Delhi Court October 2002 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.
Frick India Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: (2003)(86)ECC153
1. This appeal of the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowing Modvat credit to the extent of Rs. 29,334 to the appellants on the ground that the invoices on the strength of which the credit was taken did not bear pre-printed Serial Number. The Serial Number of the invoice was hand-written.2. Ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that the question whether Modvat credit was deniable on the above ground has since been settled by the Tribunal's Larger Bench in CCE, Ahmedabad v. Satyen Dyes 2002 (79) ECC 354 (IB): 2001 (47) RLT 669 (Tri-LB), wherein it was held that where the inputs were duty-paid and received by the assessee in their factory and utilized in the manufacture of their final product, Modvat credit on such inputs was not liable to be denied on the ground that the invoice under cover of which the inputs were received by the assessee was bearing hand-written Serial No. instead of a printed one.3. Ld. DR, on the other hand, submits that the decisi...
Ajay Kumar Aggarwal (Dr.) Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT336TriDel
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant made import of 65 pieces of 'Dialysis machines' from U.S.A. On scrutiny, it was found that the machines were more than ten years old and require a specific licence. It was also found that the machines were under valued. The value of the machines was enhanced to 150%. The adjudicating authority confiscated the machines and allowed to release on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 5 lakhs. A penalty of Rs. 1 lakh was also imposed.3. The contention of the appellant is that while enhancing the value of these goods, the shipping expenses were also enhanced at 150%. The contention of the appellant is that the actual shipping expenses were mentioned in the invoices and there is no evidence to show that the appellants suppressed shipping expenses. Therefore, enhancing the shipping expenses is not sustainable. The contention of t...
Shri Sidharth Chaudhary Vs. University of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: 103(2003)DLT231
Manmohan Sarin, J. 1. Rule.With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal.2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to set aside and quash the entire selection and admission process, made by the respondents for Master of Finance Control (MFC) and Master of Business Economic (MBE) courses for the academic session 2002-03. The writ petition also seeks for issuance of a writ of mandamus to prepare a list of candidates, who have been declared successful in the written test and to conduct the group discussion and interview afresh in accordance with the relevant rules before the commencement of the academic session. Academic session commenced on 16.7.2002 and considerable part of the first year course is stated to have already been covered and this prayer to that extent is infructuous.3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents had in the prospectus indicated total number of available seats as 30, which were likely to be r...
Suresh Raina and anr. Vs. National Fertilizers Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT56; 2003(66)DRJ43
K.S. Gupta, J.1. In this petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act'), the petitioner seek direction to the named arbitrator to enter into reference and on his refusal to do so, to appoint an arbitrator. Details of claim to be adjudicated have been set out in tabular form in sub para (xxxi) of Para 5 of the petition as under:-Supplies made under the supervision and arrangement of the petitioner for the following periods:- (i) Oct. 93 to March, 94 : 3,81,368 M.Ts. (ii) April 94 to March, 95 : 6,81,242 M.Ts. (iii) April, 95 to March, 96 : 6,30,124 M.Ts. (iv) April, 96 to Aug. 96 : 1,92,514 M.Ts. Total : 18,85,248 M.Ts.Revised rates fixed @ Rs. 60/-per MT instead of Rs. 65/- per MT : 18,85,248 x 15 Amount due : 2,82,78,720/- Less amount received as advance ad-hoc payment : Rs. 30,00,000/- Net amount due & payable : Rs. 2,52,78,720/-to the petitioners fromrespondents.Interest @ 24% p.a. on the :above amount.Pecuniary loss and damages :...
Master Kunal Vs. Harsh Dev Shinghari and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT299; 2003(66)DRJ57
K.S. Gupta, J. 1. I heard Sh. J.P. Sengh for plaintiff, Sh. D.C. Vohra for defendants 1, 2 & 8 and Sh. N.N. Dhingra for defendants 5 & 7 on the issue if requisite court fee had been paid by the plaintiff. 2. Prayers made in the suit are as under:-'(a) Decree of declaration declaring that the documents viz settlements, releases, bonds, gifts or wills executed by the defendants or Late Pandit Gian Chand not bind the plaintiff qua his share in the suit properties being joint family properties as mentioned in paragraph No. 6 of the plaint;(b) Decree of partition, preliminary and final, of separate possession of plaintiff's 1/12th share in the suit properties set out in paragraph No. 6 of the plaint;(c) Decree of rendition of account, preliminary and final directing the defendants to render accounts of the rental income and other profits derived from the suit properties detailed in paragraph No. 6 of the plaint;(d) If the defendants contest the claim for the partition and separate possessio...
Sh. Dhruv Dayal Gupta Vs. H.C.L. Infosolutions Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT225; 2002(68)DRJ303
K.S. Gupta, J.1. Smt. Satyawati Devi Aggarwal filed this application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with section 151 CPC for being imp leaded as Party to the suit, interalia, alleging that property bearing No.M-41, Greater Kailash, Part-I, New Delhi was owned by Smt. Jwala Devi and she is her daughter. Smt. Jwala Devi who died on 23rd December 1977, left behind a Will dated 22nd December 1995 which was registered in the office of Sub Registrar, Delhi as document No.54434 in Addl. Book No.III, Volume No.2542 on pages 193 to 195 on 22nd December 1995, bequeathing the said property in favor of applicant. Applicant has filed Case No.23/95 before District Judge, Delhi for grant of probate/letters of administration in respect of the said Will. Iswhwar Dayal Gupta, attorney of plaintiff is a party in said probate case and he has avoided to file objections so far. It is further stated that plaintiff alleges to have inherited the said property on the basis of a fabricated Will by Smt. Jwala Devi da...
Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Bhaumik Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Del)530
Sharda Aggarwal, J. 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Sub-section 1C of Section 54E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act), as introduced by the Finance Act, 1992, praying that the words and figures '29th day of February, 1992' in the said Section be struck down and instead the words and figures '31st day of March, 1992' be substituted.2. The Finance Act, 1992, by amending Section 54E(1) of the Act, withdrew the exemption from tax in respect of long term capital gains from the assessment year 1993-34. Under this provision, as it stood prior to the amendment, exemption from tax in respect of long term capital gains was allowed under Section 54E(1) to the extent the net consideration was invested or deposited in any specified asset prescribed in that Section within a period of six months from the date of transfer.3. Section 54E(1) of the Act prior to the amendment of 1992 stood as...
Virender Kalra @ Tony Vs. State of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: 103(2003)DLT64; 2003(66)DRJ702
ORDERJ.D. Kapoor, J.1. The dispute between the parties which gave rise to FIR for the offence under Section 288/336, IPC was that when M/s. Kalra & Company was constructing house bearing No. 180/2, Mehrauli, some wooden sticks fell on the roof of the house of the complainant and caused some damage to its roof. During the trial the compromise was arrived and the disputes between the parties were settled and respondent No. 2 was duly compensated. In view of the nature of the allegations and the compromise between the parties and the compensation given to the respondent No. 2 there remains nothing in the proceedings inspire of the fact that some of the offences is not compoundable. This is the reason the inherent jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked. The entire exercise will be in futility. The petition is allowed. The FIR and the proceedings stand quashed.dusty....
Pooja Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: (2004)(163)ELT356TriDel
1. This appeal has been preferred against the Order-in-Original dated 16-4-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, as the adjudicating authority vide which he has re-determined the ACP of the induction furnace of the appellants.2. The facts are not much in dispute. The ACP of the induction furnace of the appellants was finally determined as 9600 MTs vide order dated 25-9-98 in terms of Rule 3(1) of the Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules').Thereafter, the Commissioner re- determined the ACP on the ground that the appellants had earlier suppressed the actual production capacity of their unit in collusion with the manufacturers of the furnace and passed the impugned order.3. The learned Counsel has contended that the Commissioner had no power to review his own order dated 25-9-98 vide which he finalised the ACP of the unit of the appellants. The impugned order passed by him is illegal. In support of his contention he ...
J.K. Cement Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: (2003)(87)ECC194
1. This appeal involves an amount of Rs. 36,300 and arises for admission. There is no representation for the appellants in spite of notice.3. The issue involved in this case is whether the lubricants used in the limestone mines away from the appellants' cement factory, during January to March 2000 were capital goods eligible for modvat credit under Rule 57-Q as the rule stood at the material time. The lower appellate authority, in its order impugned in the present appeal, has relied on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Jay Pee Rewa Cements v. CCE, 2001 (77) ECC 457 (SC) : 2001 (133) ELT 3 (SC). The reliance is on para 22 of the Apex Court's judgment. The learned DR today reiterates this ground in defence of the impugned order.In Jaypee Rewa Cements, there were two issues before the Apex Court.The main issue was whether the explosives used by the cement manufacturer for mining limestone at the mines situated away from the cement factory, were eligible inputs under Rule 57-A, for ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »