Delhi Court March 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.
Smt. Shanti Devi and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)497; 97(2002)DLT410; 2002(63)DRJ1
Khan, J.1. It was on 22.8.2001 that son of petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 were riding a motorcycle on Faiz Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. One Traffic Zonal Officer ASI Dharam Pal allegedly caught hold of the handle of motorcycle and also the hands of petitioner No. 2 and as a result, both riders fell down and sustained grievous injuries. They were admitted to Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. While son of petitioner No. 1 succumbed to injuries, petitioner No. 2 survived. The brother of the deceased lodged complaints with Police Commissioner and other authorities but no action was allegedly taken in the matter. On the contrary, FIR No. 199/2001 was registered under Section 279/333 IPC at PS D.B.G. Road against two riders.2. Petitioners' grievance is that even as their complaint for registration of FIR against Traffic Officer had gone abegging, SHO PS D.B.G. Road had threatened them to compromise the matter or face dire consequences. They were now being harassed and mentally tortured by t...
New Decent Footwear Industries Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(150)ELT71(Del)
S.B. Sinha, C.J. 1. This writ petition is directed against Orders dated 29.05.2001 and 14.09.2001 passed by the Customs, & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellate Tribunal') 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm. It is engaged in manufacture of shoes. During the relevant year, namely, 12.08.1991 to 31.03.1994, the petitioner firm was having two units; unit No. 1 located at 4/33, Reshham Katra, Tajganj, Agra and unit No. 2 at 4/37, First, Reshham Katra Tajganj, Agra. The distance between the two premises was only 2000 feet. 3. Shoes used to be manufactured with the aid of power in unit No. 2, whereas the same was done without the aid of power in unit No. 1. According to the petitioner, the position inter-changed. 4. Footwear 'in or in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried with the aid of power'is classifiable in sub-heading 6401.11 of the Central Excise Tariff ( in short, 'the Tariff'). It is thus liable for central...
Raja Ram Singh Vs. Arjun Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Delhi338; 97(2002)DLT729; 2002(62)DRJ837
Usha Mehra, J.1. Suit for partition was filed by this appellant (plaintiff before the Trial Court) impleading his two brothers, present respondents (defendants before Trial Court). His suit was dismissed vide the impugned judgment dated 3rd December, 1980. Aggrieved with the dismissal of the suit he challenged the same by way of this appeal, primarily, on the ground that the respondents herein had admitted that the appellant had 1/3rd (one-third) share in the property in question. In view of this admission coupled with the fact that his father and mother bequeathed the property in his favor it was not necessary for him to implead his sisters as party to that suit. Even otherwise under the Hindu Succession Act sisters could not success to the property in question, nor the suit could be dismissed in view of the preliminary decree passed in Suit No. 296/64 dated 28th May, 1965.2. In order to appreciate the challenge, we may have a quick glance to the facts relevant for the decision of thi...
Spice Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: [2002]257ITR766(Delhi)
R.S. Sodhi, J. 1. This petition is directed against the judgment and order of the learned A. C. M. M., dated December 1, 2001, whereby the learned judge has directed that during the pendency of the reference the pre-charge evidence of the complainant be recorded and thereafter, the proceedings be stayed awaiting the High Court's decision on the reference. 2. The facts of the case are that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that there was no concealment of fact and depreciation on bottles was allowable and on the question of depreciation on computers, the matter was remanded to the assessing authority which has now decided in favor of assessed. The reference against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding depreciation on bottles is pending in the High Court.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the judgment of this court in Joint CIT v. Anatronics General Co. (P.) Ltd. : [2001]247ITR25(Delhi) , where a Division Bench of this court has uphel...
Spice Corporation Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: [2002]123TAXMAN986(Delhi)
ORDERThis petition is directed against the judgment and order of the learned ACMM dated 1-12-2001, whereby the learned Judge has directed that during the pendency of the reference the pre-charge evidence of the complainant be recorded and thereafter, the proceedings be stayed awaiting the High Court's decision on the reference.2. The facts of the case are that the Tribunal held that there was no concealment of fact and depreciation on bottles was allowable and on the question of depreciation on computers, the matter was remanded to assessing authority which has now decided in the favor of the assessed. The reference against the order of the Tribunal regarding depreciation on bottles pending in the High Court.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the judgment of this court in Joint CIT v. Anatronics General Co. (P) Ltd. : [2001]247ITR25(Delhi) , where a Division Bench of this court has upheld the Tribunal's finding justifying the assessed's claim for allowa...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: (2002)176CTR(Del)255; [2003]263ITR211(Delhi)
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. An application for setting aside an order dated November 29, 2001 (CIT v. Steel Authority of India Ltd. : [2002]257ITR241(Delhi) ), has been filed by the respondent/applicant, inter alia, on the ground that Mr. Siddharth Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the respondent at the time when the matter was taken up for hearing, was busy in some other court.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.3. By the said order dated November 29, 2001, this court answered the question referred to it for its opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which is to the following effect:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the grants received from the Government by the assessed-company, which is a 100 per cent. Government company, to enable the company to function, was a capital receipt or revenue receipt ?'4. It is not in dispute that the Steel Authority of India Limited (in short the 'SAIL') is a Government company within the meaning of Section 617 ...
Floor and Furnishing India (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus., New Delh ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2002
Reported in: (2002)LC230Tri(Delhi)
1. In this appeal, filed by M/s. Floor & Furnishing India (P) Ltd., the issue involved is whether the goods imported by them are "artificial turf" classifiable under sub-heading 9506.99 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act as claimed by them or under sub-heading 5703.30 of the tariff as floor covering.2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants had imported artificial turf meant for use for out door sports and games like hockey, golf, tennis, play areas swimming pools, locker rooms, boat docks, wet areas etc.; that the impugned goods cannot be classified under sub-heading 5703.30 which covers carpets and other textile floor coverings in which textile material serve as the exposed surface when in use and including article having the characteristics of textile floor coverings and the same are meant to be used as household goods alone; that the impugned goods are artificial turfs which are used as a flooring as a substitute to grass for games like t...
Frexton Cables (India) Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2002
Reported in: (2002)(81)ECC372
1. These appeals at the instance of assessee M/s. Frexton Cables (India) and the Revenue respectively arise out of Order-in-Appeal No.458-CE/DLH/2001, dated 24-4-2001 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi. The main issue arising in the appeal filed by the assessee is about the 'place of removal' of goods. The appeal by the Revenue is directed against a portion of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) where he has reduced the quantum of penalty from what had been imposed by the original authority. Officers of Anti-Evasion branch of the Delhi Commissionerate visited the factory of the assessee on 1-11-99. On scrutiny of the invoices in respect of the contract sale, it was revealed that the assessee was deducting expenses on account of freight and insurance from the assessable value for payment of central excise duty. The declaration filed by the party shows their place of removal as factory gate. Taking the view that, in fact, the place of removal is place ...
Maruti Udyog Ltd. Vs. C.C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2002
Reported in: (2002)(81)ECC383
1. Applicants filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 12,44,46,804 and penalty of Rs. 30 lakhs.3. The contention of the applicants is that the Tribunal, vide Stay Order No. 2/2001/B dated 16.2.2002, in respect of the same issue, directed the applicants to deposit a sum of Rs. 50 lakh. Out of the demand of Rs. 1.58 crore and the penalty of Rs. 1.60 crores. Their contention is that in the present case the Adjudication Authority also taken into consideration the motor vehicles cleared for export and received for remake/repairs. These motor vehicles were again exported.Hence no duty can be demanded on these vehicles.4. The contention of the applicant is that if duty on these vehicles which were exported is excluded from the demand, the liability on the applicant will be reduced to Rs. 5.50 crores only.5. The contention of the Revenue is that after considering this aspect, the Commissioner held that the appellants had not produced any proof of export.6. Taking into ...
Vikas Forging P. Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2002
Reported in: (2002)(104)LC843Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed against the order dated 25.7.2000 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi disallowing modvat credit of Rs. 44, 262.73 paise.2. Shri N.L. Jangir, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellant and he submitted that the appellants were working under modvat scheme under Rule 57A during the period of dispute when the goods which were sold to manufacturer-buyer had been returned on payment of duty on 52A documents under Rule 57F(1)(II) as invoked during the period to remove the inputs from their factory on payment of duty. He also submitted that the defective forgings returned by their customers were subjected to a process identical with the one employed for the manufacture of the original forgings. Accordingly, the defective forgings were heated at high temperature in furnace and shaped as per specifications of buyer in the die of hammer machine. The reforming and reshaping of the inputs were so done in the die of the hammer m...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »