Delhi Court February 2004 Judgments

Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. and Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC93

1. When the matter was called, the learned counsel for the appellants i.e. M/s. Jai Parabolic Springs Limited filed a written request for adjournment. As the duty is demanded from Shri Kewal Singh, the other appellant, and the penalty is imposed on M/s. Jai Parabolic Springs Limited, therefore, we are proceeding with the appeals after rejecting the request for adjournment. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Shri Kewal Singh and learned SDR.2. The appellants filed these appeals against the adjudication order whereby it is held that the fabrication of structures such as columns, purlins and trusses amount to manufacture and the duty was confirmed on Shri Kewal Singh and the penalty was imposed on M/s, Jai Parabolic Springs Limited and the Tribunal allowed the appeals. Thereafter the Revenue filed the appeals before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal for decision afresh after going into the evidence whether the activi...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Gupta Synthetics

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC295

1. In this appeal, the Revenue has questioned the validity of the impugned Order-in-Appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reversed the Order-in-Original by setting aside the duty demand and the penalty. Learned JDR has reiterated the correctness of the Order-in-original vide which duty and penalty were confirmed by the adjudicating authority on account of shortage of raw material and the finished goods found in the factory premises of the respondents by the officers of the Central Excise on 27.9.2001 at the time of their visit.He has also contended that the Commissioner (Appeals) has ignored the fact that the panchnama was attested by Sanjay Gupta, Manger and authorised Signatory of the respondents without any objection regarding the actual weighment of the stock and that the duty was debited at the spot itself without any objection by the respondents. He has further contended that the ratio of law laid down in Bhilai Conductors (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur, 2000 (69) ECC 192 (T...

Aarti Steels Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue against the impugned order-in-appeal the issue relates to the denial of modvat credit to the respondents on the inputs utilised in the manufacture of alloy and non-alloy steel wires.2. The Revenue has sought to deny the modvat credit on the ground that non-alloy steel wires were cleared by the respondents under CT-2 certificates to the cycle tyre manufacturer who exported the tyres under the bond at nil rate of duty. But on this very ground the credit for the earlier period was also sought to be denied to the respondents by the Department and the same was not accepted by the Tribunal, vide Final Order No. A/58/2001/NB dated 12.1.2001. the validity of that order was challenged by the Department by moving a reference application before the Hon'ble High Court. But the said application was rejected. Thereafter the Department approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (CC 8533). But the same had been also rejected. The learned Counsel has placed on r...

A.C. Enterprises Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC158

1. The appellants made a request for adjournment. We find that the case was adjourned many times at the request of the appellants and the appeal is pending since 1989, therefore, the request for adjournment is declined. Heard the learned SDR and perused the appeal papers.2. The appellants filed this appeal against the adjudication order whereby the duty of Rs. 12,92,482.61 was confirmed in respect of 203 air-conditioners which were cleared without payment of duty. 5 air-conditioners were also ordered to be confiscated and allowed to be released on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 20,000. A penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs was imposed on the appellants. The demand was confirmed on the ground that the appellants manufactured and cleared air-conditioners without payment of duty. The contention of the appellants in the appeal memo is that the allegation of fraud, misdeclaration of facts cannot be alleged against the appellants. Mere inaction or failure on the part of the appellants to pay duty do...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Aarti International Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT348TriDel

1. The issue involved in this Appeal, preferred by Revenue is whether benefit of Notification No. 1/95- C.E. is to be denied in respect of inputs which have been used in the manufacture of cotton waste arising during the course of manufacture of cotton yarn. Shri Virag Gupta, Departmental Representative submitted that M/s. Aarti International Ltd., a 100% Export Oriented Undertaking manufacture cotton yarn and cotton waste; that they had procured inputs namely HSD and Lubricants at nil rate of duty under Notification No. 1/95-C.E., dated 4-1-95; that these inputs had been used in the manufacture of cotton yarn as well as cotton waste; that Proviso to Para 5 of Notification No.1/95-C.E. provides that where articles including rejects, waste and scrap material are not excisable, excise duty equal in amount to that leviable on the inputs obtained under the Notification and used for the purpose of manufacture of such articles shall be payable at the time of clearance of such articles; that...

Smt. Anisha Begam Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC298

1. In this appeal the appellant has challenged the validity of the impugned Order-in-Original vide which penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs has been imposed on her under Section 114 of the Customs Act.2. The learned Counsel has contended that there is. no tangible evidence to connect the appellant with the recovery of the foreign currency concealed in the water bottle and lunch box as both these items belonged to one Iqbal Qureshi who even at the spot at the Airport admitted this fact in his statement. The appellant had even no knowledge about the contents of the said water bottle and lunch box and those were kept in his baggage by Iqbal Qureshi who even himself admitted this fact also in his statement. Therefore, no penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act could be imposed.3. On the other hand, the learned JDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order and contended that the appellant should not have allowed Iqbal Qureshi to keep the water bottle and lunch box in his baggage and fo...

Ansal Properties and Ind. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit (Asstt.)

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)88TTJ(Delhi)33

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order-dated 3-2-1994 of Commissioner (Appeal)-V pertaining to assessment year 1990-91."That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeal) has erred in law in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 11,79,818 being the expenditure incurred by International Contracts Division in the Head Office at New Delhi for the purpose of obtaining the detailed information, submiesion of detailed tenders and follow ups, bidding for foreign construction and consultancy projects, etc.The assessee claimed Rs. 11,79,818 as expenditure in its International Contracts Division for obtaining new contracts. The assessing officer following the assessment order as also, Commissioner (Appeal)'s order in the preceding year disallowed these expenses as being of capital nature. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeal) confirmed the addition following his predecessor's order in the preceding year observing that no other facts were brou...

Smt. Sudesh Kapoor W/O Late Sh. O.P. Kapoor, Vs. Prithvi Chand S/O Sh. ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2004(73)DRJ263

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Appellants are aggrieved by an Award dated 13th July 1987 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Suit No. 27 of 1981. According to the Appellants, the compensation awarded on the death of O.P. Kapoor was inadequate.2. The deceased was working as an Operations Assistant with Indian Airlines and was drawing a salary of Rs.1506.07 per month. He was unfortunately involved in an accident on 16th September 1980 and succumbed to his injuries. The accident is said to have taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of a car by Respondent No.1. The car was insured with Respondent No.3. The Appellants are the legal representatives of the deceased and they had filed a claim for compensation before the learned MACT.3. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned MACT framed the following issues: --1. Whether the deceased sustained fatal injuries due to rash and negligent driving of car No. PUM-8129 on the part of Respondent No.1?2. Whether...

Upendra Chugh S/O Late Sh. R.N. Chugh and Miss Shobha Chugh D/O Late S ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2004(73)DRJ292

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. This appeal is with regard to an Award dated 7th July, 1987 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short) awarding compensation for the death of Dr. R.N. Chugh, Dr. (Mrs.) Sarojini Chugh, Master Shailender Chugh (their minor son) and for serious injuries to Miss Shobha Chugh, (their minor daughter). The claim is for enhancement of the awarded compensation.2. On 5th March, 1977, a horrific accident took place between a truck driven by Wasan Singh (since deceased) and a car driven by Dr. R.N. Chugh. The truck was owned by Malkiat Singh (Respondent No.1) and insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (Respondent No.2). In the accident, Dr. R.N. Chugh and his wife Dr. (Mrs.) Sarojni Chugh and their minor son Master Shailender Chugh died. Their daughter Ms. Shobha Chugh, who was about 13 years of age at that time, received grievous injuries on her head and other parts of her body. As a result of the injuries, she is facially permanently scarred...

U.V. Uttamchandani Vs. University of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 110(2004)DLT257; 2004(73)DRJ229; 2004(3)SLJ34(Delhi)

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Petitioner prays that a writ be issued declaring that with effect from 16.6.1978 he be declared as having been appointed as University Engineer and with effect from 22.11.1983 he be deemed to be appointed as Executive Engineer since respondent No. 2 was upgraded to the said post. Mandamus be issued to the University to upgrade the post of Executive Engineer to the level of Superintending Engineer with effect from 1.6.1980. Petitioner be given all consequential reliefs. Mandamus be issued to the University to issue appointment Orders in pursuance of resolution No. 184 of March, 1988. Order dated 18.12.1990 and communication dated 19.12.1990 be quashed. Prohibition be issued to the University restraining the University from appointing Shri G.S.Mehta, respondent No. 3 as a University Engineer.2. On 20.2.1993, it stands recorded in the Order of even date, that petitioner does not press his petition against respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3 was deleted from the arra...