Delhi Court July 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.
Harbans Lal and ors. Vs. Financial Commissioner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: 2003VAD(Delhi)355; 106(2003)DLT292; 2003(70)DRJ261
S.K. Mahajan, J.1. This order will dispose of the writ petition filed by certain land owners of village Bamnoli, Tehsil Mehrauli whereby they had challenged the impugned order of the Financial Commissioner purported to have been passed in the exercise of his powers under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holding (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (in short referred to as `the Act'). The facts in short relevant for deciding this appeal are:-A notification under Section 14 (I) of the Act was issued on 08th September, 1993, for carrying out consolidation proceedings in village Bamnoli. The Consolidation Officer was appointed under the Act on June 13, 1996. The Consolidation Officer initiated consolidation proceedings by issuing a notification on June 21, 1996. On June 26, 1996, Advisory Committee under the Act was constituted to supervise the consolidation proceedings in the village. Applications were invited from the residents of the village for allotment and exchange ...
Central Bank of India Vs. Shri O.P. Singla and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: 2003VIAD(Delhi)93; 106(2003)DLT297
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This writ petition challenges the Award 18th June, 1984, given by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, respondent No.1 herein in I.D. No.110 of 1977. The reference was on the following terms:- 'Whether the action of the Management of Central Bank of India, Chandigarh in withdrawing the facility of duty special leave to Shri A.L. Chopra, Special Assistant, Central Bank of India, Ambala Cantonment for attending proceedings before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central)/Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals with effect from the 28th August, 1973 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is Shri A.L. Chopra is entitled?' 2. The respondent No.2, Union claimed that since the workman, Shri A.L. Chopra was the General Secretary of the Central Bank of India Employees' Union and had been attending conciliation proceedings before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) and, thereforee, special leave for the aforesaid purpose should be granted to him as it w...
Siddharth Intercontinental Hotels (i) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: 2004IAD(Delhi)122; 108(2003)DLT31; 2004(91)ECC245; 2004(166)ELT160(Del)
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The only question in this petition is with regard to the petitioner's entitlement to interest in respect of customs duty refunded to it in 1994.2. The petitioner imported kitchen equipment. It so happened that the imported goods were lost while in the possession of the customs authorities. Later on, after about four months, the goods were traced out but were found to be in a damaged condition. As such, the petitioner paid duty under under protest. Thereafter, the petitioner moved a refund claim for refund of proportionate duty in respect of the damaged goods. Initially the Asstt. Collector passed an order in original whereby the refund claim was found to be time barred. The Collector Appeals, in appeal preferred against the order in original, upheld the order of the Asstt. Collector. However, the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi by a judgment and/or order dated 08.04.1992 allowed the appeal of the petitioner and set aside the imp...
Mahesh Gupta Vs. Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: 2003VIIIAD(Delhi)483A; 108(2003)DLT213A; 2003(71)DRJ548; 2003(3)JCC1860A
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. This order will dispose of a petition by the complainant under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking cancellation of bail of accused Rajeev Gupta granted by Additional Sessions Judge vide orders dated 4.12.2001. 2. Facts in brief are that on 15.4.2001, petitioner Mahesh Gupta lodged a complaint that M/s. National Meal Industries is a partnership firm comprising of (i) complainant, Mahesh Gupta, (ii) Smt. Indira Gupta, (iii) Rajeev Gupta, and (iv) Krishan Gupta. The complainant has 5% share in this firm. Civil litigation between the parties arising out of partnership was pending; other partners of the firm with a view to defraud the complainant and to misappropriate funds of the partnership firm unauthorisedly opened a separate account in the name of the firm, in Punjab and Sind Bank, Azadpur Mandi Branch, Delhi which was being operated by Krishan Gupta and Rajeev Gupta secretly. The complainant came to know about it on 4.4.2001; he went to the bank...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri Ram Fibers Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Del)198; [2005]272ITR562(Delhi)
ORDER1. The case has been placed before the Court for appropriate orders as the Revenue, at whose instance the reference was made, has failed to take steps to take out notice to the respondent as also to file the paper books, despite various opportunities, right from the year 1997.2. Mr. R.D. Jolly, learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue, submits that since all the relevant documents are available in the file of ITC No. 10/95, the Revenue may be exempted from filing the documents and the paper books in this case. We are afraid, we cannot accede to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. Once a party chooses to have a reference made to this Court, it is under obligation to comply with all the rules which are applicable to the regular references. As noted above, the Revenue has not only failed to file the requisite paper books, it has also failed to take steps even to take out notice to the respondents. In view of the above, we return the reference unanswered.The ...
Ess Ess Metals Enterprises Vs. Cegat
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(158)ELT810(Del)
ORDERD.K. Jain, J. 1. An order, dated 15th May, 2003 passed by the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal') in petitioner's stay application No. 116/2003-NB-C in E/Appeal No. 20/2003-NB-C is under challenge in this writ petition. By the impugned order the Tribunal has directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs within eight weeks from the date of the said order as a condition precedent for entertaining their appeal. 2. The material facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows :- On the basis of some intelligence report that the petitioner was engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods, namely, Nickel, Tin and Lead alloys in their factory, without obtaining Central Excise license L-4 and was removing/clearing the same without payment of Central Excise Duty and without observing certain prescribed formalities, a notice was issued to the proprietor of the petitioner concern to produce the relevant records. ...
Cit Vs. Shri Ram Fibres Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: [2003]133TAXMAN400(Delhi)
ORDERThe case has been placed before the court for appropriate orders as the revenue, at whose instance the reference was made, has failed to take steps to take out notice to the respondent as also to file the paper books, despite various opportunities, right from the year 1997.2. Mr. R.D. Jolly, learned senior standing counsel for the revenue, submits that since all the relevant documents are available in the file of ITC No. 10/95, the revenue may be exempted from filing the documents and the paper books in this case. We are afraid, we cannot accede to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. Once a party chooses to have a reference made to this court, it is under obligation to comply with all the rules which are applicable to the regular references. As noted above, the revenue has not only failed to file the requisite paper books, it has also failed to take steps even to take out notice to the respondents. In view of the above, we return the reference unanswered.3. The ...
Lumax Industries Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-31-2003
Reported in: (2004)91TTJ(Del)880
ORDERP.N. PARASHAR, J.M.:This appeal has been filed by the assessed against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), 8-10-1996, for the assessment year 1993-94.2. Shri Salil Agarwal, advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessed, whereas Shri B.D.S. Kharb, CIT (Departmental Representative) along with Shri Prahlad Singh, Senior Departmental Representative, represented the department.3. Ground No. 1 is directed against the sustenance of disallowance of deduction of Rs. 11,428. The assesse a had deposited total TDS of Rs. 50,612 as against contractual payments. Out of this Rs. 39,183 could be adjusted in the counts of job workers. The remaining amount was, thereforee, written off by e assessed as a business loss. The loss claimed by the assessed was disallowed by the assessing officer on the ground that this was a payment of income-tax which is not an allowable deduction.4. Before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) it was submitted by the appellant that this was not e tax paid by the a...
Azad Engineering Works Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2003
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC574
1. The above captioned appeals have been filed by the appellants against the common order-in-original vide which duty and penalty against M/s. Azad Engineering Works and penalties against other appellants under Rule 209A as detailed therein, had been confirmed.2. The learned Counsel has contended that there is no evidence on the record to substantiate the charge of clandestine manufacture of the goods in question (diesel generating sets, diesel engines) by M/s. Azad Engineering Works, appellant No. 1 and clearances of the same by them to the other appellants without payment of duty. Therefore, the impugned order against all the appellants deserves to be set aside. On the other hand, the learned JDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order.3. I have heard both sides and gone through the record. The bare perusal of the record shows that appellant No. 1, M/s. Azad Engineering Works is engaged in the manufacture of diesel engines and diesel generating sets with ISI mark under ...
Creative Dyeing and Printing Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2003
Reported in: (2004)(164)ELT41TriDel
1. These appeals are at the instance of the assessee M/s. Creative Dyeing & Printing Mills, its Directors and General Manager. The main issue raised in these appeals is whether adjudicating authority as well as Commissioner (Appeals) were correct in upholding the allegation in the SCN that the appellant M/s. Creative Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt.Ltd. have failed to include the Design Development charges in the assessable value of the fabrics produced/processed on job work basis.2. It is the contention of the appellant that designs were developed in the form of swatches for approval of a particular exporter for ready-made garments. These swatches were then sent to the buyer for his approval. In case of non-approval of such swatches, no processing order nor grey fabrics were received by the appellant. Only a very small number of such designs were used for printing and swatching whereas the demand has been raised for the entire amount received as charges for developing the design....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »