Delhi Court August 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds - plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Hotline Teletubes and Components Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2005)(98)ECC276
1. In this appeal which has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) who has affirmed the order-in-original of the adjudicating authority passed in the de novo proceedings after the remand of the matter by the Tribunal, the controversy centres round the question is, as to whether the appellants are entitled to claim the refund of the unutilised credit balance in respect of the picture tube exported prior to the issuance of the Notification No. 6/97-C.E. (N.T.), dated 1-3-1997, when claim for the refund has been lodged by them after 1-3-1997.2. I have heard both sides and gone through the record. There is no dispute regarding the facts leading to the filing of the refund claim filed by the appellants, The appellants exported the picture tubes in respect of which the Modvat credit available to them was of Rs. 5,45,784/-. They filed the refund claim for this amount on 19th March, 1997 due to the Budgetary changes as a result o...
Sanghi Industries Ltd. Vs. C.C.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC701
1. The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Sanghi Industries Ltd., is whether they are eligible to get their free shipping bills converted into DFRC shipping bills.2. Shri Krishna Kant, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants had exported rotary kiln clinker under free shipping bills during the period from 3.5.2002 to 15.7.2002; that the appellants, under their letter dated 24.9.2002, made a request to the Commissioner of Customs for conversion of 9 free shipping bills into DFRC shipping bills on the ground that they were new in the filed of export of cement clinker and were not aware of the procedure to be followed for filing the shipping bills for DFRC since filing of free shipping bills was on account of need to export the goods expeditiously and since the exports were required to be made in time; that the Commissioner, under the impugned order, has rejected their request on the ground that since the fuel and coal are not covered under DFRC and also the fact that b...
Bundelkhand Alloys (P) Ltd., Shri Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC449
2. Appellants filled these appeals against the imposition of penalties of Rs. 30,000 on M/s. Bundelkhand Alloys (P) Ltd., penalty of Rs. 15,000 on Shri Dheer Singh, Authorised Signatory of M/s. Bundelkhand Alloys (P) Ltd. and Rs. 25,000 on Shri Saurav Jain, Director of M/s Bundelkhand Alloys (P) Ltd. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.9.2000, the Revenue Officers confiscated two trucks. The trucks were loaded with MS Ingots manufactured by M/s. Bundelkhand Alloys (P) Ltd. and goods were covered under two Challans issued by the M/s. Maharani Traders. Subsequently, the appellants produced the invoices showing payment of duty.4. The Adjudicating Authority confiscated the goods and imposed the penalties.5. The contention of the appellants is that the impugned goods were cleared on payment of duty and invoices were prepared showing the payment of duty. However, these cannot be issued on the same date as their authorized signatory has to go to visit the Temple. As the goods were ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Sterling Cellular
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2006)STR159
1. The Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi.2. The contention of the Revenue is that as the respondent paid the service tax late therefore, they are liable for interest.3. The contention of the respondent is that the cheque was deposited in the bank on the due date. However, the amount was credited into Govt.account after three days and respondent relied upon the circular issued by the Directorate of Service tax, dated 23-8-2000 whereby it has been clarified that the Govt. dues can be presented in the form of cheque into the authorized bank and if the cheque is not dishonoured later, the payment shall be deemed to have been made on the date when the cheque was handed over to the Govt's bankers.4. Revenue pointed out that this circular was withdrawn. Subsequently I find that during the period in dispute, the circular was in existence and it was withdrawn w.e.f. 10-6-2001.5. In view of the above circular, I find no merit i...
Cas Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2004)(173)ELT507TriDel
1. After hearing both the sides for sometime on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of Central Excise duty Rs. 9,53,924/- and penalty of equal amount we find that the appeal itself can be decided after waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty and with the consent of both sides.2. The issue "involved in this appeal is whether the appellants are justified in paying of duty on Tariff rate on the goods cleared under M.R.P. Scheme under Section 4A to different departments. The contention of the department is sale to different department is not retail sale and therefore assessment cannot be made under Section 4A and the same issue has been settled in the case of Purisons Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v.CCE, Delhi-II, Final Order No. 710/03-NB(A), dated 16-12-2003 [2004 (164) E.L.T. 417 (T)] in which the Tribunal has observed that "it is Section 4A which will apply in the case of sale to different department. Therefore, the provisions of Section 4A will be directly applicable". The ratio of the...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Air Liquide North India (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC696
1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) reversed the order-in-original of the adjudicating authority, who confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 2,60,073 with equal amount of penalty on the respondents.The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Oxygen, Nitrogen and Carbon-di-oxide and other gases classifiable under Chapter 28 of the CETA. In addition to the manufacture of these gases, they, during the period in dispute (1998-1999 to 2000-2001), purchased Helium gas from the market in cylinders and after conducting moisture control test, composition test, quality control test and other tests resulting in segregation of Helium gas into different grades having distinct properties and different market value/price, cleared the same to different types of buyers. The issue which falls for our consideration is as to whether these activities of the respondents amounted to manufacture or not in terms of Chapter Not...
Parivar Sewa Sanstha Vs. Dy Dit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2005)1SOT71(Delhi)
This appeal is preferred on behalf of the assessee against the order of the CIT (A) on various grounds enumerated hereunder :- "1. That the learned CIT(Appeals)-XXlX, New Delhi has erred, both on facts and in law in directing the learned DDIT (E), Investigation Circle, New Delhi to bring to tax the purported resulting income of Rs. 3,62,64,825 and further holding that the assessee is not entitled to an exemption provided under section 11 of the Income Tax Act on the ground, that it has violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c) and 13(2) of the Income Tax Act; 1. 1 That the finding and the conclusion of the learned CIT (A) are based on misconceived facts and are wholly erroneous in law; 1.2 That in arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, the learned CIT (A) has over looked that the assessee Sanstha, a Charitable Institution, has committed no such violation as alleged and that merely because one of the employee, namely, Mrs. Sudha Tiwari, has been paid allegedly excess remuneration (as ...
Hcl Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: (2005)1SOT59(Delhi)
The assessee, hereinafter known as HCL, entered into an agreement styled "manufact tiring and software license agreement" on 1-9-1987 with an American company which at that time was known as Tolerant, which name was changed later to Veritas. The agreement was for the supply of technology relating to the manufacture of computers in India and related software. Under clause 2.1 of the agreement, HCL was to be granted a license and technology transfer for the technology, including all items listed in Exhibit B, subject to the payment of the "manufacturing license payment stipulated in clauses 5.1 and 5.2 of the agreement. Under this clause, HCL agreed to pay Toleranta "one time charge of five hundred thousand US dollars ($500,000)" and the same had to be paid in the following manner: (a) $ 200,000 to be paid as initial payment within ten days after the effective date of the agreement. (b) $200,000 after the delivery of the source materials as described in Exhibit B and the completion of t...
Morepen Finance Ltd. Vs. Reserve Bank of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: [2005]127CompCas142(Delhi); (2004)4CompLJ357(Del); 116(2005)DLT129; 2004(76)DRJ514; [2005]60SCL410(Delhi)
A.K. Sikri, J. 1. Reserve Bank of India (RBI), as the petitioner, filed C.P.191/97 under Section 45MC1(c) of the Reserve Bank of India Act for winding up of CRB Capital Markets Ltd (hereinafter called `the company'). Along with this petition, RBI also moved CA.552/97 for appointment of the Provisional Liquidator under Section 450 of the Companies Act,1956. This petition came up for hearing on 22.5.1997 when the Court appointed the Official Liquidator attached to this Court as the Provisional Liquidator with direction to him to take into control and custody all the assets, properties and books of accounts of the company. Since then the Official Liquidator is controlling the affairs of the company. However, it may also be mentioned at this stage that the ex-Director of the company has submitted the application for revival of the company in which orders were passed on 22.3.2002 directing to convene meetings of secured creditors, unsecured creditors and share holders. The proceedings in th...
Super Express Construction Vs. Prem Kutir Coop. Group Housing Socy.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ARBLR123(Delhi); 113(2004)DLT794; 2004(76)DRJ470
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. This Petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act raises the intricate implications and complexities of arbitration clauses especially those containing a term excepting or excluding some matters from this method of dispute resolution, which is a substitute forum for the civil courts. Owing to its legal significance arbitration clauses have necessitated careful drafting, and thereforee have attracted the attention of legal luminaries across the globe. In order to obviate contradictions arising from careless or inept drafting, we now have the benefit of the availability of these clauses having been debated upon and drafted at international conventions. The present case will demonstrate their importance. In the absence of an arbitration clause in a contract, the parties would have to approach a Court of Law to settle the dispute. However, where a typical exclusion clause is found within an arbitration clause the usual effect is that out of the many disputes that m...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »