Delhi Court March 2004 Judgments

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited Vs. K.B. Mukherjee

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Mahesh Chandra, Member: 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) against the order dated 31.7.1997 passed by District Forum (South) in complaint Case No. 3623/1994 entitled Shri K.B. Mukherjee v. M.T.N.L. By the impugned order the learned District Forum allowed the complaint filed by the respondent late Sh. K.B. Mukherjee and found the appellant MTNL (O.P. before District Forum) deficient in service. The learned District Forum quashed the telephone bill for the period 1.3.1.1994 to 1.9.1994 raised by the appellant and ordered for the revision of the bill and also for the restoration of telephone line besides the payment of cost of Rs. 1,000/-. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that complainant Sh. K.B. Mukherjee (respondent in the present appeal) was the subscriber of telephone No. 6415532 installed at his residence in June 1988. He received the bill of Rs. 3563/- for the period 16.12.1992 ...

H.M.T. Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC586

1. These appeals are against order No. 35/95, dated 18-4-95 passed by the Collector of Customs, Meerut, in adjudication of show cause notice No. VI (15) Seiz/Cust/Adj/47/91, dated 7-1-1992 issued by the Additional Collector of Customs, Meerut. The operative part of the impugned order is as below :- 1. I order confiscation of the seized goods including the packing material such as card-board boxes used to keep/conceal the said goods under Section 111, Section 118 and Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 as applicable to such goods. I, however, give an option to HMT-WFR to redeem the confiscated goods on payment of Rs. 75,00,000/- (Rupees seventy five lakhs only) as redemption fine which amount is being determined for the purpose of Sub-section (1) of Section 125 ibid. The option to redeem the said goods on payment of the aforesaid fine will be open to them for 90 days of the receipt of this order. 2. It is further ordered that at the time of release of the goods, the aforesaid Noticees...

Mihir Engineers Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal at the instance of the assessee challenge is against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 29.8.2003. The proceeding arise out of 9 show cause notices proposing to include the cost of bought out items in assessable value of the goods manufactured by the assessee. The adjudicating authority under order dated 16.10.2000 dropped the demand following the ratio of the orders passed by this Tribunal in appellant's own case where similar allegations were made. On appeal by the Revenue, the Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed the demand under order dated 29.8.2003 which is under challenge before us.2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of parts of cooling towers, namely, Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic Plastic (for short FRP) Casing and FRP Basin falling under sub-heading 8419.00 in their factory during the relevant period. The appellant has orders for supply and installation of cooling towers at customer's site. Out of 21 essential parts required for the i...

Cce Vs. Bee Dee Steel Rolling Mills and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Revenue has filed these two appeals against the Order-in-Appeal No.422-423/03 dated 13.6.2003, by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the confiscation of the goods as well as the trolla and imposed penalties on both the respondents.2. When the matter was called, no one was present on behalf of the respondents. As the appeals have been adjourned on couple of occasions, we heard Shri Vikas Kumar, learned SDR for the Revenue and perused the records. The learned SDR submitted that during the course of road check on 6.8.1997, a trolla was intercepted by the Central Excise officers; that the trolla was carrying bars and rods cleared from the premises of M/s. Bee Dee Steel Rolling Mills without any documents; that the quantity in trolla was 22.480 MT, which was seized alongwith trolla for further action under the Central Excise law; that the physical verification of the finished stock on 8.8.1997 at the premises of the first respondent, revealed shortage of 340.541 MT of bars a...

Bharat Litho Co. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC597

1. During the relevant period (November, 1992 to February, 1993), the appellants were engaged on the manufacture of Plastic Cabinets and Parts of Refrigerator and were availing the benefit of Modvat credit on inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. In their declaration dated 27.3.92, filed w.e.f. 1.4.92, under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, they had declared a number of final products including "Plastic Parts of Refrigerator" falling under sub-heading 8418 of the CETA schedule and had also declared all the inputs intended to be used in the manufacture of such final products.Polystyrene and certain other inputs including ABS resin were among the inputs declared in respect of the Plastic Parts of Refrigerator.Polystyrene also figured in the list of inputs for most of the other final products declared by the party. During the aforesaid period, the appellants took Modvat credit of over Rs. 5 lakhs on Polystyrene and used the same for payment of dut...

Apollo Tyres Limited Vs. Acit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)89ITD235(Delhi)

1. This Special Bench has been constituted under section 255 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to decide the following question arising out of the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 6177/Del/96 for assessment year 1993-94 : "Whether on facts and in law, the gains earned on cancellation of the Foreign Exchange Forward Contract are capital receipt or revenue receipt? If it is capital receipt, whether the same should be reduced from the cost of plant & machinery in connection with which the forward contract was entered into?" 2. At the outset, relevant facts having bearing on the point in issue may briefly be set out. The assessee company is a limited company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of automobile tyres, tubes etc. The assessee imported certain plant and machinery for setting up a new tyre manufacturing plant near Baroda in Gujarat state during the year 1991. For financing the project, the assessee borrowed funds in US Dollars and Pound Sterling from US Exim Bank and C...

Vishnu Mittra Govil Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2004(74)DRJ62

Mukundakam Sharma, J. 1.In this testamentary proceeding written statement/objection was filed by Mr. Shiam Sunder Lal. On the basis of the petition and the said written statement which was filed by way of objection, the Court has also framed the following issues:-1. Whether late Shri Shree Krishan had executed any valid Will in favor of the petitioner? If so, its effect. 2.Relief. 2.The issues were framed as far back as on 15.2.,2002. While filing the said petition the petitioner has sought for grant of probate/letter of administration in respect of the alleged Will dated 17.12.1980 executed by late Shri Shree Krishan registered on 23.12.1980 with the Registrar of the Documents, Delhi. In the said proceeding order was passed by this Court for publication of the citation in 'The Statesman'. Notice was also directed to the issued to the relations mentioned in paragraph 5 of the petition. Subsequent thereto Mr. Shiam Sunder Lal / the objector filed his written statement. It is stated in t...

Surakshit Exports Private Limited and ors. Vs. Gcg Transglobal Housing ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2004Delhi437; 2004(74)DRJ1

Mukundakam Sharma, J. 1. By this order I propose to dispose of two applications, namely, is Nos.1641/2002, which is filed by the defendant, and is No.6930/2002, which is filed by the plaintiffs. 2. The said applications have been filed in the present suit which is filed by the plaintiffs seeking for a decree for foreclosure of mortgage or sale or in the alternative for recovery of Rs.2,04,76,219/- together with interest @ 24% per annum from the date of the suit to the date of payment. The suit has been titled by the plaintiffs as 'suit by mortgagee for foreclosure or sale and in the alternative recovery of Rs.2,04,76,219/-'. It is alleged in the plaint that the plaintiffs advanced a loan of Rs.1,69,95,000/- to the defendant on various dates between 5.7.1999 and 19.11.1999. It is further alleged that the suit property which is approximately 15 acres of land in Village Bamnauli, Tehsil Vasant Vihar, New Delhi was purchased by the defendant under the aforesaid four sale deeds dated 12.10....

Indian Institute of Technology Vs. National Commission for Scheduled C ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 111(2004)DLT155; 2004(74)DRJ109

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. Rule.2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.3. The present petition raises a legal issue about powers of National Commission for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes to exercise jurisdiction of review in respect of an earlier order passed by the said Commission.4. The factual matrix is limited. Respondent No.2 applied for admission to Ph.D (Programme) in the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the petitioner Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, and was offered admission. On such admission the following communications were issued to respondent No.2 which was accepted by the said respondent.'Through another letter you have been offered admission to the Ph.D. Programme from the 2nd semester 2001-2002 commencing from 1.01.2002. I am glad to inform you that you have also been selected for the award of half-time teaching/research assistantship as per rules, for which you will be required to render 8 hou...

Cce Vs. Goyal M.G. Gases Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC495

1. The Revenue has filed this appeal praying for imposition of penalty on the Respondents M/s. Goyal M.G. Gases Ltd. 2. Shri Kumar Santosh, learned SDR, submitted that the Respondents manufacture oxygen & nitrogen gases and avail of Modvat Credit of the duty paid on inputs and capital goods; that the Respondents had taken Modvat Credit of Additional Customs duty on the strength of Bill of Entry dated 14.1.98; that subsequently they had reversed the credit as capital goods were not installed by them in the factory and the Bill of Entry was in the name of their unit that they had again taken the credit on 8.1.2000 without installation of the capital goods; that they had subsequently transferred the said capital goods to their another unit situated at Burdwan under invoice dated 15.1.2000 after debiting the duty amount; that part of the said capital goods were removed in January and February, 2000 on various dates after debiting the duty amount; that the Dy. Commissioner under Order-...