Delhi Court January 2003 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.
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Majestic Auto Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT656TriDel
1. In this appeal, the Revenue has questioned the validity of the impugned order-in-appeal dated 30-4-2002 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the Modvat credit of Rs. 2,91/680/- on aluminium grills and parts/components of air-conditioning system to the respondents for the months of September and October 1995 as capital goods, by reversing the order-in-original of the Assistant Commissioner.2. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of two wheeled motor vehicles. They claimed Modvat credit of the disputed amount on parts/components of the air-conditioning system and aluminium grills, apart from other items/goods (not the subject matter of the present appeal). On in aluminium grills, they claimed the Modvat credit on the ground that the same had been installed in the paint shop for proper flow of air to ensure good quality painting of the final product, while on the parts/components of air-conditioners on the ground that the air-conditioners maintain temperatures a...
Hongo India (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT470TriDel
1. In these two appeals arising out of common Order-in-Original No.8/Commr/Noida/2002, dated 20-5-2002, the issue involved is whether the Modvat Credit on the capital goods is available to M/s. Hongo India (P) Limited in respect of moulds, dies and fixtures received by them from M/s. Honda Siel Cars (India) Limited.2. We heard Shri B.L. Narasimhan, learned Advocate for the appellants, and Ms C. Baranwal, learned SDR for the Revenue. The learned Advocate submitted that M/s. Hongo India (P) Limited manufacture and supply automobile components to M/s. Honda Siel Cars India Limited who supply moulds, dies and fixtures to M/s. Hongo India (P) Limited in terms of agreement on payment of appropriate duty under Rule 57S(1) (ii) of Central Excise Rules under the cover of documents specified under Rule 57G; that M/s. Hongo India (P) Limited availed the Modvat/Cenvat Credit of the duty paid on the moulds, etc.; that the Commissioner had disallowed the Modvat credit under the impugned order on th...
Chahal Foods Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State Bank of Patiala and ors.
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: III(2003)BC65
1. Office note indicates that the rejoinder, the translations and also the certified copy of the order dated 16.8.1999 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as DRT, Jaipur) have been filed into the Court. Though the learned Counsel for the 1st respondent objects to the taking on record the rejoinder and the annexures filed therewith, in the interests of justice, in my view, the rejoinder and the annexures can be taken on record. Accordingly, they are taken on record.2. I have heard arguments of both the sides on the appeal and perused the records.3. The learned Presiding Officer of the DRT, Jaipur passed the final order in O.A. 267 / 98 on 2.8.1999 read with the order dated 16.8.1999.The order dated 16.8.1999 became necessary in view of the fact that the plaintiff Bank was directed to file a revised statement of account along with an affidavit by order dated 2.8.1999. After the filing of the revised statement, ultimately the final order directing the a...
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Catvision Products Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: (2004)84TTJ(Delhi)241
1. These appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by the common order for the sake of convenience.2. First, we take up the appeal of the assessee. The first issue arising out of this appeal relates to the computation of proceeds derived from the industrial undertaking for the purpose of deduction under Section 80-I. Briefly stated, the facts are these: The assessee was initially carrying on the business of purchase and sale of items like dish antenna, i.e., in asst. yrs. 1989-90 and 1990-91. However, a manufacturing unit was established at NOIDA in the year under consideration for manufacture of dish antenna. The return for the year under consideration was filed declaring all income of Rs. 6,42,400 after claiming deduction under Section 80-I at Rs. 11,13,237. The assessee declared profit of Rs. 44,52,948 from the NOIDA unit on the sale of Rs. 1,15,57,701 whereas net loss was declared at Rs. 27,35,052 on the sales of Rs. 1,03,22,483 in the head office. The AO was of the vi...
Smt. Prem Lata W/O Sh. Raj Kumar Aggarwal and Smt. Usha Devi W/O Sh. R ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 2003IAD(Delhi)829; 102(2003)DLT864; 2003(66)DRJ664
S.N. Kapoor, J. 1. Heard.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dismissing the appeal of the daughters-in-law, the present appellant, of the respondent Anaro Devi. 3. The brief facts are: the property in question undisputedly stands in the name of Anaro Devi. There is no dispute about the fact that she got some money from her husband. There is nothing to indicate that the money, which was given to her by her husband, was given with an idea to purchase a property benami in her name. Neither the husband nor the sons of the respondent claimed any share. The daughters in law cannot claim any share and right to residence in that house for the premises in question are not their matrimonial home and they are supposed to live along with their husbands at matrimonial homes. The learned appellate court took this view on merits but noticed that the appeal was barred by time and dismissed the same. 4. A preliminary objection has been taken by the respondent on the ground of maintainabilit...
Smt. Munni Devi W/O Late Sh. Jagannath, Vs. New India Assurance Co. Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 1(2003)ACC623; I(2003)ACC623; 2004ACJ974; 2003IIAD(Delhi)255; 103(2003)DLT464; 2003(67)DRJ301; (2003)134PLR13
S.N. Kapoor, J. 1. Heard. 2. This judgment shall dispose of the above mentioned two appeals bearing No. FAO No. 95/1995 filed by the claimants, and FAO No. 219/1994 filed by the Insurance Company against a common award dated 12th August, 1994 passed by Sh. Charanjit Jawa, Judge, MACT, Delhi.3. The facts of this case in brief are that Sh. Jagannath, a mason aged about 37 years suffered injuries in a accident which took place on 4th January, 1979, caused by the negligent driving of Jaipal Singh, while driving truck No. DLL 7134. His right leg was ultimately amputated. If has further come in the statement of P.W.1, injured, that after suffering injuries he was taken to the police station in the Mehrauli. He was bleeding profusely. He regained consciousness in Safdarjung Hospital. He further stated that he was put under plaster and after about 13-14 days, his leg was amputated above knee. No cross-examination was addressed on this point. This is corroborated by the statement of the Dr. V. ...
Ved Prakash Sharma Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 2003IIIAD(Delhi)413; 109(2004)DLT544; 2003(68)DRJ240; 2004(2)SLJ485(Delhi)
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. RULE. 2. With the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard and disposed of by this order. 3. The applicant in terms of the advertisement should not be more than 30 years of age in the case of Assistant Teachers and Graduate Teachers and 35 years in case of Post-Graduate Teachers. Since the petitioner had applied for the post of Trained Graduate Teacher, he as on 14th July 1990, in terms of the advertisement should have not been more than 30 years of age. Petitioner's date of birth was 25th May, 1958 and he was, thereforee, 32 years and two months of age as on 14th July, 1990. He was thus not eligible to be appointed as a Trained Graduate Teacher in terms of the said advertisement. Since the petitioner was not appointed being overage, he filed a petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal for a direction being given to the respondents to appoint the petitioner as a Trained Graduate Teacher. Since the petitioner was working in a Government aided schoo...
Mahender Singh and ors., Vs. M.C.D.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 2003IIIAD(Delhi)454; 109(2004)DLT606; 2003(68)DRJ605; 2004(2)SLJ509(Delhi)
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. RULE. 2. With the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard and disposed of by this order. 3. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these writ petitions, they are being disposed of by this common order. 4. Petitioners who were working as Beldars on daily wages since about 1985 in the Anti-Malaria department of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi have filed these petitions for issue of an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to prepare a rational and logical scheme to give immediate and regular employment to them in Group `D' posts. In a writ petition being C.W.P. No.2698/1986, an order came to be passed on 17.12.1987 whereby the following directions were given by the Court to the respondent for regularising the services of the persons working on daily wages in the Anti-Malaria Department of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi: 1. The respondent shall prepare a joint seniority list of all these categories of workers/be...
Dainik Himachal Sewa Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 2003IIIAD(Delhi)605; 104(2003)DLT156
A.K. Sikri, J.1. The petitioners in these five writ petitions are small newspapers registered with the Registrar of Newspapers for India (RNI) from different dates having different registration numbers. They are also registered under the provisions of the Press and Registration of Books Act 1867. The Director General, Directorate of Advertising & Visual Publicity (respondent No. 2 herein) (for short 'the DAVP') is entrusted with the duty and responsibility of release of Government advertisement to the newspapers registered with the RNI and empanelled with it. For the purpose of release of advertisements, it executes a rate contract with the registered newspapers and on that basis the advertisements are released to such newspapers from time to time.2. All these petitioners were empanelled with respondent No. 2 and the rate contracts issued by respondent No. 2 were extended up to September, 2002. However respondent No. 2 stopped releasing advertisements to the petitioners from 25th July,...
Kul-hind Tanzeem Khuddamul Hujjaj Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2003
Reported in: 2003(68)DRJ631
Usha Mehra, J. 1. The main grievance of the petitioner as indicated in the petition are that the 'Haj Committee' has siphoned away considerable amount which was to go for subsidies for air-tickets and that return air ticket to Jeddah is charged exorbitantly by the 'Haj Committee'. That 'Haj Committee' hires building In Mecca and Madlna at exorbitant rate. That exchange rate charged by the 'Haj Committee' are on higher rates than actual. Further, that the Hajjis who came directly to India from Madina without going to Jeddah have been made to pay for the journey from Madina to Jeddah. These were primary grievances and allegations of the petitioner in the writ petition. Since these allegations related to the corrupt management of the 'Haj Committee' hence the petition was treated as a public interest litigation. Notice of the same was issued to the UOI as well as other respondents. UOI filed reply to the petition denying the allegations. It is stated that so far as providing of subsidy fo...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »