palledar Vs. Secretary to the Government of Nct of Delhi and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000VIIAD(Delhi)128; 2000(56)DRJ646; [2000(86)FLR682]
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. Petitioner in this case was working as 'Palledar' with respondent No. 2 namely, Super Bazaar Cooperative Stores Limited. On 20th July, 1991 he was suspended in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings against him thereafter on 5th August, 1991 departmental enquiry was ordered. Only allegation allegation leveled against the petitioner was that he Along with another worker named Mr. Madho Singh, in connivance with each other attempted to pilfer one bag of 40 kg of indigenous sugar then valued at Rs. 386/-, from the store of R.D.C., I.N.A. branch on 21st May, 1991. while loading the bag of sugar in vehicle No. DHG-5068. Enquiry was held. Enquiry Officer returned his findings holding that charges stood proved against the petitioner and on that basis of order dated 6th July, 1992 was passed imposing penalty of removal from service. Petitioner filed statutory appeal which was also rejected vide order dated 19th September, 1992. Thereafter, petitioner filed Civil Writ P...
Guardsman Nanar Ram Vs. Chief of Army Staff and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)272
ORDERA.K. Sikri,J.1. Petitioner was enrolled in the army as an Infantry man on 9th March, 1988. He is metric fail. Minimum qualification for appointment to the post of infantry man is metriculation thereforee in normal course, petitioner could not have been appointed to this post as he did not fulfill the minimum educational qualification required for the post of Infantry man. However, it is the case of the petitioner that at the time of his recruitment, he had produced metric fail certificate and thereforee this fact was duly conveyed to the recruiting authority and notwithstanding this fact, the petitioner was recruited as Infantry man. He served for 7 years and 228 days and thereafter on 22nd October, 1995 he was illegally discharged from service under Item III(v), Rule 13(3) of the Army Rules, 1954 as shown in the discharge book. Petitioner submitted statutory complaint dated 13th November, 1995 to Army Chief with copy to various other authorities but it did not evoke any response....
Sheela Joshi Vs. Indian Airlines Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)305; 2000(54)DRJ276
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. Unfolding of the petition reveals the following averments made by the petitioner on the basis of which this petition is filed: 2. Petitioner joined the services of respondent No. 1 Indian Airlines Limited (hereinafter referred to as IA, for short) as an Air Hostess in the year 1982. When she was working as such, is introduced Voluntary Retirement Scheme (hereinafter referred to as Scheme, for short) as per which all permanent employees who had completed ten years of continuous service could make written request for voluntary retirement. This scheme came into operation w.e.f. 10th October, 1994 and was to remain in force till 31st December, 1994. Clause IV of this Scheme gave power to the Managing Director to accept or reject the request of the Scheme at his 'sole discretion' on the merit of each case. This reads as under:- 'IV. DECISION.: The Managing Director has the right to accept or reject the request for voluntary retirements at his sole discretion on the me...
Delhi Public School and ors. Vs. Mrs. Ketki Aggarwal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000(56)DRJ121
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. Petitioner No.1 namely DPS, Vasant Kunj is an unaided recognised school. On 7.6.1994 an advertisement, issued by petitioner school, was published in Hindustan Times, inviting applications from trained and experienced candidates for the posts of PGT/TGT and PRT grades etc. Various persons including respondent No.1 responded to the aforesaid advertisement. Respondent No.1 gave her application for the post of TGT. Interview was scheduled for 29.10.1994 and respondent No.1 Along with other applicants appeared before Selection Committee on the aforesaid date. Selection Committee interviewed all the candidates who reported for interview. Petitioner school has produced the minutes of the Selection Committee meeting held on 12.11.1994, after the aforesaid interview, as per which 14 persons were selected for the appointments to the posts of Junior Teacher. In so far as respondent No.1 is concerned, it is mentioned in the minutes that she was selected to be appointed on the...
P.K. Kadam Vs. A.K. Rekhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)717
ORDERMukul Mudgal, J.1. This is a petition under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking a reference of disputes/claims to the Arbitrator for adjudication. 2. The petitioner has relied upon the Arbitration Clause contained in Annexure-A which is the Agreement dated 1.9.1995 between the parties. 3. The arbitration clause of the said Agreement reads as follows: 'That all disputes and questions in connection with the partnership or this deed arising between the partners or between any one of them or their legal representatives and whether during or after the partnership, shall be referred to the arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of Arbitration Act, then in force.'4. The dispute between the parties as per the petitioner is said to have arisen out of a partnership formed by the said Partnership Deed dated 1.9.1995. In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the plea for appointment of an arbitrator is resisted inter-alia on the ground that the petitio...
The Management M/s. Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Undertaking of M. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000IVAD(Delhi)816; 86(2000)DLT390
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. This writ petition is filed against award dated 29.2.1996 passed by Industrial Tribunal No. III in ID No. 45/91. Industrial dispute was referred to the Tribunal with the following terms of reference:- 'Whether Sh.Birpal as entitled to be regularised as Mason from the date of his initial appointment in proper pay scale and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?'2. The case of the respondent workman before the Tribunal was that since the workman was performing the duties of Mason from the date of his initial appointment, he was entitled to be regularised as Mason and he was also entitled to get the pay of Mason since he was working as such. It was an admitted case of the parties that workman was not employed on permanent basis but was employed on daily rated basis. After discussion the evidence on record as well as various pronouncements of Supreme Court and this Court, the relief of regularisation to the respondent w...
Meenakshi Vs. M.C.D. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-2000
Reported in: 2000IVAD(Delhi)824; 2000(56)DRJ102
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. Petitioner on the basis of her B.Ed. qualifications, is seeking to get appointment as Primary Teacher with respondent No.1/MCD. The petitioner had originally passed her B.Ed.exam securing 478/800 marks. However she had applied for improvement in respect of one of the papers i.e. English teaching. By virtue of result of improvement examination, her marks were increased by 9 marks thereby she secured 487/800 marks. She does not get the appointment on the basis of her original marks but if her improved marks are taken into consideration, she would get the job of Primary Teacher. Whether she is entitled to rely upon the marks as a result of improved examination is the question which is to be determined in the present case. The facts on the basis of which this question arises for determination are important and thereforee may be stated first. On July 16, 1996 an advertisement appeared in the 'Employment News' of the same date through which the respondent No.2 acting on...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »