Delhi Court May 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.
U.T. Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: (2003)(89)ECC271
1. Appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants in the manufacture of Pumps, Hydraulic Lift Assembly. The Officers of the Central Excise visited the factory on 19.9.1999 and on verification of the record the following discrepancies are found in their statutory record. (i) 532 pieces of Pumps were found without any entry in the statutory record.Certain slips were recovered which shows the clearances of the goods without payment of duty of Rs. 25,279.00 and Rs. 14,756.00.2. The goods sent to the job work not received back within the prescribed period as provided under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules. These goods involved duty of Rs. 48.115.00.3. After issuing a show cause notice the adjudicating authority confiscated the 532 pumps and allowed the release of the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 10,000. The aluminum scrap was also confiscated and allowed to release on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 5,000. The...
Saboo Ispat (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: (2004)(164)ELT45TriDel
2. In this case, appellants are engaged in the manufacture non-alloy steel ingots with the aid of induction furnace and they were working under the provisions of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act.Appellants claimed abatement for the period from 15-2-2000 to 31-3-2000 on the ground that their factory remained closed. The Commissioner, vide impugned order rejected the abatement claim.3. The contention of the appellants is that the claim was rejected on the ground that the intimation regarding closure and starting of the factory was not submitted by the appellants to the Revenue as per the provisions of Central Excise Rules.4. The contention of the appellants is also that on 15-2-2000, they filed necessary intimation and copy of which was duly received by the inspector of Central Excise on 15-2-2000 and the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise received the intimation on 16-2-2000. The scheme of Compounded Levy came to an end w.e.f. 31-3-2000 and their factory remained closed even ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. 20 Microns Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT748TriDel
1. In this Appeal filed by the Revenue, the issue involved is whether the extended period of time-limit under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act is invocable for demanding the duty from M/s. 20 Microns Ltd. 2. Shri A.S. Bedi, learned Senior Departmental Representative, submitted that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture and sale of Microns size powdered calcium carbonate, talc, dolomite, and other similar products coated and uncoated; that they were availing exemption from payment of duty by classifying the product under Heading 25.05 and availing the exemption under Notification No. 70/95-C.E., dated 16-3-95; that the Additional Commissioner under Order-in-Original No.17/02, dated 3-4-2002 classified their products under sub-heading 3824.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, and confirmed the demand of duty for the period 1-5-1998 to 31-7-1999 and imposed penalty; that on Appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned Order had set aside the deman...
Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Welcure Drugs and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT465TriDel
2. I have gone through the amendment sought which of formal nature and the omission appears to have taken place on account of typographical error in the Office of the Department. Therefore, the amendment/replacement of EA-3 Form as sought by the Department is allowed.3. Today the matter is posted for hearing on merits and I proceed to hear the same.4. In the appeal, the Revenue has questioned the validity of the impugned order-in-appeal dated 2-9-2002 which is common against all the respondents vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reversed the order-in-original on the ground that it was totally non-speaking and also not proper and legal. The facts are not much in dispute. The proceedings were drawn against the respondents on the strength of a show cause notice dated 19-11-1998 by alleging that the firm, respondents No. 1, had indulged in the clandestine removal of the goods, while the other respondents helped the firm in the removal of the goods with full knowledge that those wer...
Shri Amar Singh Trilochan Singh Vs. Smt. Jasoti
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: 2003VAD(Delhi)473; 105(2003)DLT499; 2003(69)DRJ63
C.K. Mahajan, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 25th January, 1982 passed by Rent Control Tribunal in Appeal 1079 of 1980.2. The premises in question was let out by late Shri Vishan Das Shivani to the appellants for commercial purposes with effect from 1st July, 1974. The appellants entered into a partnership business with one Ranjit Singh son of Mr. Bhagwan Singh for the transport business. The respondent who is the widow of Vishan Dass Shivani, filed an eviction petition under clauses (a), (b) and (j) of the proviso to sub-Section (1) to Section 14 of the Act. It was alleged that appellants had sub-let, assigned or parted with the possession of the premises in question to M/s Amar Transport Company, Agra, without the consent in writ of the respondent and the unauthorised sub-tenant had opened its branch in the premises in question. It was further contended that appellant had caused or permitted to be caused substantial damage to the property and had unauthorised ma...
Sh. S.P. Yadav Vs. National thermal Power Corporation Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)505; 108(2003)DLT34; 2004(2)SLJ325(Delhi)
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. This order would dispose of the application registered as CM No. 4713/2003, which is filed by the respondents praying for review and/or modification of the order dated 30.3.2001 and also the application registered as CM No. 5972/2003 which is filed by the petitioner praying for postponement of the hearing of the aforesaid application registered as CM No. 4713/2003 until the contempt proceeding drawn up against the respondent registered as CCP No. 234/2003 is decided by this Court. 2. The petitioner, who is a stenographer working with the respondent company -NTPC filed the aforesaid writ petition in this Court praying for quashing the orders of transfer dated 22.7.1996 and 25.9.1996 and also for a further direction directing the respondents to post the petitioner at NOIDA Construction Group and not to uproot the petitioner from his accommodation at NOIDA till the disposal of the writ petition and other ancillary reliefs thereto. Along with the said writ petit...
R.K. Builders Vs. Delhi Development Authority and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)557; III(2003)BC231; 105(2003)DLT199; 2003(69)DRJ694
J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs. 5,05,000/- exclusive of interest on account of withholding of the amount by the defendant-DDA against item No. 6 of the agreement by which plaintiff was awarded the work of development of land for Co-operative Group Housing Society, Saraswati Vihar. Item no. 6 was towards cost of centring and shuttering @ Rs. 22.65 plus 78% above per sq. meter. Item 5 of the agreement specifically provided that cost of centring and shuttering and finishing would be exclusive of P/F at or near ground level cast cement concrete kerbs, edgings, etc setting in position with cement mortar 1:2 (one cement : 2 C.sand). 2. The grievance of the plaintiff is that in spite of having cleared the cost that worked out to Rs. 2,17,803.71, the DDA specifically withheld the said amount arbitrarily. On the other hand, defendant-DDA took the stand that as per Clause 15 of the Agreement all works under or in course of execution or executed in pursuance of the contract ...
Andhra Bank Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ARBLR311(Delhi); [2005]128CompCas959(Delhi); 107(2003)DLT636; 2003(70)DRJ732; 2004(1)RAJ34
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. Rule.2. With the consent of parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. The petitioner, the Andhra Bank, is a Public Sector Bank having its Head Office at Hyderabad. The respondent is the Indian Airlines Ltd. Both are the Public Sector Enterprises. A dispute arose between the petitioner Bank and the Indian Airlines with respect to grant of Credit Card facilities for ticketing of the Indian Airlines. The petitioner Bank had a claim on the Indian Airlines and the Indian Airlines had a counter claim on the petitioner Bank.3. By a letter dated 29.03.1989 issued by the Secretary, Department of Public Enterprises, Ministry of Industry, New Delhi, as regards commercial disputes between the Public Sector Enterprises inter-se as well as between Public Sector Enterprises and Government Departments, it was indicated that such disputes be settled through arbitration. In the letter it is noted that after considering the note dated 08.05.1987 prepared by the D...
Glory Public School and anr. Vs. Lt. Governor, Govt of Nct and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: 2003VIIIAD(Delhi)454; 107(2003)DLT662; 2003(71)DRJ161
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. Rule. With the consent of the parties this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.2. The petitioner, Glory Public School, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, is a school which is up to the middle level i.e. up to class VIII. This school was granted recognition in 1995. The question involved in this petition relates to the upgradiation of the school to class X. The only issue involved here is as to whether the writ petition is to be dismissed on the ground of laches or not. 3. In so far as the facts are concerned, they are not in dispute. By an application dated 19th March, 1997, the petitioner applied for upgradiation of the school to secondary level i.e. up to class X. The application was made to the Director of Education (respondent No. 2 herein). The application of the petitioner was rejected on 6th July, 1998 and there were 23 grounds of rejection pointed out in the said rejection letter. However, amongst the 23 grounds, there was no objection with regard to the...
Shri D.P. Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2003
Reported in: 109(2004)DLT846; 2004(73)DRJ174; 2004(3)SLJ422(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay him full pension with effect from the date he retired from service as Deputy Commandant in the Border Security Force.2. The petitioner retired at the age of 55 years after rendering a service of more than 30 years but before completion of 33 years. He was granted pension on pro rata basis. The petitioner sent a legal notice to the respondents seeking grant of full pension and other retiral benefits on the plea that since the age of superannuation up to the rank of Commandant in para-military forces was 55 years, i.e., three years less than officers of the higher rank in the same force and other Central Government employees, who normally retire at the age of 58 years, the requirement of qualifying period of service for being entitled to full pension in his case should be taken as 30 years and not 33 years as in the case of other Central Government employees, etc. In nutshell, the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »