Delhi Court September 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.
J. Mitra and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC32
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned Order-in-Original dated 10.4,2002 vide which duty demand of Rs. 49,25,551 alongwith penalty of Rs. 1,50,000 under Rule 173Q and of Rs. 33,04,041 under Section 11AC of the Act had been confirmed against them. They had also been directed by this order to pay interest of Rs. 11,54,436 under Section 11B of the Act.2. The impugned order has been passed by the adjudicating authority in pursuance of the Tribunal's Final Order No. 2-3/2002-C dated 1.1.2002.The Tribunal vide the said order directed the adjudicating authority to requantify the duty in accordance with law after examining the question whether modvat credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of the products in question, as detailed in the order of the Tribunal, could be allowed to the assessee and also the question whether the benefit of abatement of duty from the sale price for the purpose of determining the assessable value could be granted to t...
Flex Chemicals Limited Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT557TriDel
1. In this appeal, filed by M/s. Flex Chemicals Ltd., the issue involved is whether the entire duty of Excise paid on Residual Fuel Oil (RFO) used as inputs is available as Modvat Credit or the Credit is restricted to the amount of Excise duty calculated at the rate of 10% ad valorem.2. Shri Kailash Chander, Representative of the Appellants, submitted that the Appellants manufacture Polyster Chips and avail of Modvat Credit in respect of inputs as well as capital goods; that the Asstt.Commissioner, Central Excise under Adjudication Order No. 51/99, dated 14-4-99 restricted availment of Modvat Credit on RFO @ 10% ad valorem as the RFO falls under the same category under which Light Diesel Oil, bitumen and paraffin falls and all these products including RFO are classifiable under Subheading 2713.30 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act; that the Commissioner (Appeals) also under the impugned Order has restricted the availment of Credit holding that RFO is a generic name and i...
Sanjeev Woollen Mills and ors. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)(84)ECC867
1. The captioned 11 stay petitions have been filed by M/s Sanjeev Woollen Mills and others praying for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty.2. The facts briefly stated are that three consignments were received between 1989 and 1991. Bills of entry were presented for clearance of the consignment. The goods were declared as synthetic waste (soft quality) with predominance of acrylic fibre. Examination of the goods was conducted. Samples were drawn for test. Test result indicated that the description of the goods was not correctly given. Since the goods on test were found to be different from the declaration about the description of the goods, therefore, it was also alleged that there was under-valuation. The goods were however provisionally released under a bond and bank guarantee. The cases were adjudicated. The Commissioner in the case of bill of entry No. 110713 dated 19.1.90 held the goods were liable to confiscation. He confirmed the demand of duty of Rs. 53,39,836.59 and impo...
Jaiswal Steel Enterprises Pvt. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)(84)ECC488
1. The issue involved in these three appeals filed by M/s. Jaiswal Steel Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. is whether the refund under Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 is available to them.2. Shri Sekhar Vayas, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants manufacture sleeper plates, brake blocks, sockets, plates, etc.; that they cleared cast iron sockets on payment of duty to their customers which were returned to them on account of breakage/not of proper weight; that D-3 intimations were filed by them with the Central Excise Authorities and, thereafter, the rejected goods so received were melted and remade into cast iron sleeper plates, brake shoes & sockets and cleared to other customers after payment of central excise duty; that the Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claims on the ground that the details of processing undertaken by them were not mentioned in the prescribed register and goods made remade by them were not of the same class as required under Sub-rule (3)...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Bhilwara Processors Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC379
1. These appeals arising at the instance of the Revenue are referred for consideration of a Larger Bench under Misc. Order No. 11/2002-A, dated 18-2-2002. The appeals arise out of orders dated 31-8-2001 and 1-6-2001 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur. Under the above orders the Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the appeals filed by the assessee relying on the decision of this Tribunal in Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur - 2000 (122) E.L.T. 45. In the above decision the Tribunal has held that "when the trader gives value as his selling price of the processed fabric, that price given by the trader must be accepted by the job worker for the purpose of payment of duty. The Excise authorities cannot go beyond that declared value". Since the original Bench before which these appeals came up for hearing found it difficult, to accept the above proposition as correct in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Ujagar Prints Etc. v. Union of...
Dharampal Satyapal Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)(84)ECC876
1. M/s. Dharampal Satyapal have filed two appeals along with two stay petitions. Revenue has filed two appeals against the same impugned order. Since all the four appeals and stay petitions arise out of the same impugned order they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. In the stay petitions filed by the assessee there is a prayer for staying operation of impugned order. Since the duty has not been quantified there is no question for financial hardship at this stage.2. Since there is no quantification of the amount of duty the two stay petitions are rejected. With the consent of both the parties the four appeals were taken up for hearing.3. The facts of the case briefly stated are that M/s. Dharampal Satyapal are engaged in the manufacture of chewing tobacco. They sell goods manufactured by them from their depots. Their sale invoices indicate FOR destination price, which includes the cost of transportation, octroi, sales tax, luxury tax, insurance, trade d...
Fabiroo Gift House Vs. India Tourism Development Corp.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(66)DRJ243
Khan, J (ORAL) 1. Petitioner's O.A.No.676/1999 for appointment of Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of Arbitration Act has been dismissed on the premise that disputes raised by it fall under Section 15 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act of 1971 and by implication create a bar against appointment of Arbitrator. Whether such bar operates is the sole question falling for determination. 2. Petitioner is a licensee of shop Nos.8 to 25 of Shopping Arcade at Ashoka Hotel run by R-1. The parties executed two license deeds providing for an enhanced license fee and containing an Arbitration clause which read thus:- 'All disputes or differences whatsoever arising between the parties out of or relating to the constitution, meaning Y operation of effect of this license deed or the breach thereof shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the provision of the Indian Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 and the award made in pursuance thereof shall be binding on the parti...
Poonam Sharma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC194; 2004ACJ80; AIR2003Delhi50; 100(2002)DLT721; 2003(66)DRJ407; [2004(101)FLR165]
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The petitioner is heir and legal representative of one Vinod Kumar Sharma. He met with an accident on 10.12.1992 while allegedly driving in a drunken state. A First Information Report (in short, 'F.I.R.') was lodged on the basis of a telephone call, which is in the following terms :-'D.D. No. 50B dt. 10.12.92, P.S. Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. Arrival of telephonic information from P.P. MIG Flats and Departure. Time, 8.10 P.M. Constable Santosh Kumar No. 1547/W gave an information from P.P. MIG Flats that on the main Najafgarh Road, in front of Shop of Maharaja Band, a two wheeler scooter has met with an accident. Police be sent. As per the procedure, the telephonic information was recorded in the Daily Dairy. Copy of the Daily Dairy has been handed over to S.I. Suhil Kumar who along with Constable Sumer Singh No. 1197/W left for the spot. Duty Officer.' 2. Thereafter the respondent No. 6 together with a Constable visited the site. The said respondent recorded statemen...
Atma Prakash Goel Vs. the State Transport Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC142; AIR2003Delhi69; 101(2002)DLT14
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. In this writ petition, which is in the nature of a public interest litigation, the petitioner has inter alias prayed for the following reliefs :-'(i) Issue a Writ or direction by way of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to implement and enforce the prescribed rates of fare on the stage carriages.(ii) Issue a Writ or direction in the nature of Certiorari on the working of slabs on so called fare stages choosen by the Respondent No. 3 and after examining the same quash the impugned slabs in the public interest.(iii) Issue a Writ of direction in the nature of Writ of Prohibition thereby restraining the Respondent No. 3 and other stage carriers from overcharging its passengers.(iv) Issue any appropriate Writ or direction directing the respondents to ensure the display of Table of fare in all the stage carriages invariably.(v) Pass such other order or orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case which are in the interest of ...
Shri Chet Ram Sharma and ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: 100(2002)DLT653
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. 1. Rule.2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal.3. The petitioner has impugned the order dated 13.9.2002 passed by the Joint Assessor and Collector on the ground that the land in question was not capable of being built upon and thus cannot be subjected to house tax under Section 162 of the MCD Act.4. The petitioners are the owners of the land in pursuance to sale deeds. The petitioner applied for approval of the lay out plan on 11.1.1994 but the same was not sanctioned. This was so since when the MCD asked the DDA for intimation of the land use, the DDA informed that the land would be acquired. This issue remained pending for number of years and the petitioner filed the C.W. No. 6091/2000. The said writ petition was allowed only on 26.9.2002 since admittedly the land had still not been acquired.5. The grievance of the petitioner is that on one hand the plan of the petitioner was not being sanctioned on the groun...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »