Delhi Court September 2002 Judgments

Anil Kumar Sangwan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2003(68)DRJ686

S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has inter alia prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions for quashing the proceedings of the General Court Martial and the order dated 22.09.1993 whereby and whereunder he was found guilty of committing civil offence, that is to say, murder contrary to Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as, 'I.P.C.') and attempt to murder contrary to Section 307 of I.P.c. whereby and whereunder he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and dismissal from service. The said sentence has been confirmed with the order that the sentence of imprisonment for life shall be carried out by confinement in civil prison.2. According to the petitioner, in relation to the second charge, the weapon, which was used, was allegedly a Carbine Machinegun having Butt No. 73. However, in relation to the first charge, the description of the weapon used had not been specified. The petitioner p...

Chander Mohan Sharma Vs. N.C.B. Delhi Zone Unit

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 101(2002)DLT104; 2003(85)ECC312

Mahmood Ali Khan, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The petitioner was found in possession of 1 kg. of heroin.2. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in judicial custody for the past two years and that there is violation of the provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act and the written notice (Annexure B to the petition) which is purported to have been served on the petitioner does not specifically state that the petitioner had a right to be searched in the presence of a magistrate of a gazetted officer. thereforee, the trial is vitiated and the petitioner is entitled to bail. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in K. Mohanan v. State of Kerala, . He has also referred to a bail order passed by a single Bench of this Court on 3.12.2001 in CRLM M 2726 of 2001 (Ikram v. State).3. Counsel for the respondent has strongly opposed the grant of bail. It was argued that commercial quantity of heroine wa...

idco Dyes and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and anr. and Haryana Rang Udyog and ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Del)212; [2003]259ITR600(Delhi)

A.K. Sikri, J.1. All these writ petitions raise a common question of law. They are accordingly disposed of by a common judgment. However, for the sake of convenience the facts of C W. P. No. 1255 of 1981 are noted.2. This petition is filed by two petitioners. Petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company of which petitioner No. 2 is the director. On November 29, 1978, the petitioner-company filed an application under Section 245C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act' for short) before the Settlement Commission for settlement of its case under the Act. This application is referred to by the petitioners in the petition as the 'main settlement application'. At the time of making this application various proceedings under the Act were pending against the petitioner-company in respect of the assessment years 1977-78 and 1978-79. Thus in entry No. 5 of this main settlement application the petitioner mentioned these two assessment years only.3. On December...

Sanjiv Mahajan Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN606(Delhi)

S.B. Sinha, C.J.All these four writ petitions involving common questions of fact and law were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.However, the fact of the matter is being noticed from Civil Writ Petition No. 4604 of 2000.2. On or about 7-2-1986, the Department of Personnel and Training (hereinafter referred to as the 'DOPT) issued an Office Memorandum in terms whereof the general principles of determining the seniority of various categories of persons employed in Central Service were laid down whereby and whereunder the relative seniority of direct recruits and promotees were to be determined according to rotation of vacancies between the direct recruits and the promotees, which was to be based on the quota of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively in the Recruitment Rules. By way of an Explanatory Memorandum to these principles, it has been stated that a roster is required to be maintained based on the reservati...

R.P. Garg Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Lokeshwar Prasad, President: 1 .The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is directed against order dated 18.6.2002, passed by District Forum No. III, Janakpuri, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. 2066/2000 entitled Shri R.P. Garg v. The New India Assurance Company Limited. 2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, in brief, are that the appellant, Shri R.P. Garg, had filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Act before the District Forum averring therein that the appellant got his vehicle, bearing Registration No. HR-05-GA-0295 insured with the respondent for the period from 13.3.1999 to 12.3.2000. It was stated in the complaint filed by the appellant that the above said vehicle, insured with respondent, met with an accident on 23.8.1999. It was stated that regarding the above accident a report was lodged with the police authorities and the vehicle was forwarded to the works...

Flex Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC112

1. The appellants M/s Flex Chemicals Ltd. manufacturer PET chips falling under Chapter Heading No. 3907.60 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants apart from manufacturing these chips for their own use are also manufacturing the same on job work basis for their sister concern - M/s Flex Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as FIL) for which the raw material is supplied to them by this party. The duty on such PET chips is paid by the appellants by computing the assessable value on the basis of the cost of inputs + job charges. The manufacture of the chips on job work for FIL involves two separate processes/methods which are as under: (i) In the first process, the raw materials viz, DMT, MEG and catalyst are supplied to the job worker by FIL. In this process of manufacture, a product Methanol is obtained as a by-product which is retained by the job worker. For this process, the job worker is paid job charges @ Rs. 6000.00 per M.T. of PET chips by FIL. (ii) In the second p...

Metal Can Company Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(106)LC378Tri(Delhi)

1. M/s. Metal Can Co. have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the Order-in-Appeal No. 701-703/2001 dated 8.8.2001 under which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the demand and imposed penalty.2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture Metal Containers and avail of Modvat Credit of the duty paid on the inputs; that the defective tin plates are the main inputs which are received by them in odd sizes and which at times contain folds, crimps, wrinkles and other defects; that the plates are first relieved of the defective portion which is total scrap; that the odd size plate is made into regular size sheets by cutting off/trimming its sides; that further big sheet could not be printed on its entire surface and the un-printed portions have to be cut off and such cut offs are nothing cut scrap; that at times entire sheet has to be scraped owing to faulty printing; that for preparation of component like bottom, lids, and rings, sheets are cut, punc...

Prabhu Dayal Prem Chand Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT922TriDel

1. Challenge in this appeal is against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) dated 1-11-2001. The appellant filed two Bills of Entry dated 26-9-98 and 17-12-98 for clearance of Brass Scrap as per ISRI grade 'Honey' arid Copper Scrap No. 2 as per ISRI grade Birch/Cliff respectively. The Bills of Entry were assessed at declared invoice value, namely CIF US $ 1100 and 1300 PMT respectively and the goods were examined and cleared after payment of Customs duty.Subsequently, on noting that the London Metal Exchange (LME) prices prevalent on the date of import were more than the price declared by the appellant, additional duty on the above basis was demanded. This demand was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. The appeal filed was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The contention raised by the appellant that the assessable value cannot be enhanced on the basis of the prices published in LME alone, but it must be supported by contemporaneous import, wa...

Ramdish Verma and ors. Vs. State of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 100(2002)DLT554

Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 5/91 dated 21.3.1997 and 22.3.1997 respectively.2. The appellants have been convicted under Section 302, IPC read with Section 34, IPC and were sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/- was also imposed on each one of them and in default of payment of fine, they were further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days each.3. The brief facts necessary to dispose of this appeal are recapitulated as under. On 16.9.1990 at 9.20 p.m., Attar Singh, Pradhan of Village Nawacla informed the Police Station, Vikas Puri on telephone that one person namely, Mehtab Singh was quarrelling behind his house. On the basis of this information, DD No. 40 B was recorded and the inquiry was entrusted to Sub-Inspector Mahesh Kumar. Consequently SI Mahesh Kumar visited the spot and found no one except the blood lying in the room and some ...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Kitply Industries Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2002)(84)ECC851

1. The Commissioner, Central Excise has filed this appeal, being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut pursuant to the review order passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the respondent herein are engaged in the manufacture of wood and wood products. They are manufacturing laminated panels and claimed classification thereof under chapter sub-heading 4406.10 and 4407.90. The department alleged that the product manufactured by the respondent herein was classifiable under chapter heading 44.08. For this purpose they relied on Note 5 of Chapter 44 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 which read as under :- "For the purpose of heading No. 44.08 the expression "similar laminated wood" includes blockboard, laminboard and battenboard, in which the core is thick and compound of blocks, laths or battens of wood glued or otherwise joined together and surfaced with the other plies and als...