Delhi Court May 2002 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2002)176CTR(Del)294; 101(2002)DLT89; [2002]257ITR88(Delhi)

S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. These references were made at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), for the opinion of this court on the following question :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that depreciation on a vehicle which is not registered in the name of the assessed was an allowable deduction in the hands of the assessed ?'2. The basic facts of the matter as have been stated by the Tribunal are as follows :'2. The assessed is a company engaged in the manufacture of sugar and having two units, one at Basti and the other at Waltergang a few kilometers away from Basti. The relevant assessment year is 1976-77 and the previous year ended on April 30, 1976. 3. During the year under consideration the assessed claimed deducti...

Backbone Tarmat-ng Jv Vs. National Highways Authority of India and anr ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 99(2002)DLT862

S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. These LPAs arise out of a judgment and order dated 22.2.2002 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 4955/01 whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant herein was dismissed. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The appellant herein is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and is engaged in the business of construction of hotels, buildings, offices, factories, roads, tramways, and hospitals etc. It entered into an agreement which was a joint venture agreement with Tarmat Infrastructural Engineering Pvt. Ltd. for bidding on the tender issued by National Highways Authority of India. In October, 2000, Highways Authority invited pre-qualification (PQ) applications for packages III and IV from prospective bidders. The value of package III was estimated at Rs. 205 crores and value of package IV was estimated to be Rs. 208 crores, which meant that in order to qualify for both the packages the bidder m...

P.D. Jharwal (Deceased) Through Smt. Shingari Devi and ors. Vs. Union ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002(64)DRJ640

S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. P.O. Jharwal, original petitioner, since deceased was a member of Delhi Judicial Service. He was a direct recruit having been appointed in the year 1973. He joined his services on 1st May 1975. Prior thereto he was a member of Rajasthan Judicial Service. By reason of letter dated 31st October 1992, he was intimated that/for the, years 1989-90, 1990-91 and .1991-92 he has been given .the. remarks 'B', 'B' and 'C' respectively. Although he was not asked to submit a representation as against the said/purported adverse remark, on the ground that he was not informed as to on what basis such remarks were made, a representation was filed by him.2. It has been contended that Annual Confidential Reports (in short 'ACRs'.) are given on the work and conduct of the Officer, having regard to; (i) the ACR recorded by the learned District and Sessions Judge (ii) the remarks recorded by the High Court on the monthly disposal of the work (iii) the remarks recorded by. the Inspecting ...

Cit Vs. Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2002]123TAXMAN693(Delhi)

S.B. Sinha, C.J.These references were made at the instance of the revenue under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', Delhi, for opinion of this court on the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that depreciation on a vehicle which is not registered in the name of the assessed was an allowable deduction in the hands of the assessed ?'2. The basic fact of the matter as has been stated by the Tribunal is as follows :'2. The assessed is a company engaged in the manufacture of sugar and having two units, one at Basti and the other at Waltergang, a few kilometers away from Basti. The relevant assessment year is 1976-77 and the previous year ended on 30-4-1976.3. During the year under consideration, the assessed claimed deduction in the profit and loss account of a sum of Rs. 12,300 on account of pension paid ...

V.K. Sodhi and ors. Vs. Lt. Governor and ors. Overruled

Court: Delhi

S.B. SINHA, C.J.1. Whether amended Regulation 67 of SCERT Rules and Regulations is applicable in the case of the petitioners, in the question involved in this writ petition.2. The State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT for short) was created in the year 1986 with an objection to provide better opportunities and facilities in all spheres and at all stages the best education in the schools and colleges administered by the Delhi Administration. It is a society registered under the Societies Registration ACt. It is an autonomous body which came into being w.e.f. 27^th May 1998. Its objectives are said to be similar to those of National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). SCERT framed its rules and regulations dealing with the terms and conditions of the academic staff working with it which reads thus:"67. Terms and Tenure of Service of Academic Staff.The terms and tenure of service of the academic staff at the Council shall remain the same as available ...

Shram Shakti Polytex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2002)(144)ELT183TriDel

1. The above captioned three appeals have been filed by the appellants against the common order-in-original dated 11-5-2001 passed by the Commissioner vide which he has confirmed the duty with equal amount of penalty on the appellants No. 1 and also imposed penalties on the other appellants as detailed in the order itself.2. The appellants No. 1 is a company engaged in the manufacture of PP/HDPE tapes, fabrics and sacks while other appellants are its Directors. The factory premises of the appellants was checked by the Anti Evasion wing of the Central Excise on 30-7-1999 and certain irregularities were found in the maintenance of the statutory records.The show cause notice was accordingly served on them on the allegation of having evaded the payment of duty by clandestine removal of the goods in the guise of wastage and also of having removed the raw material (inputs) on which credit was taken illegally. In the show cause notice, the duty demand was raised against the company, appellan...

Action Construction Equipments Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2002)(82)ECC575

1. The issue involved in these nine Appeals, three appeals filed by M/s. Action Construction Equipments (P) Ltd. and six appeals filed by the Revenue, arising out of a common Order-in-Appeal No. 474-479/2001 dated 30.4.2001, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi, is whether the freight and insurance charges are to be included in the assessable value of mobile cranes.2. Shri K.L. Handa, learned Consultant, mentioned that the Appellants manufacture hydraulic mobile cranes; that the Dy. Commissioner is six Adjudication Orders confirmed the demand and imposed penalty on the ground that they had taken insurance policy in their names for delivery of mobile cranes at the destination of buyers' place and as such place of removal of the excisable goods would be the place where the property in the goods was passed to the buyer following the decision in the case of CCE, Meerut-II v.Prabhat Zarda Factory Ltd. (Appeals) set aside the three Adjudication Orders out of the six on the ground...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Indian Shaving Products Limited

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2002)(144)ELT650TriDel

1. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhiwadi, vide his order dated 8-12-99 has sanctioned a rebate of Rs. 3,83,522.00 to the respondents under Rule 12(1)(a) read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. However, in his order, he has directed the entire amount sanctioned to be appropriated against the demand confirmed on the party in his earlier orders.2. The respondents filed an appeal against appropriation of their refund amount which is allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur, vide his order dated 27-11-2001. He in his order has observed that it is well settled in law that no coercive measures can be taken for recovery of dues in case where appeal/stay are pending disposal. He has observed that the Tribunal in their decision in Elixir Plastic v.Superintendent -1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 474) and in Tata Iron and Steel Co.Limited v. CCE -1994 (69) E.L.T. 241 has directed that when the matter is sub-judice the department has no right to adjust demand in respect thereof aga...

Carrier Aircon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2002)(82)ECC562

1 . The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Carrier Aircon Ltd., is whether the duty of excise is payable by them in respect of excisable goods manufactured and cleared by them under CT-3 procedure and in respect of which rewarehousing particulars have not been received.2. Shri R. Krishnan, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants manufacture air-conditioners which were supplied by them to several hospitals and 100% Export-Oriented Undertakings (EOU) at nil concessional rate of Central Excise duty against CT-2 and CT-3 Certificates issued by various Range Superintendents; that the said Certificates are issued by the buyers' Range Officer against the bonds executed by the buyers for due receipt and accountability of the goods supplied against such Certificates; that the Adjudicating Authority, under Adjudication Order No. 221-C.E./98, dated 17-9-98, demanded duty of excise as the Appellants did not have the proof of rewarehousing; that on appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) ...

Cce Vs. Shalaks Chemicals

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2002)(83)ECC541

1. This ROM has been filed by the respondents seeking correction of typographical mistakes in the impugned Final Order No. 27/2002-D dated 4.1.2002 vide which the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 30.8.94 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.2. The mistakes pointed out by the counsel for the respondents are detailed in para 2 (Clauses i, ii, iii & iv) of the application.3. The learned SDR has also conceded that the mistakes detailed in this para had crept in the final order and that these are typographical errors and the same may be corrected.4. We have also perused the final order and find that the typographical errors, as detailed in para 2 ( Clauses i, ii, iii & iv) of the application, are apparent in the order and the same are ordered to be corrected. The correction may be carried out on the face of the order....