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.
Ballarpur Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2002
Reported in: (2003)(153)ELT308TriDel
1. The impugned order has demanded a duty of over Rs. 21 lakhs and has imposed an equal amount of penalty. Further, there is a demand for interest also on the duty not paid. The duty demands are in respect of alleged manufacture and clearances of paper waste/broke by the appellant paper mill. It is the appellant's contention that the duty demand is not tenable at all inasmuch as the items in question arose during the course of manufacture undertaken by M/s. Haryana Coated Paper Ltd., and not by the appellants. The appellants have explained that they were supplying map litho paper to M/s. Haryana Coated Paper Ltd., for the purpose of converting them to art paper. In accordance with the terms of the contract, M/s. Haryana Coated Paper Ltd., disposed of the waste paper arising during the conversion and made adjustments in the appellant's accounts to the extent of the price realized on such waste paper. During the hearing of the case, the learned Counsel for the appellants has explained w...
Tecil Chemicals and Hydro Power Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2002
Reported in: (2002)(84)ECC871
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 30-10-2001 vide which the refund claim of the appellants had been rejected.2. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of calcium carbide and acetylene black. Calcium carbide is captively used by them in the manufacture of final product, acetylene black. They did not make any declaration of this input (calcium carbide), in their price lists No. 10/78 and 11/78, filed by them in May and April 78. The Revenue Department, however, informed them that their input was excisable and they were required to declare in the price list and classification list and were also liable to pay duty thereon. They, thereafter in subsequent price list 12/78 and classification list 3/78 declared calcium carbide also. Thereafter, notice was issued to them on those price lists and classification lists regarding classification and valuation. Till the pendency of the dispute they sta...
Supercom India Ltd. Vs. Directorate General Foreign Trade, Ministry of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(66)DRJ294; 2003(87)ECC577; 2003(160)ELT69(Del)
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Petitioner seeks quashing of order dated August 4, 1998, passed by respondent No. 2 i.e. the Appellate Committee, Ministry of Commerce, Government of India, maintaining the penalty of Rs. 5 lacs on the petitioner for non fulfillment of the export obligations. Petitioner also seeks a restraint on the respondents from recovering the penalty amount of Rs. 5 lacs.2. The facts, in brief, culminating in the present petition are as under:Petitioner M/s. Supercom India Ltd. obtained a letter of approval from the Government of India to set up an industrial unit in the Noida Export Processing Zone inter alias for the manufacture of carbon film resistors. The approval was given vide letter dated 1.1.1988, and as supplemented by the letter dated 27.1.1992, by which the net average value addition was reduced from 31% to 20.32%. Petitioner was required to export its entire production and the net average value addition was put at 20.32% as noted above. The other terms and conditi...
J.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. M.C.D. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(69)DRJ32
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. Rule.2. Mr. Anil Grover, advocate, accepts notice of rule on behalf of respondent No. 1.3. Mr. Akshay Bipin, advocate, accepts notice of rule on behalf of respondent No. 2.4. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a 'No Objection Certificate/Permission' from respondent No. 1 under Section 143 of the Delhi Municipal Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the said act) in favor of the petitioner for displaying the company logo 'JK TYRE DIAL-A-TYRE' on its vans/vehicles and for restraining respondent No. 2 from challenging the vans/vehicles of the petitioner for displaying the aforesaid logo.5. It is stated in the petition that the petitioner company for the first time has introduced 'The Tyre Delivery and Fitment Mobile Van Concept' promoted as DIAL-A-SERVICE, in terms whereof the petitioner delivers the tyres and related value added services at the doorstep of the customers while also educating them about the tyre care and there two such vans ...
Jindal Polyster Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: (2003)(152)ELT228TriDel
1. This appeal has been filed against the impugned order-in-original dated 18-4-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise vide which he had rejected the prayer of the appellants for the remission of duty on account of destruction of goods by natural cause i.e. fire.2. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of polyester filament yarn. During the course of manufacture, spinning hard waste also arises. They filed an application for remission of duty in respect of 236000.77 kgs. of spinning hard waste of polyester filament yarn, destroyed in fire which took place in their factory premises on 6-6-1998. The intimation regarding the fire was lodged by them with the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise and the Superintendent Range vide letter dated 6-6-1998 received in their Offices on 8-6-1998. They also sent intimation about the fire to the SHO, Gulaothi on 6-6-1998. The Commissioner had rejected their claim on two grounds; firstly, there w...
Jagraj and ors. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: (2003)(87)ECC176
1. Appellants filed these appeals against the common adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, therefore, are being taken up together. S/Shri Charan Singh and Jagraj Singh, owners of the trucks, filed appeals against the confiscation and imposition of redemption fine on their trucks. S/Shri Jai Bhagwan and Pappu filed appeals challenging the imposition of penalty of Rs. ten thousand under Section 112 of the Customs Act.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 6.5.99, two. trucks were intercepted by the Customs officers and 25 bags containing small cardamoms were recovered from each truck. Statements of Shri Jai Bhagwan, driver of one of the trucks and Shri Pappu, cleaner of one of the trucks, were recorded as other driver and cleaner ran away from the spot. S/Shri Jai Bhagwan and Pappu, in their statements, under Section 108 of the Customs Act, admitted that the smuggled cardamoms were loaded in their truck by Shri Raja Babu and they were to receive higher rate of fare a...
Jagdish Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT618TriDel
1. Appellants filed these appeals against the common adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, therefore, are being taken-up together. S/Sh. Charan Singh and Jagraj Singh, owners of the trucks, filed appeals against the confiscation and imposition of redemption fine on their trucks. S/Sh. Jai Bhagwan and Pappu filed appeals challenging the imposition of penalty of Rs. ten thousand under Section 112 of the Customs Act.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 6-5-99, two trucks were intercepted by the Customs officers and 25 bags containing small cardamoms were recovered from each truck. Statements of Sh. Jai Bhagwan, driver of one of the trucks and Sh. Pappu, cleaner of one of the trucks, were recorded as other driver and cleaner ran away from the spot. S/Sh. Jai Bhagwan and Pappu, in their statements, under Section 108 of the Customs Act, admitted that the smuggled cardamoms were loaded in their truck by Sh. Raja Babu and they were to receive higher rate of fare and also...
Sheraton International Inc. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: (2003)85ITD110(Delhi)
1. Since common issue is involved in both these appeals, the same are being disposed of by the common order for the sake of convenience.2. At the outset and before coming to the main issue on merits, the learned counsel for the assessee Shri Ajay Vohra has challenged the validity of assessment for the assessment year 1997-98 by contending that the notice issued under Section 142(1), on the basis of which assessment was made by Assessing Officer, was barred by period of limitation and, therefore, the entire assessment proceedings were yoidab initio. It has been contended that though there is no express provision providing period of limitation for issuance of notice under Section 142(1), it can be deduced from the scheme of the Act. According to him, such notice cannot be issued after the end of the assessment year or alternatively, after the expiry of one year from the end of the assessment year. Since notice under Section 142(1) calling the assessee to file the return for assessment y...
O.P. Mishra Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4017; 100(2002)DLT636; 2003(66)DRJ273
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. The Superintendent, Central Jail-3, Tihar, New Delhi has preferred this writ petition with the prayer to quash the orders dated 16.3.2002 and 15.4.2002 passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi.2. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this petition are recapitulated as under:3. It is incorporated in the petition that along with the several administrative duties of looking after the law and order of the under trials and convicts lodged in Tihar Jail, the petitioner has also been entrusted with the duty of producing the undertrials in the various Courts. It is submitted that the petitioner has been performing his duties with diligence and care for the last several years.4.In the petition it is also mentioned that one Ajit Singh@Babloo s/o Om Singh was an under-trial lodged in Tihar Jail. It may be pertinent to mention that the directions have been issued by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Misc. Petition No. 27680-M/2000 titled as '...
Holistic Farms P. Ltd. Vs. Mcd and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT125
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner raising he question of law as to whether the amended bye-laws would apply to the petitioner even though the plan submitted by the petitioner had been sanctioned prior to the amendment.2. The petitioner company is the owner of a plot of land measuring 1.029 Hectares situated at village Rajokri, Tehsil Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The building bye-laws including in relation to dwelling in farm houses were published by a notification dated 23.6.1983. The Master Plan was published vide notification dated 1.8.90 and the norms for coverage and height of dwelling unit in respect of the farm houses were modified. Subsequently a committee was set up under the Chairmanship or Professor V.K. Malhotra to suggest modifications to the building bye-laws and the committee submitted its report which was followed up by notification dated 23.7.98 modifying Master Plan. In terms of the modifications the maximum coverage was increased....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »