Delhi Court April 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.
D.S.A. Engineers (Bombay) Vs. Housing and Urban Development Corporatio ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: 2004(74)DRJ331
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. The petitioner herein was awarded a work contract for external services (plumbing) under agreement dated 10th June, 1992. Disputes arose between the parties out of and in connection with the aforesaid agreement which also contained an arbitration clause. In terms of the aforesaid arbitration clause, disputes arising between the parties were referred to the arbitrators, namely, Sh. H.S. Sobti and Sh. P. Krishnan. The said arbitrators entered into the reference, received evidence adduced by the parties and they passed a unanimous award and published the same on 30th June, 2001.2. The respondent has now challenged the aforesaid award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 contending, inter alia, that the said arbitral tribunal ignored the terms and conditions of the agreement duly signed and executed between the parties and, thereforee, the said award passed in favor of the petitioner cannot be upheld and is liable to be set aside. Howev...
Ranjeet and anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT903
ORDERO.P. Dwivedi, J.1. In respect of incident dated 14/15.5.2001 an FIR No. 217/2001 under Sections 341/323/34, IPC was registered on the statement of injured Kanhi Ram. Injured Kanhi Ram registered another FIR No. 242/2001 under Sections 341/323/ 34, IPC in respect of an other incident dated 21.3.2001. In both these FIRs deceased never named any of the petitioner as culprits. Moreover, second FIR was got cancelled by the police as police found it to be a false report. Kanhi Ram was admitted in LJPN Hospital on 22.3.2001 and got discharged on 5th May, 2001. Ultimately on 27.6.2001 Kanhi Ram died at his home. Cause of death has been opined to be pneumonitis. The brother of the deceased then filed a complaint case and in support thereof he has filed affidavit and on that basis Metropolitan Magistrate had taken cognizance and issued processes. In response thereto respondent appeared before learned Metropolitan Magistrate and he was taken into custody. They are in custody since 24.11.2003...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Divine Light Mission
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: [2005]278ITR659(Delhi)
B.C. Patel, C.J.1. For the asst. yr. 1966-67 onwards, these references/appeals are before the Court. All the references/appeals pertain to the same assessed.2. The following are the questions referred by the Tribunal :'IT Ref. No. 158 of 19851. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that provisions of Section 12 of the IT Act were applicable to donations of Rs. 41,359 which were credited to the suspense account ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,00,739 made by ITO on account of capital expenditure ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,820 and 1,900 being credits in the name of Mahatma Satyanand and Mahatma Gianand, respectively ?4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the a...
Nahar International Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2004
Reported in: (2004)(171)ELT307TriDel
1. In this appeal preferred by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal dismissing their claim for refund of the duty, the issue relates to the applicability of doctrine of unjust enrichment.The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Acrylic/Cotton Yarn.They lodged four refund claims of different amounts, in all of Rs. 10,78,056/- on the ground that they had borne the burden of excess duty in respect of the clearance of goods Acrylic/Cotton Yarn from their factory to Depot on stock transfer basis which were subsequently sold at lower price from Ludhiana Depot. The adjudicating authority dismissed these claims through common order-in-original by applying the principle of unjust enrichment. That order had been affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. None had come present on behalf of the appellants. No request for adjournment has also been received. Therefore, we proceed to decide the matter after hearing the learned SDR. We have gone through the records and in our vi...
Associated Cement Companies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2004
Reported in: (2004)(169)ELT182TriDel
2. The appellant filed this appeal against order-in-appeal whereby the benefit of Modvat credit was denied on Filter Bags, Spares for Bag Filter used as part of pollution control equipment.3. The benefit of Modvat was also denied in respect of Cartridge Heater on the ground that it is classifiable under Heading 85.16 which is not covered under the definition of capital goods.4. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of cement and air pollution control equipment which is a part of cement plant and without air pollution control equipment the cement plant 'is not complete.Revenue is not disputing the entitlement of credit as 'capital goods' in respect of air pollution control equipment. Admittedly Filter Bags, Spares for Bag Filter and Bag Filters are parts of pollution control equipment. Therefore, being parts of pollution control equipment, the appellants are entitled for the benefit of these parts as capital goods. The Tribunal in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Shree Cement Ltd. re...
Klj Plasticizers and ors. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2004
Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC510
1. When this application for stay came up for hearing, we find that the appeal itself can be disposed of as the issue raised is covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plasticizers of various types falling under chapter sub-heading 2917.90 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act.2. The appellants clear the finished goods by packing them into tankers or drums, as the case may be, for the sake of convenience at the request of the customer. We are concerned in this appeal with the clearances in drums supplied free of cost by the customers.3. It is contended that the appellants receive old and used drums from the buyers free of cost. The main products are cleared in these drums to the buyers. In arriving at the assessable value of such clearance the appellants do not add the cost of packing for the same. As the appellant have not included the cost of old and used drums, supplied free of cost ...
Jindal Strips Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2004
Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC433
1. This appeal has been directed against the impugned Order-in-Appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the Order-in-Original of the adjudicating authority who confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 6,26,355 with penalty of equal amount against them. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Hot rolled SS Flats and HR SS Coils. On conducting physical verification of their finished goods as well as raw material by the Central Excise officers on 17th and 18th September 2001, shortages of finished goods involving Central Excise duty of the above amount was found. They debited the duty voluntarily.After issuance of show-cause notice, the adjudicating authority affirmed the duty with equal amount of penalty detailed above. The Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed that order.2. The learned Counsel has contended that shortage was not arrived at by taking out physical verification of the stock of finished goods. It was based only on eye estimation. He has also contended that ...
Bwl Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2004
Reported in: (2004)(168)ELT458TriDel
1. The refund claims in these two appeals are in relation to goods supplied to BSNL. The refund claims were rejected on the ground that the reduction in prices made by BSNL was on account of liquidated damages and that the assessee failed to produce evidence proving that the higher amounts of duty initially paid at the time of removal of the goods had not been fully passed on to the buyer of the goods.2. When the appeals came up for hearing today, none is present for the appellants. They have made a request that the appeals may be decided on merits. Accordingly, we heard the learned SDR and are passing this order.3. It is clear from the price finalisation letters of BSNL that the original prices were provisional and subsequently on finalisation, the prices were fixed at lower rate per Km. Thus, the finding that the lower prices were on account of liquidated damages etc. is contrary to the facts. There is also no basis to the finding that the appellants might have passed on the higher ...
Score Information Technologies Ltd. Vs. Employees State Insurance Corp ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ARBLR18(Delhi); 111(2004)DLT475; 2004(75)DRJ152
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to revoke the suspension order dated 25.7.2003 and restore the work order. Petitioner claims that in the beginning of the project, it was not able to conform to the time frame in view of contributory deficiencies of the respondent. On petitioner's representation to respondent petitioner was asked to complete portion of work within 10 days on the assurance that if work was completed, the suspension order would be revoked and work restored. Petitioner's grievance is that despite the said work being done on time, work has not been restored. Respondent denied any such assurance and claimed failure to execute the work by petitioner. Petitioner claimed that there was an arbitration agreement. Matter was adjourned to enable parties to obtain instructions. Petitioner submitted that as per the arbitration clause, Director General or his nominee is to be the arbitrator. Petitioner stated that s...
Hotel Jaipur Ashok and anr. Vs. Miss. K.P. Sarojni, Ministry of Labour ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2004
Reported in: 111(2004)DLT281; [2004(101)FLR1198]; (2004)IIILLJ359Del; 2005(1)SLJ152(Delhi)
Madan B. Lokur, J.1. India Tourism Development Corporation (ITDC), Petitioner No. 2, is a public sector undertaking incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It has several aims and objects, one of which is:'To take over and manage existing hotels and sell, construct, purchase, acquire, lease, take on lease, run and maintain hotels, motels, restaurants, canteens, guest houses and other places for the purpose of boarding, lodging and stay of tourists.'2. In fulfillment of its aims and objects, ITDC has established and it operates 19 hotels, 13 travellers and 3 forest lodges apart from other establishments all over the country. Petitioner No. 1 is one such hotel established by ITDC. The variety and number of establishments has gone up over the years.3. On 16th May 1961, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 1(3)(b) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (the Act), the Central Government issued a Notification that the provisions of the Act will be ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »