Delhi Court March 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.
Hindon River Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC492
1. The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Hindon River Mills, is whether the Yarn captively consumed by them for the manufacture of fabrics is capable of being marketed.2. Shri S.C. Kamra, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants, a composite textile mill, are engaged in spinning, weaving, and processing of different types of yarns and fabrics; that after the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of J.K. Cotton Spg. & Wvg.Mills Co. Ltd. v. UOI [1981 (8) E.L.T. 887 (Del.)] to the effect that yarn obtained and further processed within the factory for manufacture of fabrics would not be subjected to Excise duty the Appellants also claimed that the Central Excise duty is not payable on yarn as the same was not removed from their factory premises; that as the department was not allowing them the benefit of the decision of Delhi High Court in J.K. Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. they also filed a writ petition and obtained an interim order for paymen...
Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC461
1. This appeal is against denial of interest on an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs refunded to the appellants. The said amount was deposited by the party under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act in Appeal No.E/2900/93 as directed by this Tribunal. That appeal was allowed as per Final Order No. A/71/98/NB dated 19.2.98 as Modified by Misc. Order No.M/271/98/NB (DB) dated 9.10.98 passed in ROM application No. 46/98/NB.As per the said order, the demand of duty and the penalty on the appellants stood set aside. The final Order dated 19.2.98 was received by the party on 12.3.98 and the Misc. Order dated 9.10.98 was received some time in November or December 1998. The amount of Rs. 10 lakhs pre-deposited in the above appeal was refunded to the appellants on 30.12.99 as per order which was passed on the refund claim dated 19.3.98. The grievance in the present appeal is that interest was not paid on the above amount.2. Ld. counsel for the appellants submits that, in view of decisions of this Tribun...
Kleen-rite Enterprises Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC238
1. Appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the washing machines manufactured by the appellant were held to be classified under heading 8450 of the Central Excise Tariff.3. The contention of the appellant is that the washing machines manufactured by the appellant are not showing ordinary washing machines, and these machines are for industrial use and the majority of them are being used by textile processing houses and the machines were also cleared for use in the hotels and hospitals. The machines in question are used for bleaching, dyeing, disinfecting, starching, besides slow washing and rinsing etc. These functions of the machines are not disputed by the Revenue, therefore, the machines are classifiable under heading 8451 of the Central Excise Tariff which covers machinery (other than machines of 8450) of the washing, cleaning etc.4. The appellant also submitted that the adjudicating authority wrongly quantified the duty. ...
Kalinga Gases Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC278
1. This appeal is against an order passed by the Commissioner of Customs in adjudication of show cause notice dated 29-3-2001 issued to the party for confiscating certain goods (along with the vehicle used for transportation thereof) which were the subject-matter of final assessment of a Bill of Entry dated 27-9-2000 under Section 47 of the Customs Act. In the impugned order, the Commissioner confiscated 30 gas cylinders containing 284.5 Kgs. of Carbon dioxide under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act and gave option to the appellants to redeem the same by paying a fine of Rs. 20,000/-. He also held that 68 other gas cylinders (provisionally released) were liable to be confiscated and appropriated Rs. 10,000/- from the security amount towards redemption fine. He ordered likewise in respect of the truck which belonged to the appellants. The Commissioner, further, imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on the party under Section 112 of the Act.2. Heard both sides. Ld. Counsel for the appellant...
Tata Sons Ltd. Vs. S. Bandyopadhyay Through New Delhi General Mazdoor ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: 111(2004)DLT489; 2004(73)DRJ553; [2004(102)FLR157]; (2004)IIILLJ125Del
Madan B. Lokur, J. 1. The Petitioner is aggrieved by an Award dated 18th February 1998 passed by the learned Labour Court in ID No. 85/92. The sole question agitated by learned counsel for the Petitioner is with respect to the finding of the learned Labour Court that the respondent an employee of Tata Risk Management Services, working as a Deputy Manager (Engineering) on a salary of Rs. 2700 per month, dearness allowance of Rs. 1500 per month and a flat is a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act).2. The case law on the subject of how to determine whether an employee is a workman or not has been discussed by me in considerable detail in K.H. Pandhi vs. Presiding Officer, CW No. 1224 of 1978 decided on 5th February 2004. It is not necessary for me, thereforee, to repeat the case law or the discussion therein. 3. Suffice it to say that the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in H.R. Adyanthaya vs . Sandoz (India) Ltd., : (19...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. N.L. Kakkar Presiding Officer, Industr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(73)DRJ568; [2004(101)FLR777]; 2004(3)SLJ366(Delhi)
Madan B. Lokur, J. 1. The Petitioner (DTC) is aggrieved by orders dated 25th April, 1977 and 11th July, 1979 passed by the Additional Industrial Tribunal and the Industrial Tribunal No. 1 respectively in O.P. No. 85 of 1974 being an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act).2. The facts as they appear from the record are that on 4th May, 1972, two Assistant Traffic Inspectors Om Prakash and H.C. Dutta checked a DTC bus for ticketless travellers. Three ladies in a group, alighting from the bus after completing their journey from East Park Road to Fatehpuri, were found to be without tickets. On being asked, they stated that they had given a one-rupee note to the conductor (Respondent/workman herein) who returned 40 paise to them, but did not issue any ticket. On being confronted, the conductor stated that the tickets were lying on the foot-board of the bus. These ladies were immediately taken to a Special Metropolitan Magistrate/Mobile Court for be...
Narender Singh S/O Late Sh. Randhir Singh, Joginder Singh, S/O Late Sh ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: I(2004)ACC774; 2005ACJ731; 110(2004)DLT461; 2004(73)DRJ595
Madan B. Lokur, J. 1. By this decision, I propose to dispose of three appeals being FAO No. 148/1997 (treated as the main appeal), FAO No. 149/1997 and FAO No. 263/1997. 2. On the night intervening 26th/27th June, 1981, a bus carrying some pilgrims to Ujjain fell in the Shipra River near the city. Several people died in the accident including Randhir Singh aged about 52 years, his wife Krishna Devi aged about 45 years and their son Devender Singh aged about 18 years. The bus was driven by Kaptan Singh and was owned by Sudershan Kumar, who has since expired (represented now by his LRs Respondents No.4 to 8). The Appellants, who are the sons and daughter of Randhir Singh, filed three claim petitions before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short the Tribunal) under the provisions of Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short the Act) claiming compensation for the accidental deaths. Petition No. 307/85 relates to the death of Devender Singh and from the Award o...
Shri J.S. Chadha Vs. Shri Alok Nanda and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: 110(2004)DLT657; 2004(74)DRJ20
Kramajit Sen, J.1. This Revision is directed against the Order dated 10.5.2003 passed in Suit No.47/2000 by the Civil Judge, Delhi, dismissing an application under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure filed by Defendant No.2 Shri J.S.Chadha. The application has been filed in a Suit for Permanent Injunction on the grounds that the Plaintiff had concealed material facts, in that no reference had been made of a Suit previously instituted by the Plaintiff for the passing of Declaration to the effect that the divorce decree obtained in the United States of America by Defendant No.1, daughter of Defendant No.2 and wife of the Plaintiff, is a nullity. Secondly, it has been contended in this application that service of summons/notice of the Suit on Defendant No.1 through her father, and duly constituted attorney Defendant No.2, namely, Shri J.S. Chadha, was also the product of an act of concealment inasmuch as the Plaintiff was well aware that Defendant No.1 was residing in the United States...
Rajinder Parshad Verma Vs. Smt. Pushpa Verma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Delhi308; 110(2004)DLT440; 2004(73)DRJ585
Vijender Jain, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. Respondent filed a suit for possession. The respondent and the appellant are the sister-in-law and brother-in-law. The case of the respondent was that she was the owner of the property consisted of plot No.46 (Part), ad measuring 100 sq. yds approximately situated in Partap Nagar, Near Mayur Vihar Phase-1, Delhi having purchased from its previous owner Sh.Indraj Singh Verma in January, 1981.2. The case of the respondent was that as the appellant was in personal difficulty in finding accommodation and was permitted to stay in the suit property temporarily as a licensee and till date he has not paid even a single penny for use and occupation of the suit property and when she had to marry her son she demanded the possession of the suit property which was denied by the appellant. A notice, thereforee, was issued on 5.3.1999 for termination of license and thereafter, th...
Narender Kumar and ors. Vs. M.C.D. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)SLJ294(Delhi)
ORDERPradeep Nandrajog, J.WP(C) No. 3483/2003:1. Issue raised in the present judgment is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in CW No. 2316/2000, Ranbir Singh v. D.S.S.S.B. decided on 18.1.2002. Said judgment was followed in CW No. 6650/2001 decided on 12.2.2002. It is unfortunate that in spite of the authoritative judicial pronouncements of this Court officials of the MCD continue to insist in persisting with a wrong stand.2. It is not disputed that the judgment delivered by this Court in Ranbir Singh's case and Lajja Ram Bhardwaj's case have been implemented. The issue which the MCD was raising pertained to the certificates issued by the Armed Forces to its employees. The Government of India had issued office memorandums to the effect that the degrees obtained/certificates obtained during employment under Armed Forces would be treated as equivalent to civil degrees for purposes of civil employment of ex-servicemen in civil posts. This Court, held that equivocation for ex-s...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »