Delhi Court April 2001 Judgments

Vijay Kumar Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Lokeshwar Prasad, President: 1. The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is directed against order dated 2.3.2001, passed by District Forum (North-West), Shalimar Bagh, Delhi in Complaint Case No. 2500/2000 - entitled Shri Vijay Kumar v. Delhi Vidyut Board and Anr. 2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated, are that the appellant, Shri Vijay Kumar, claiming himself to be the general attorney of one Smt. Sundari Devi, had filed a complaint before the District Forum under Section 12 of the Act averring that he was a consumer in respect of electricity connection bearing K-No. 7314419, installed at his residence at A-1/2-B, Keshavpuram, Delhi. The grievance of the appellant, in the complaint, before the District Forum, in nutshell, was that the appellant had requested the respondent several times for the transfer of connection in his name, yet, his request to ...

M/S. Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. the Designated Authority the

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, imposed anti-dumping duty on Pure Terephthalic Acid (PTA) originating in or exported from Korea RP, Thialand and Indonesia under Notification No. 13/92 dated 28.4.98. The rate of duty so imposed on Korean Supplies varied from Rs.1130/- PMT to Rs. 1490/- PMT. This was done based o n the final Findings and recommendations arrived at by Designated Authority, Ministry of Commerce vide his Final order No. 14/1/94 ADD Dated 19.3.98. The Final Findings were reached byu the Designated Authority after investigating imports and domestic production for the period April, 1996 to October, 1996 with regard to export prices and Indian manufacturing cost of PTA. The investigation had revealed a dumping margin varying from 6.65% to 9.63% in respect of various exporters of PTA from Korea RP.2. Rule 23 of Customs Tariff (Identification Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules 1995 provides that the ...

M/S. Reby Castings (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Cce Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. These four appeals have been filed by the appellants, M/s. Reby Castings (P) Ltd. against the common Order-in-Appeal dated 19th Jan., 2000 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur, vide which he had up-held the four orders of different dated, of the Joint Commissioner (Tech.), who confirmed the duty and penalties of various amounts as indicated in those orders, for the period September, 1997 to March, 1999, on the appellants.2. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of ingots/billets of non-alloy steel faling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. These goods were notified under Notification No.30/97-CE (NT) dated 30.8.97, as amended by Notification No.43/97-CE (NT) dated 30.08.97 by the Central Government, for which duty was required to be charged under Section 3 A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 96 ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The total capacity of the furnace of the appellants for the purpose of discharging ...

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S. Mehta Cold Forge and Orthers

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(76)ECC549

1. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Mehta Cold Forge, Nasik and M/s. Nasik Industrial Engineering Corporation, Nasik were engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under TI-52 and 68 of the Schedule to the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. They were availing exemption from payment of duty during the period 1983-84 to 1985-86 in terms of Notification 80-80-CE dated 19.6.80 as amended, by showing that they are two separate and distinct manufacturing units. The Department was of the view that for all practical purposes, both units were working as a single unit inasmuch as both were using factory premises of each other and had installed their machinery in each other's factory premises and had been using the same for the production of goods without charging rent from each other for use of machinery.They had also utilised the services of the supervisory and office staff and workers of each other without paying any additional remuneration.Further raw materials were suppli...

M/S. Sangam Place Vs. Cce, Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Shri Pawan Arora,Id.Advocate arguing the case for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty submits that in the instant case the total amount of duty was only Rs.560/-. He submits that the penalty of Rs.46,800/- is out of all proportion. He submits that the applicant was new company and was not conversant with service tax matter and hence there was delay in submission of quarterly return and prays that the penalty may be waived.2. Shri S.N.Singh, Id.DR submits that the penalty under the Service Tax Act in terms of Section 77 is mandatory. He submits that there was a delay of 288 days and, therefore the authorities below have rightly imposed a penalty. He, therefore submits that since the penalty is mandatory, the applicant may be directed to deposit the entire amount of penalty.3. We have heard the rival submissions. We note that Section 77 of the Service Tax Act provides for a penalty of Rs.100 to Rs.250 per day during the material period. There was delay of 288 days. Looking to the fact t...

M/S. Vishnu Sahai Subash Chander Vs. Cce, Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Arguing the cases for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs.2 lakhs on the applicants, Shri K.K.Anand, 1d.Advocate submits that the matter was earlier decided by the Commissioner who dropped the proceedings against the applicants. Others against whom the penalties were imposed filed appels before the Tribunal. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner. He submits that the Commissioner while deciding the issue in the remand order imposed a penalty of Rs.2 lakhs on the applicants. He submits that since the proceedings had been dropped earlier by the Commissioner. No appeal was filed before the Tribunal by the appellant and the order passed by the Commissioner in 1990 dropping proceedings against the appellants had become final as the department had not filed any appeal against that order.2. Ld.Counsel also submits that in the instant case the penalty has been imposed on account of demand of additional excise duty. He submits that in the case where the demand for additiona...

M/S. Rathi Ispat Ltd. and Others Vs. Cce Meerut

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(136)ELT1308TriDel

1. The prayer in miscellaneous application 114/2001 is fro extension of time to file written objections to the show cause notice - by the final order No. 48-49/2001-A dated 1.2.2001, applicant was directed to file the reply by 16th April 2001. Ld. counsel Shri A.K.Jain, states that the reply has already been filed and hence this application becomes infructuous.3. The prayer in miscellaneous application 109/2001-A is for refund of pre deposit amount of Rs. One crore which the applicant deposited in 10 equal instalments between 28.12.98 to 4.10.99.4. Tribunal's final order by which the impugned order was set aside is dated 11.2.2001. Hence the application is pre-mature. It is accordingly dismissed as such with liberty to the applicants to file a fresh application for direction within a reasonable time, if their claim for refund of pre-deposit amount is not disposed of by the authorities below....

M/S. Ginni International Limited Vs. Cce, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Arguing the application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs.37,40,579/- and a penalty of Rs.5 lakhs, Shri V.Lakshmi Kumaran, ld.Advocate submits that the applicant is 100% export oriented unit engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn and woven fabrics. Apart from physically exporting the yarn and fabrics, the applicant is also selling them in domestic tariff area to the other EOUs. He submits that the applicant is entitled to sell in DTA 50% of FOB value of export (sic) on payment of applicable duty. He submits that the Development Commissioner, Nodia Export Processing Zone granted them permission to sell 50% of FOB value of physical export and deemed export in terms of para 9.10 of the Policy. He submits that the applicant was permitted to sell the goods in DsaTA to the tune of Rs.999.38 lakhs for the quarter April to June 99 and Rs.801.69 lakhs for the quarter July to September 1999. He submits that the Commissioner alleged that the applicant was entitled to only 50% of FOB ...

M/S. Diesel Component Works Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The above appeals along with stay applications have been filed on 30th November 1999. But till date the appellants have not got clearance from the Committee on Disputes for proceeding with the matter. Hence we see no reason to keep the appeals pending any longer but give liberty to the appellants to apply for restoration as and when the clearance from the COD is obtained by the appellants....

M/S. Indian Acrylics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of acrylic fibre since 1992. For the purpose of manufacture of the goods, they imported acrylonitrile from M/s,Mitsubishi Corporation of Japan. Under Bill of Entry dated 20.3.98, they imported 2024 MTs of acrylonitrile under invoice dated 3.3.98 declaring the value as US $ 500 PMT CIF. On scrutinising the documents for assessment, it was found that the goods were supplied against purchase order dated 29.1.98 and that during the period of contract as per PLAT Publication, the CIF price of the goods ranged between US $ 580 TO 610 PMT CIF. It is also found that one more consignment of acrylonitrile had been imported by M/s.Pasupati Acrylon Ltd. from the same supplier wherein the value was declared as US $ 550 PMT. From the above, it appeared that correct price prevailing during the period of shipment ranged between US & 550 to 570 and that the appellants' invoice declaring the value as US $ 5...