Delhi Court June 2003 Judgments

Shyam Sunder Sharma Vs. Industrial Investment Bank of

Court: DRAT Delhi

Reported in: III(2003)BC122

1. Respondent-Industrial Investment Bank of India (formerly known as Industrial Reconstruction Bank of India, and hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent-Bank') filed O.A. 200/97 against, (1) M/s. Premier Vegetable Products Ltd.; (2) Mr. D.N. Jaju; (3) Mr. Sanwar Mal Aggarwal; (4) Mr. S.N. Ojha; and (5) Mr. Shyam Sunder Sharma (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRT'). The DRT passed the ex parte final order against the appellant and others on 25.11.1999. The appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application under Section 22 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for setting aside the ex parte final order urging that notice of the O.A.was not served upon the appellant, and that he had also not come across any publication of the notice of the O.A. in the newspaper. According to the appellant, he was sick and, therefore, had been liv...

S.N. Ojha Vs. Industrial Investment Bank of

Court: DRAT Delhi

Reported in: III(2003)BC138

1. Respondent-Industrial Investment Bank of India (formerly known as Industrial Reconstruction Bank of India, and hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent-Bank') filed O.A. 200/97 against (1) M/s. Premier Vegetable Products Ltd., (2) Mr. D.N. Jaju, (3) Mr. San war Mal Aggarwal, (4) Mr. S.N. Ojha (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant'), and (5) Mr. Shyam Sunder Sharma before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRT'). The DRT passed the ex parte final order against the appellant and others on 25.11.1999. The appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application under Section 22 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for setting aside the exparte final order urging that notice of the O.A.was not served upon the appellant. He also claims that he was not aware of the proceedings before the Tribunal. According to the appellant, he was a resident of A-15/B, Hauz Khas, New Delhi, but, had s...

Cristopia Energy Systems (i) Pvt. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(174)ELT92TriDel

1. Appellants filed these appeals against the common adjudication Order.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of parts of thermal energy storage system and were availing the benefit of small scale exemption. The appellants were clearing the goods under the brand name of 'Cristopia'. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants for demand of duty on the ground that the brand name belongings to a foreign company which is not eligible for small scale exemption notification. The adjudication authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalties on the firm as well as on Shri C M Gupta executive director.4. The appellants now produced a certificate under Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, to the effect that 'Cristopia' the brand name was registered in their name wef 27.11.1996. The appellants also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta-I Vs ESBI transmission Private Ltd, reported in 1997 (91) ELT 292 (Cal) a...

Cc Vs. R.K. International and ors.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(89)ECC582

1. Brief facts of the case as narrated by the Revenue are that specific intelligence was received by DRI, Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad on 7.8.93 that a consignment of Lead Scrap has been imported in the name M/s. Ram Metal Industries, Baroda, which is pending clearing for at Kandla Fort and actually contains Ball Bearings of foreign origin being illicitly imported and cleared in the guise of Lead Scrap and Shri Solly Perumal, Director of M/s. Trinity Shipping & Allied Services Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad in association with Shri Om Prakash Punjabi of Ahmedabad is said to be actively involved in the smuggling of Ball Bearings into India by way of mis-declaring import cargo.2. On scrutiny and verification of the related import documents by the Customs Officers, it was found that a Bill of Entry No. F-4316 dated 30.7.93 was filed under; 'Self' by the importer on the basis of Bill of Lading dated 25.7.93 and invoice No. 0106 dated 20.3,93. In the Bill of Entry, the goods imported were mentioned as ...

Shree Balaji Trade Overseas Vs. Cc, (Gen)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(88)ECC828

1. Appellants filed these appeals against the adjudication orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs. As the common issue is involved, both the appeals are being take up together.2. In Appeal No. C/549/02-D, the facts are that the appellants made import of consignment of 60 packages of 100 per cent polyester fabric of non-texturied filament (in stock lot) and 100 per cent polyester warp knit fabric (in stock lot). Appellants filed a Bill of Entry dated 6.4.2000 and claimed classification of 100 per cent polyester fabric of non-texturised filament (in stock lot) under heading 5407.61 of Customs Tariff and 100 per cent polyester warp knit fabric (in stock lot) under heading 6002.43 of Customs Tariff. The examination of the consignment could not be carried out due to mishandling of the cargo by Air India.The consignment was handed over to M/s. Air India at Dubai for carriage from Dubai to Delhi. Out of 60 packages, 29 packages were brought directly from Dubai to Delhi by M/s. Air Indi...

Polar Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT951TriDel

1. The appellants are manufacturers of excisable goods such as electric motors, fans, etc. The manufacture of such items involves an intermediate product die cast rotor, which is got manufactured through job workers. The laminations and stampings required for the manufacture of die cast rotor are manufactured by the appellants themselves out of bought out raw materials and the same are cleared to job workers. The facts of the present case are that the appellants had cleared laminations and stampings (manufactured by using bought out inputs on which Modvat credit was taken) on payment of duty, to their job workers under cover of gate passes and Rule 57F(2) challans; that the job workers returned die cast rotor under cover of the said gate passes and challans to the appellants; that the latter, on receipt of the intermediate product in their factory, took Modvat credit of the duty paid on laminations and stampings to the tune of Rs. 3,52,717.14 during March to June, 1993; that, by a sho...

Pahwa Chemicals (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC547

1. In this Appeal filed by M/s Pahawa Chemicals (P) Ltd., the issue involved is whether they are eligible for the benefit of small scale exemption under Notification No. 16/97-CE dated 1.4.1997.2. Shri A.K. Jain, learned Advocate for the Appellants, has sent the written submissions wherein it has been mentioned that the present impugned Order has been passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in pursuance of Tribunal's Final Order No. A-560/2001-NB, dated 19.7.2001 under which the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals); that against the said Final Order, a Civil Appeal has been filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which stands admitted; that they have also requested the Hon'ble Supreme Court to hear the Appeal out of turn. The learned Advocate has, further, mentioned in the written submissions that the matter deserves to be referred to a Larger Bench in view of numerous conflicting judgments about the binding nature of the Board's Circular. He has, further mentioned that it ha...

Vimla Aggarwal Vs. Dr. Mukesh Batra and Another

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 5.4.2003, passed by District Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, Institutional Area, Mehrauli, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. 2256/2001- entitled Smt. Vimla Aggarwal v. Dr. Mukesh Batra and Anr. 2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated, are that the appellant Smt. Vimla Aggarwal had filed a complaint before the District Forum under Section 12 of the Act alleging deficiency in service/negligence on the part of the respondents in treating her. In the complaint, filed by the appellant, for the alleged deficiency in service on the part of the respondents, the appellant had claimed a sum of Rs. 3,15,950/- for mental agony, suffering permanent disability, cost of medicines, etc. etc. 3. The claim of the appellant in the District Forum was resisted by the respondents. In t...

Northern India Steel Rolling Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(89)ECC134

1. The above captioned appeals have been preferred against the common Order-in-Original dated 10.9.2002 vide which the Commissioner of Customs has ordered the confiscation of the imported goods with option to get the Same redeemed, determined the value of the goods for assessment purposes and also imposed penalties of various amounts, as detailed therein.2. The appellants No. 1 is a firm of which appellants 2 and 3 are partners, while appellant No. 4 is the authorised representative of the firm. The firm imported fresh iron/steel bars/rods in 12 containers and filed Bill of Entry 587 dated 6.4.2000 at CFS, Ludhiana. But misdeclared the goods as heavy melting scrap (HMS) (quantity 254.870 MTs; and undervalued the same to avail the benefit of customs duty. The officers of DRI acting on specific information visited CFS, Ludhiana and examined all those containers in the presence of Vivek Walia, appellant, authorised representative of the firm and two Chartered Engineers, Shri J.S. Oberoi ...

Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. Vs. Cc and Ce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(89)ECC400

1. The issue involved in this Appeal filed by M/s. Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. is whether they are liable to pay an amount equal to 8% of the price of the exempted goods in or in relation to manufacture of which inputs, in respect of which MODVAT credit has been taken have been used under Rule 57 CC of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. Shri Z. U. Alvi, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellant manufacture various excisable goods and avail the facility of MODVAT credit of the duty paid on the inputs; that they procure all their major inputs in bulk in advance and at the time of receipt of the inputs, it is not known as to which final product the inputs would be sued; that they availed MODVAT credit on inputs and utilize the same immediately thereafter as none of their final products were exempted from whole of duty; that part of the inputs have been used in the manufacture of certain goods which, though as such were not exempted, were cleared without payment of duty to specific u...