Delhi Court July 2003 Judgments

Lal Bahadur Vs. the State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 4(2003)CCR123; 106(2003)DLT481; 2003(69)DRJ668; 2003(90)ECC727; 2003(2)JCC1246

B.N. Chaturvedi, J. 1. Is the petitioner a juvenile? 2. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge returned a negative finding on this question which made the petitioner to seek recourse to revision. That is how, present revision petition comes up for hearing and disposal. 3. The petitioner is accused of having been found in unlawful possession of 49 gms. of smack on 22nd of June, 2002 at 6.45 p.m. at Budh Bazar Road, Near Hari Hospital, Hari Enclave, Sultanpuri, Delhi within the jurisdiction of Police Station Sultanpuri, Delhi. He was charged accordingly for an offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 4. Upon an application dated 8.5.2002 being made on behalf of petitioner seeking to be declared as a juvenile and dealt with accordingly, an enquiry into his age was undertaken by the learned trial court and in the process statements of Smt.Premwati, mother of the petitioner, and one Pyarey Lal Sharma, an Assistant Clerk from Janta Intercolle...

S.K. Poddar Vs. Indian Television Manufacturing Co.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Rumnita Mittal, Presiding Member: 1. The present appeal is directed against order of District Forum (Central), Kashmere Gate, Delhi, dated 19.6.2003 passed in Complaint case No. 539/2003 entitled Sh. S.K. Poddar v. M/s. Indian Television Manufacturing Co. 2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that the appellant had filed a Complaint No. 257/2002 before the District Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act averring therein that the appellant had purchased a TV from the respondent which was defective since the day of purchase and despite numerous repairs during the period of warranty was lying non-functional. The said complaint was decided by the learned District Forum vide order dated 27.5.2002 whereby the learned District Forum had directed the respondent to replace the appellants TV, as well as issue a fresh warranty valid for 1 year effective from 27.5.2002 to 26.5.2003. Thereafter the appellant had again filed a fresh compla...

Steel Tubes of India Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC541

2. Appellants filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The adjudicating authority disallowed the Modvat credit of Rs. 45,19,748/- and imposed the penalty of equal amount on M/s. Steel Tubes of India Ltd. and penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on M/s. STI Sanoh India Ltd. on the ground that M/s. Steel Tubes of India Ltd. wrongly availed the credit on the strength of invoices which were issued in the name of M/s. STI Sanoh India Ltd. 3. Brief facts of the case are that appellants M/s. Steel Tubes of India Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of C.R. Sheet and Steel Tubes and were availing the benefit of Modvat Scheme in respect of the duty paid inputs such as H.R. Sheet/Sheets. The appellant availed the credit of Rs. 45,19,784/- on H.R. Coils on the strength of invoices issued by the manufacturer in the name of M/s. STI Sanoh India Ltd. which is their sister concern. M/s. STI Sanoh India Ltd. diverted these consignment to M/s. Steel Tubes of Ind...

Yak Paints (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT974TriDel

2. The appellants prima facie have a strong case on merits. Therefore, stay application is allowed.2. I have heard arguments of both sides and in my view, the appeal itself can be disposed of.3. The only issue involved in the present appeal, relates to the availability of the Modvat credit of the amount in question (Rs. 1,24,586.42) to the appellants. The authorities below have disallowed this Modvat credit on the ground that the supplier of the goods who received the same from M/s. Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd. as their trader under invoices issued under Rule 52A, failed to produce duplicate transporter's copy, as he only produced the original copy.4. The learned Counsel has contended that the goods have been purchased by the appellants from M/s. Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd. under the cover of invoices issued under Rule 57GG by the registered dealer of the manufacturer and those have been utilised by them in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products. Therefore, the Modvat cr...

Do Best Infoway Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(91)ECC625

1. Appellant imported a consignment of 5900 pieces of educational video games of model GLK-2002 from M/s Apex Trading Well Company, Hong Kong and sought clearance of the goods under Bill of Entry No. 280 dated 11.6.2002. Appellant claimed assessment of the goods at the transacted value, 17 HK dollars equivalent to 109.38 per piece). Customs Authorities issued Show-cause Notice dated 18.7.2002 proposing to reject the transaction value on the ground that transaction value was much lower than the value of comparable imports through other Customs stations. The notice proposed to assess the goods at the rate of Rs. 173.61 per piece. It also proposed confiscation of the goods under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and imposition of penalty under Sections 112 and 117 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant filed reply to the Show-cause Notice explaining that the transaction value represented commercial value of the goods in question and that according to the Customs Valuation Rules, a...

Cinelamp Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT557TriDel

1. The appellants filed these appeals against the common order-in-appeal whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) after allowing the refund claim adjusted the amount against the pending dues.3. The contention of the appellants is that the adjustment was made without any notice to the appellants. The appellants relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kutty Flush Doors & Furniture Co. (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, reported in 1989 (42) E.L.T. 730 (Tribunal).4. The contention of the appellants is also that the refund, due to M/s. International Talkie Equipment Co. Pvt. Ltd. was adjusted against the pending dues of M/s. Kinetone. The Tribunal in their Final Order No. 71/03-B, dated 5-2-2003 held that M/s. Kinetone was the manufacturer. Therefore, in the present proceedings the refund sanctioned to M/s. International Talkie Equipment Co. Pvt. Ltd. cannot be adjusted against the dues pending against M/s. Kinetone.5. The contention of the Revenue is that a penalty of...

Hi-line Pens Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT168TriDel

(a) The appellant took Modvat credit on common inputs i.e. inputs which are common for exempt and dutiable pens but did not keep separate accounts or pay 8% on the exempted pens or reverse the credit. (b) The appellant gave certain special discounts and brought the value of certain pens within the exempted limit.2. We have perused the records and heard both sides. With regard to the common inputs, the submission of the appellant is that the total amount of Modvat credit was only Rs. 5 lakhs and even though a part of it was used in the manufacture of dutiable goods/ they have already reversed the entire credit of Rs. 5 lakhs to give a quietus to the dispute.During the hearing of the case, learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that such reversal of credit meets the requirement of law.Reference in particular was made to Order No. C-II/792/WZB/2002, dated 25-2-2002 of the West Regional Bench of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. Nirma Ltd. and the decision of the Tri...

Ferrous Forgings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT856TriDel

1. The issue in the appeal relates to the availability of the Modvat credit to the appellants and seems to be prima fade covered by the ratio of law laid down in the case of Osram Surya (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Indore, reported in 2002 (142) E.L.T. 5, by the Apex Court. Therefore, the stay application of the appellants is allowed.3. I have heard arguments on merits of both the sides and gone through the record.4. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants who are engaged in the manufacture of steel forgings in the form of rough shaped and machined articles, availed Modvat credit in July 96 in RG-23A Part-II on the basis of excise duty earlier debited by them vide entry Nos. 88, 124 and 108, dated 4-8-1995, 21-9-1995 and 1-9-1995, in all of Rs. 7,53,322.52.5. The only ground on which the credit has been sought to be disallowed and alleged in the show cause notice, is that the appellants had taken recredit of the reversed amount after six months in violation of the provisions of Rule 57-...

Acit Vs. Dabur India Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. This appeal has been filed by the Department against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 21-5-1997 for A.Y. 1994-95 2. Shri Salil Gupta, Sr. D.R. appeared on behalf of the Department whereas Shri R. Ganesan, C.A. represented the assessee.3 Ground No. 1 & 2: These grounds are directed against deletion of addition of Rs. 4,25,205/- relating to travelling expenses incurred on wives of directors.4. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that in many trips the wives of Directors had accompanied them. The assessee had claimed the expenditure incurred on wives of directors as business expenditure. The AO required the assessee to furnish the details of director travelling with their wives. It was submitted that the directors undertook trips for business purposes, including meeting of the suppliers/dealers; meeting of various collaborators, bankers etc.and during such foreign trips the wives of directors had accompanied their husbands at the instance of the company for ...

All India and General Mazdoor Union Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2003VAD(Delhi)566; 106(2003)DLT208; 2004(1)SLJ471(Delhi)

Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This writ petition by the workmen challenges the Order dated 27th August, 1997, declining reference of a dispute by the Secretary, Labour, NCT, Delhi and the review order dated 27th January, 1998. The writ petition further seeks reference of the dispute as to termination under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The 3 petitioners claimed to work continuously in Punjab Bhawan, Delhi for 5, 4 & 2 years respectively and upon their termination of services and rejection of the demand notice dated 5th April, 1996, sought to raise an industrial dispute under Section 12 of the Act. On 27th August, 1997, an order was passed by the Secretary (Labour), Government of NCT of Delhi that the dispute cannot be referred as the Punjab Bhawan activities did not constitute 'Industry' within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Act and the review against this order inter-alia for the reason that a similar dispute in case of one Swami Na...