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.
Universal Chemicals and Indus. Vs. Designated Authority
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC185
1. Challenge in this appeal filed by M/s. Universal Chemicals & Industries Ltd. is against final finding of the Designated Authority issued under Notification dated 8-9-2001 as well as Notification dated 1-11-2001 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue imposing anti dumping duty on imports of Potassium Permanganate from People's Republic of China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Initiation of anti dumping investigation concerning import of Potassium Permanganate originating in or exported from the above countries was on the basis of a petition filed by the appellant herein. In this appeal the relief sought by the appellant is that anti-dumping duty to be levied and collected on all imports of Potassium Permanganate from China into India ought to be @ 610 US$ PMT as was held in the preliminary finding under Notification dated 3-12-2000.2. On the basis of the petition filed by the appellant herein who is the sole producer of Potassium Permanganate in India anti dumping inves...
Govind Nagar Sugar Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN760(Delhi)
ORDERThis writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against : (i) the notice, dated 4-10-2002, issued by the Income Tax Officer Ward 12(2) New Delhi, attaching the bank accounts of the petitioner in the Central Bank of India, Basti, Uttar Pradesh for recovery of the outstanding demand pending against the petitioner in respect of assessment year 1999-2000; and (ii) the order dated 11-10-2002, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-IV, New Delhi rejecting the application of the petitioner for stay of the said demand.2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that on the one hand the Commissioner (Appeals) is not disposing of petitioner's application for stay of demand, despite the fact that even arguments in the appeal itself have already been beard, where after the petitioner has also filed its written submissions on 1-10-2002 and, on the other, the department is taking coercive steps to recover the amount in dispute. Mr. Syali, learned senior cou...
Rare Fuel and Automobile Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indian Institute o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: 102(2003)DLT549; 2003(66)DRJ62
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition seeks a direction to respondent No. 1 M/s Indian Institute of Petroleum, to revalidate the certificate dated 20.6.2001, issued to the petitioner and to upgrade the same in terms of notification dated 19.11.2001, issued by the Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways (MORTH). A direction is also sought to the respondent State Transport Authority (for short S.T.A.) respondent No. 3 not to stop the endorsement of the buses manufactured on or after 1.4.1996, converted into CNG by the petitioner in order to mitigate the prevailing transport crisis in Delhi, due to want of CNG buses. Petitioner also seeks exemplary damages and costs, on account of harassment and loss caused to the petitioner, to be recovered personally from the officials of the IIP or Indian Institute of Petroleum responsible for the denial of revalidation.2. The petitioner claims to be a company comprising professionals involved in the research and development of gas...
Govind Nagar Sugar Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR227(Delhi)
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against : (i) the notice, dated October 4, 2002, issued by the Income-tax Officer, Ward 12(2), New Delhi, attaching the bank accounts of the petitioner in the Central Bank of India, Basti, U. P., for recovery of the outstanding demand pending against the petitioner in respect of the assessment year 1999-2000, and (ii) the order dated October 11, 2002, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-IV, New Delhi, rejecting the application of the petitioner for stay of the said demand.2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that, on the one hand, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is not disposing of the petitioner's application for stay of demand, despite the fact that even arguments in the appeal itself have already been heard, where after the petitioner has also filed its written submissions on October 1, 2002, and, on the other, the Department is taking coercive steps to recover the amount in d...
Associated Switchgear (P) Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC588
1. These two appeals relate to differential duty demand, confiscation and Imposition of penalties on the appellants. The facts are common and interconnected issues arise for decision. Accordingly, both the appeals were heard together and are disposed of under this common order.2. The appellant is a small scale unit engaged in the manufacture of Electrical Distribution Control Panels. They undertook contracts for design, fabrication erection and commissioning of such control panels at the premises of certain parties. The present dispute relates to the alleged short levy of duty in respect of such contract supplies.3. The facts of the case are that the appellants do not manufacture all the parts required for the manufacture of the electrical panels. Some of the parts were bought from the other manufacturers. The appellants issued two sets of invoices in respect of the contracts, one for the parts manufactured in their factory and the other, purportedly, for the goods purchased from the ...
Bonenzo Engg. and Chemical (P) Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)(152)ELT342TriDel
1. M/s. Bonenzo Engg. & Chemical (P) Ltd. have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the Order-in-Appeal Nos. 143-44/2002, dated 18-2-2002 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Shri Manjeet Singh, learned Consultant, submitted that the Appellants, a small scale unit, manufacture excisable goods falling under Chapters 32 and 84 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act; that in the terms of Notification No. 175/86-CE., dated 1-3-86 they were entitled to duty free clearance upto Rs. 30 lakhs subject to the condition that the duty free clearance in respect of goods of any one Chapter would not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs; that since they were manufacturing goods falling under two chapters, they decided to avail exemption from payment of duty in respect of clearances up to Rs. 10 lakhs under Chapter 84 and the remaining Rs. 20 lakhs under Chapter 32; that accordingly as soon as they crossed the exemption limit of clearance of Rs. 10 lakhs under Chapter 84 they started paying duty on t...
Super Steel Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC178
2. Appeal No. E/446/02-A has been preferred against the impugned order-in-original dated 31-8-2001/17-9-2001 vide which duty demand of Rs. 11, 26,487/- with penalty of Rs. 75,000/- and redemption fine of Rs. 10,000/- had been affirmed against the Company, appellant No. 1 by the Commissioner of Central Excise for the period 1-4-94 to 24-8-94, while the other two appeals E/61 and 63/02-A have been filed against the common Order-in-Original dated 31-8-2001/17-9-2001 vide which duty demand had been confirmed against the Company, appellant No. 1 for the period 1-4-94 to 22-7-96, Modvat credit had also been disallowed to it, and penalty had been imposed on the appellants No. 1 and 2, by the Commissioner, as detailed in the order itself.3. The facts giving rise to these appeals may briefly be stated as under : 4. The appellant No. 1 is a Company engaged in the manufacture of Kerosene Wick Stoves (Brand Nutan) under the Licence granted by the Indian Oil Corporation, as per the specifications ...
Fairlon Engg. (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT429TriDel
1. These two appeals have been filed by the appellants against the common order-in-appeal dated 20-5-2002 vide which their appeals against the order-in-original dated 5-7-2001, passed by the Deputy Commissioner rejecting their refund claims, had been dismissed.2. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants filed refund claims for the refund of the duty on the strength of the Tribunal's order before the Deputy Commissioner, but the same was rejected by him on the ground of unjust enrichment. They filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) who refused to condone the delay in filing the appeals and also observed that since the application for refund claim of the appellants was pending before the Tribunal, he has no power to deal with the matter.4. No doubt the appeals were filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) after the expiry of 60 days prescribed under Section 128 of the Customs Act, but he had the power to condone the delay up to 30 days if sufficient cause was made out. ...
Network Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)84ITD67(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 9th Oct., 1995, in relation to asst. yr. 1992-93.2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee contended that he was not pressing ground Nos. 5 to 7. These are, therefore, dismissed as not pressed.3. The remaining 4 effective grounds which survive for our reconsideration are as under : "1. That the CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the debenture issue expenses of Rs. 18,17,680. 2. That the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the entire expenses of Rs. 50,49,111 has been incurred on the issue of debenture and thus the whole sum is allowable as a deduction. 3. It is contended that the expenses incurred on the issue of debentures, understood by the lower authorities erroneously to be for debentures and shares, are expenses incurred for issue of debentures and the bifurcation is vitiated in law as it is based on ignoring the relevant material and record and relying on extraneous considerations. 4....
New Delhi Municipal Council Vs. Sh. Rohit Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2002
Reported in: 2003(66)DRJ155
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. 1. Rule.2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties the matter is taken up for final disposal.3. This batch of writ petitions has been filed by the petitioner impugning the orders of the appellate authority and raising a question of law as to whether the mere specification of the arrears of house tax in a house tax bill can given rise to a cause of action to the assessed to impugn the same before the appellate authority in so far as it relates to the arrears for which neither the assessment orders nor bills were impugned earlier.4. The premises in question bear No. MB-34, Inder Prakash Building, 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi were originally purchased by one Master Sudesh Behl(minor), beneficiary Trust and thereafter transferred to the respondent in pursuance to agreement to sell dated 20.4.2001. It is stated that vide the assessment order dated 22.3.97 assessment was completed for the years 1989-1990, 1990-1991, 1991-92 and the rateable value was fixe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »