Delhi Court September 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.
J.C.T. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT234TriDel
The appellant is a composite mill. It spin yarn from cotton and weave yarn into fabric. The dispute in the pre sent case is about the valuation of yarn so woven and captively consumed for weaving of fabric. The period involved is 1999-2000. The Central Excise authorities made an addition of 10% towards inflation in the price of raw cotton in respect of yarn varieties like 12s, 14s, 16s, etc.However, in respect of coarser counts of 6s, 7s and 8s the addition made was at the rate of 15%. Appellant contests this higher rate as without any basis. We have perused the records and have heard both sides. There was no material on record which showed that the rate of inflation was at higher at 15% in respect of cotton used in the production of these coarser yarns. The higher rate adopted, therefore, has to be held as without any basis. The same is to be applied to those varieties also. The duty demand made pursuant to such an erroneous valuation cannot be sustained. The impugned order is, there...
Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: (2004)(112)LC212Tri(Delhi)
1. In this Appeal filed by M/s. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd., the issue involved is whether MODVAT credit of duty paid in respect of UV lamp and fluorescent tubes Rule 57Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. I heard Shri M P Dev Nath, learned Advocate for the Appellants, and Shri H.C. Verma, learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue.It is the contention of the Appellants that both UV lamps and fluorescent tubes are used in the printing machines installed in their factory for printing of compact discs; that parts, spares and accessories of capital goods are eligible capital goods for the purpose of availing the MODVAT credit irrespective of Chapter Heading in which these goods may fall. The contention of the Department, on the other hand, is that Heading 85.39 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act is excluded from the definition of the capital goods as given in Rule 57Q; that these are not parts of any specified machines and are only used in CD plant of the Appella...
Bec Foods Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC680
1. In these three appeals, filed by M/s. BEC Foods, the issues involved are whether refund of duty paid by them is sanctionable and whether the refund is hit by the principle of unjust enrichment.2.1 Shri B.L. Narasimhan, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants were originally registered as a 100% export-oriented undertaking (EOU); that they made an application for de-bonding of the unit to the Development Commissioner on 26-4-94 and they were finally de-bonded as per letter dated 1-3-95; that the Commissioner of Central Excise under letter dated 27-6-95 addressed to the Assistant Commissioner directed that a total sum of Rs. 76,83,195/- was required to be paid by them to achieve the status of a complete de-bonded unit; that based on the said communication the Assistant Commissioner issued a certificate dated 10-7-95 to the effect that the unit stood de-bonded with effect from 9-7-95; that on their protest the actual date of de-bonding was declared to be 15-5-95 and not 9-7-95...
Grasim Industries Limited Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: (2004)(164)ELT348TriDel
1. The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Grasim Industries Limited, is whether modvat Crdit of the duty paid on components of power plant is admissible to them under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. Shri V. Shridharan, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture, inter alia, caustic soda Iye for the manufacture of which continuous supply of power is a vital requirement; that accordingly in 1994-95, they received a number of duty paid components of power plant and brought into existence a complete power plant in its factory with the assistance of M/s. Bhel; that the Commissioner under the impugned order, has disallowed the Modvat credit of the duty taken on the components of power plant ont eh ground that the goods used for generation of electricity in the power plant cannot be said to be used for producing or processing or for bringing about any change in any substance for the manufacture of final products and as such the components of power pla...
Nanhe Mal Export Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT481TriDel
1. Appellants filed these appeals against the order-in-appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals).2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Gutka, the factory premises of appellants were visited by the Revenue authority. On 12-8-97 on verification of their record, it was found that raw material i.e. Katha, 125 Kgs, Supari 1,037 Kgs, Tobacco 125 Kgs were found short. The statement of Shri Amir Chand Jain, Director of the Company was recorded to the effect that out of 1,037 Kgs of Supari, 7,76,620 pouches of Gutka can be manufactured. On the basis of this statement, Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,55,342/- was demanded from the appellants. Further scrutiny of the record on 27-11-95 t6 12-8-97 it was found that the appellants suppressed the production of their final product compared to the raw material i.e.Supari and on this account duty of Rs. 1,77,211/- was also demanded.The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalty of equal am...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Praneet (Wtr) India (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC708
1. This is an appeal at the instance of the Revenue challenging the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), dated 12-3-2003. Under the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the Order-in-Original passed by the Joint Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh dated 21-10-2002 holding that no duty was payable when the goods returned to the appellants unit for minor rectification were sent back to the buyer after carrying out such rectification.2. Respondents were entitled to concessional rate of duty of 9.6% on the value of clearances up to Rs. 1 crore in terms of Notification No.9/2001-C.E., dated 1-4-2001. At times goods were returned by the buyers for rectification of certain defects. After carrying out such repair or rectification the goods were again cleared from the factory of the respondent to the buyer. Adjudicating authority took the view that the value of the clearances of returned goods should be taken into account while computing the figure of Rupees one ...
Usha Mahajan W/O Roshan Lal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: 2003VIAD(Delhi)486; 2003(70)DRJ796; 2003(3)JCC1482
J.D. Kapoor, J. 1.This is a petition through jail. The petitioner is in jail for the last seven years. Her husband is handicap and daughter is of marriageable age. Trial is proceeding on a very slow and ambling pace. It should be the endeavor of the trial court to see that the trial proceeds expeditiously in cases where the accused are lodged in judicial custody whatever the gravity or severity of the offence may be. Whether the cases are transferred from one court to another on administrative grounds is not the concern of the accused. Neither should be the consideration for the trial court to take excuses that it has been received by way of transfer recently. To incarcerate a person for such long duration in jail is nothing short of handing down the punishment. The expeditious trial of a case depends upon the facts of every case. The case in which accused are in judicial custody for long cannot be on the same pedestal as those who have been enlarged on bail. Merely with a view that su...
Ss Builders Vs. Smt. Sita Rani Ahuja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: 2003VIIAD(Delhi)302; 106(2003)DLT538
Mahmood Ali Khan, J. is Nos.7189/00 & is No.11152/00 1. By this order an application of the plaintiff filed under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC for restoration of the civil suit which was dismissed in default on 5.8.1999 will be decided. 2. The plaintiff has filed a civil suit against defendants for specific performance of an agreement of sale and in the alternative for a decree for recovery of Rs.1,54,000 with interest. Relief for permanent injunction is also claimed. The suit was contested by the defendants. Issues were framed on 17.10.1997 and the suit was posted on 4.8.1999 for recording the evidence of the plaintiff, on 5th and 6th August, 1999 for recording the evidence of the defendant no.1 and on 7.8.1999 for recording the evidence of the defendants no.2 to 5. The matter was notified before the Joint Registrar on 6.2.1998 in the presence of the counsel for the plaintiff. Joint Registrar noticed that the list of witnesses had not been filed. He directed the parties to produce witnesses at ...
Casio India Co. Limited Vs. Ashita Tele Systems Pvt. Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: 106(2003)DLT554; 2003(70)DRJ742; 2003(27)PTC265(Del); 2003(3)RAJ506
Manmohan Sarin, J. 1. This is an application moved by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, seeking an ad interim injunction against defendant No.1, its Directors, agents, assignees from using the domain name of 'www.casioindia.com' or any derivative of the trade mark and trade name of the plaintiff company 'CASIO' or any combination thereof. The restraint is also sought against defendant No.2 ENOM,INC, from permitting use and/or transfer to any third party the domain name 'www.casioindia.com' except the plaintiff. M/s. ENOM Corporate is duly accredited by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers as the Registrar for Domain names. Plaintiff also seeks a mandatory injunction directing defendant No.1 to transfer the above domain name to the plaintiff company. Further relief regarding maintenance of accounts is sought. The application has been moved in the suit for permanent and mandatory injunction and for rendition of accounts. Suit is said to be under Sections ...
Ahmad Ilahi S/O Ali Ilahi Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-2003
Reported in: 2003VIAD(Delhi)591; 2003(71)DRJ9; 2003(3)JCC1483
J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. This is a petition through jail. The petitioner is in jail for the last four and half years. In identical case some observations have been made by this court which are as under:- ''Trial is proceeding on a very slow and ambling pace. It should be the endeavor of the trial court to see that the trial proceeds expeditiously in cases where the accused are lodged in judicial custody whatever the gravity or severity of the offence may be. Whether the cases are transferred from one court to another on administrative grounds is not the concern of the accused. Neither should be the consideration for the trial court to take excuses that it has been received by way of transfer recently To incarcerate a person for such long duration in jail is nothing short of handing down the punishment. The expeditious trial of a case depends upon the facts of every case. The case in which accused are in judicial custody for long cannot be on the same pedestal as those who have been enlarged ...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »