Delhi Court October 2004 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.
Cce Vs. Kapoor Steels
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: (2005)(99)ECC781
1. The assessee and revenue are both in appeal against the same Order-in-Appeal. Accordingly, they were heard together and are being disposed of under the common order.2. The issue relates to claim of the appellant for deemed credit under Notification No. 58/97-CE dated 30.8.97. The notification permits deemed credit at 12% of the invoice value provided the purchase of the input is directly from a manufacturer working under compound levy scheme (Section 3A of the Central Excise Act) and the invoice contained a declaration that "appropriate duty of excise has been paid" on such inputs". In the present case, the objection taken by the Revenue is that the declaration contained in the invoice is that "duty liability to be discharged under Rule 96ZP(3)" and it is being contended that this declaration does not satisfy the requirement of the notification that, appropriate duty has been discharged. The explanation of the appellant is that the working of the declaration is in view of peculiar ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Star Enterprises
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT310TriDel
1. The Revenue has filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No.96/2004 dated 27-2-2004 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the penalty against M/s. Star Enterprises.2. When the matter was called no one was present on behalf of the Respondents in spite of notice being sent to them. However, they have submitted Cross Objection. Therefore, we heard Shri H.C. Verma, learned D.R. and considered the Cross Objection submitted by the Respondents.The learned D.R. mentioned that M/s. Star Enterprises manufacture Hot Rolled products which are chargeable to Central Excise duty on the basis of Annual Capacity of Production under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act; that on the basis of declaration dated 22-8-97 filed by them the Commissioner under letter dated 29-8-97 determined the Annual Capacity of Production on provisional basis; that subsequently the Respondents under their letter dated 1-9-97 informed about the change in 'd' value and submitted revised declaration for fixatio...
Bhushan Strips Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT419TriDel
1. The appeal challenges the duty demand, confiscation and imposition of penalty upon a finding that there was shortages and excesses when stock taking was carried out in the appellant's factory on 26-4-1994.According to Annexure 'A' to show cause notice shortage was mainly in respect of G.P. Coil of more than 600 mm (78.850 MT) G.P. Sheets of more than 6 mm (23.150 MT) and waste and scrap of H.R./C.R. side Trimmings (35.575 MT). The excess was mainly in the case of C.R. Coils with more than 600 mm (42.650 MT). The shortages involved a duty demand of about Rs. 3.8 lakhs and excess involved a duty of Rs. 1.15 lakh. The contention of the appellant is that Panchanama furnishes excesses and shortages in gross quantity terms; but no working sheet as to how the shortages and excesses were determined are available or made available to the assessee. It is being pointed out that when the total stocks was more than 6,000 Tons, in the absence of proper work sheet it was not possible to carry out...
Himalaya Udyog and anr. Vs. Himachal Pradesh Financial
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: II(2005)BC75
1. Heard arguments of Mr. H.C. Arora for the appellants and also the arguments of Mr. J.S. Attri for the respondent.The respondent-Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation filed suit before the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh against the appellants/defendants for the recovery of the money allegedly due to it on 18.4.1991. The same was subsequently transferred to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur as O.A. 147/97. The learned Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur passed the ex parte final order dated 10.3.1999 for the recovery or Rs. 13,43,778.95 with costs and interest @14% per annum from 18.4.1991 till realisation from the appellants/defendants.2. The appellants/defendants filed the Miscellaneous Application 86/2000 for setting aside the above said ex parte order before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Chandigarh (since the subject matter of the dispute fell within the jurisdiction of the DRT, Chandigarh, which was subsequently constituted). The learned Presiding ...
Harmel Chand Vs. Amritsar Const. Co. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC188
R.S. Sodhi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 12.1.1989 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi in Suit No.89/81 whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 67,310/- with an interest of 10 % to the claimant on account of injury suffered by him in an accident that occurred on 23.1.1981.2. Brief facts of the case as noted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is as follows:-'The present claim petition has been filed by the petitioner, Harmel Chand u/s 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 for grant of compensation against the Amritsar Construction Company, Ram Sahai, driver and the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident on 23/1/81 at about 6.15 p.m.According to the petitioner on 23.1.81 at about 6.15 p.m., he was going towards his residence while driving three wheeler scooter No. DER-1844 at a slow speed and on the correct side of the road, and when the truck bearing No.DLG-154 driven by the responden...
State of Haryana Vs. Badri Parshad and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC28
R.S. Sodhi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.11.1993 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi in Suit No.394/2004 whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,40,000/- together with interest at the rate of 10% for an accident that took place on 15th March, 1984.2. Brief facts of the case as noted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal are as follows:-Sh. Badri Parshad met with the accident on March, 15, 1984 at 4.30 p.m. at Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. He was traveling in the bus No.HYR-3517 which was being driven by Hari Ram, respondent No.2. The said bus belonged to the Haryana Roadways. The respondent No.1 was the State of Haryana. The details about the accident as given in the petition are that on the said date and time, the petitioner was waiting at the Nangloi Bus Stand for going to his village Radhu was in Jhajjar, District Rohtak. The bus in question came there. On the instructions of the driver and the conductor of the bus the passengers st...
Prabhu Dayal Vs. Roop Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Delhi144
Gita Mittal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 6th February, 1991 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi in Suit No.60/2001 ( Old Suit No.19/1991) decreeing the suit filed by the respondent No.1.2. One Roop Kumar(respondent no.1 herein) brought a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against Prabhu Dayal(appellant herein). The appellant and respondent nos.2 to 7 (arrayed as defendant nos. 2 to 7 in the suit) were sons and daughters of late Shri Kapoor Chand. Plaintiff averred that his father Kapoor Chand was a tenant in shop no.7707-07, Dharam Pura Lodge, Clock Tower, Subji Mandi, Delhi(hereinafter referred to as the 'suit property') for the last 40 to 55 years. They carried on business originally of cycle tyres and repairs and latterly sold juice. They were lastly doing the business of cotton in the name of Sharma Cotton Cording and Flour Mills. Shri Kapoor Chand died inter state on 12th November, 1990 and his brother Vasudev died...
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. Amtek Geophysical Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: 115(2004)DLT624
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. The parties have been litigating with each other with ferocity for several years. Observations were made by this Court to the effect that the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner) had adopted dilatory tactics in the Claims raised by Amtek Geophysical Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent) which are the subject matter of arbitration proceedings. One of the contentions that had arisen was whether the Arbitration Act, 1940 or the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would govern the arbitral proceedings. In SLP No.5211/2002 the Hon'ble Supreme Court had passed the following Order while disposing of the Petition on 19.4.2002: By consent of parties, the order of the High Court is modified as follows:The arbitration proceedings will go on under the provisions of the new Arbitration Act. However, any party aggrieved by the Award to be passed by the Arbitrator will be at liberty to challenge the same either und...
Smt. Laj Wanti, W/O Shri Hans Raj Mehta Vs. Delhi Development Authorit ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Delhi150
Vijender Jain, J.1. This is a classic case of monopolistic institutional exploitation by the respondent-DDA. In similar circumstances, the Division Bench of this Court on 7.5.1990 in the case of the same Cooperative Society, which is the Society in this case also, in the matter of N P Taneja V/s.Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Delhi & ors. decided that non-communication of the order of Lt.Governor, Delhi, which was the basis for determination of sub-lease of the petitioner pursuant to show cause notice dated 13.4.1987 was bad in law as on that basis the Lt.Governor on 18.3.1987 had determined the sub-lease of the petitioner without supplying a copy of the same to petitioner despite requests and demands. Like in the case of N P Taneja's (supra), in this case also the petitioner has demanded a copy of the said order of the same dated i.e. 18.3.1987. The dates of the orders by which the sub-leases were determined are also common in the present writ petition as well as in the case of N P...
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Sanchar Nigam Executives' Association (I ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: 115(2004)DLT87; 2005(79)DRJ17; [2006(106)FLR163]; (2005)IILLJ509Del
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This is an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, seeking an ad-interim order of temporary injunction, restraining the defendant No. 1, its office bearers including the defendant No. 2, members, sympathizers and associates from resorting to strike in any manner, rallies, dharnas, demonstrations, gherao in any manner pursuant to what according to the plaintiff are threats emanating from the defendants' letters dated 15th July, 2004 and 28th July, 2004 including the ingress and egress of officers, staff and public in and around 500 meters of the premises of the plaintiff at Statesman House, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi or Kidwai Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi or any other office premises of the plaintiff at Delhi/New Delhi or in or in front of the residential premises of its officers.2. The genesis of the dispute arising in this suit is as follows:-A notice dated 15th July, 2004 has been issued by Sanchar Nigam Executives' Association (India)...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »