Delhi Court September 2004 Judgments

J. Kimatrai and Co. Vs. K.D. International and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 115(2004)DLT205

R.S. Sodhi, J.1. This appeal seeks to challenge the judgment dated 30.04.1993 of the Additional District Judge, Delhi in Suit No.84/91 whereby the learned Judge has set aside the award holding that there was no agreement for referring the matter to arbitration and, thereforee, the arbitrator had no jurisdiction to proceed with the reference.2. Nobody appears for the respondent. With the assistance of learned counsel for the appellant, I have gone through the record of the case.3. Facts of the case are that the appellant/claimant is a partnership concern supplying fabric to the respondent on credit did so vide Bill No.5155 dated 6.10.1989 and 5196 dated 16.10.1989 for a sum of Rs.47,897/50 and Rs.21,101/50 respectively. The payment was to be made by the respondent periodically. However, there was a default and the appellant issued a notice dated 26.2.1990, Exhibit R-1 seeking balance payment of Rs.35,000/-. Since the respondent did not comply with the demand notice the appellant moved t...

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sonmati and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: I(2005)ACC17; 2006ACJ1268; 66(2004)DLT115; (2005)139PLR12

R.S. Sodhi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11.5.1999 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi in Suit No.8/98 whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 4,32,000/- together with interest of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. 2. Brief facts of the case as noted by the Tribunal are as follows:-'..... the case of the petitioners is that the deceased Shri Brahma Nand was a vegetable seller. In 25.12.92 in the morning the deceased was going to Azadpur Subzi Mandi in Tempo No.DEL-6374. At about 6.10. A.M., when the tempo reached near Maya Puri Chowk at the Ring Road, respondent No.1, who was driving the tempo lost control and the tempo over turned. The tempo was being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner. The deceased received fatal injuries in the accident. The deceased used to buy fruits and vegetables from Subzi Mandi Azadpur and used to sell the same in retail at Barar Square in Delhi Cantt. and used to ...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ritesh Industries Limited

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 114(2004)DLT198; [2005]274ITR324(Delhi)

B.C. Patel, C.J.1. The present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) is preferred by the Revenue raising the following question:-Whether the amount of ''duty draw back'' can be regarded as income derived from an industrial undertaking so as to entitle the assessed a deduction under section 80I of the Income Tax Act, 1961?2. In this matter one need not go into the facts as it is an admitted position that the assessed who is a manufacturer, has received ''duty draw back'' in view of the export of garments. The question is whether the amount of ''duty draw back'' which the asessee has received can be considered to be ''profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking'' in the context of Section 80I of the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 80I of the Act, is relevant for our purpose and, thereforee, we reproduce it below :-''80-I (1) Where the gross total income of an assessed includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial ...

M.L. Gupta and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2006(1)SLJ459(Delhi)

Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. Civil Writ Petition No. 4527/1994 was listed on 21st September, 2004 when the Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the respondents stated that these matters should be taken up along with five connected matters, namely, WP (C) Nos. 3739/1995, 3751/1995, 4780/1995, 4793/1995 and 4794/1995. The hearing of the CW No. 4527/1994 was adjourned for today with the directions that those writ petitions be also listed today as they involved similar facts and the issues arising for consideration are similar. Accordingly, today with the consent of the Counsel appearing for the parties, we have taken up the three writ petitions, namely, WP (C) Nos. 4527/1994, 4780/1995 and 4793/1995 which parties were represented for hearing and which are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The petitioners herein were recruited on daily wage basis as Constable in Central Reserve Police Force (C.R.P.F.). It is the case of the petitioners that all the petitioners have served the respo...

Cit Vs. Ritesh Industries Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2004)192CTR(Del)81

B.C. Patel, C.J.The present appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) is preferred by the revenue raising the following question'Whether the amount of 'duty drawback' can be regarded as income derived from an industrial undertaking so as to entitle the assessed a deduction under section 80-I of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?'2. In this matter, one need not go into the facts as it is an admitted position that the assessed, who is a manufacturer, has received 'duty drawback' in view of the export of garments. The question is whether the amount of 'duty drawback' which the assessed has received can be considered to be 'profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking' in the context of section 80-I of the Act. Sub-section (1) of section 80-I of the Act, is relevant for our purpose and, thereforee, we reproduce it below :'80-I (1) Where the gross total income of an assessed includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaki...

Rangi International and Another Vs. New India Assurance Co.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Mahesh Chandra, Member: 1. The complainant M/s. Rangi International has filed this complaint through its proprietor Shri Surinder Singh against the O.P./New India Assurance Co. Limited. The complainants were the owner of Ashok Leyland Truck No. DL-IL-C2599 and they got the Truck insured with the O.P. Insurance Company for a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs for the period 8.11.1997 to 7.11.1998. The said truck met with an accident on 19.2.1998 at about 11.00 p.m. and it was completely damaged. The driver of the truck died on the spot and the cleaner also died before reaching the hospital. A report about this occurrence was lodged by the complainant on the same day at Police Station, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad and the complainant also informed the O.P. vide letter dated 20.2.1998 and requested to depute a Surveyor for inspection of the truck. The complainant after completing all the formalities also submitted the claim on 11.11.1998. However, the O.P. did not respond in respect of the request of the compl...

Groz Backert Asia Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(98)ECC412

2. Shri Sudeep Singh, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants pleaded that the appellants have imported cold rolled high carbon non-alloy steel strip under the bill of entry Nos. 153578 dated 3.12.96 and 153579 dated 3.12.96 wherein there was a difference in the quantity of steel strip shown in the bill of entries and corresponding invoices.The difference in the quantity of the steel strips was 4832 kgs. and difference in the quantity of steel wire was 1572.10 kgs. This difference between these two documents was said to be received less in the factory. The appellants pleaded that earlier this case came before the Tribunal and vide their Order No. A/181-182/01-NB(S) dated 31.1.2001, the case was remanded to the original authority with direction that the appellants should make elaborate submissions before the original authority as to how a mistake had occurred in mentioning the quantities of the imported goods in the respective bills of entry and the lower authorities after consid...

Shiv Cables and Wire Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC97

1. M/s. Shiv Cables and Wire Industries (India) have filed this against Order-in-Appeal No. 1/2004 dated 30.1.2004 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the enhancement of assessable value of the imported goods on the basis of PLATT price.2. Shri J.M. Sharma, learned Consultant submitted that the Appellants are importing recycled/reprocessed LDPE regularly at assessable value US $ 380 to US $ 390 Per MT; that during the period February, 2000 to October, 2000 they had filed 13 Bills of Entry for clearance of re-processed/recycled LDPE and declared the value US $ 380-390 per MT; that the Assistant Commissioner under Order-in-Original No. 1 /2002 dated 14.3.02 enhanced the value to Rs. 28,80,135 on the basis of PLATT price; that he, however, allowed the deductions of 41.5% from PLATT prices taking into account inferior quality of the goods imported by them; that the Commissioner (Appeals) also under the impugned order, the rejected their Appeals. He further submitted that the Re...

Commercial Engineers and Body Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(117)LC446Tri(Delhi)

1. The appellant has filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The appellant has engaged in the manufacture of bodies of motor vehicle and were clearing the same to Central Govt. Ordinance Factory.The bodies cleared by the appellants were used in the manufacture of motor vehicles by Central Govt. Ordinance Factory. The appellants were clearing the goods under Notification No. 64/95-CE. The benefit of notification was denied to the appellant on the ground that the notification exempts the parts of motor vehicles falling under Chapter 87 of Central Excise Tariff as the appellants were clearing the bodies of motor vehicles and not parts of the motor vehicles.3. The contention of the appellant is that the appellats were clearing bodies of motor vehicles falling under heading 87.07 of Central Excise and these bodies were used in the manufacture of motor vehicles by Central Govt. Ordinance Factory and these bodies are part of motor vehicles, there...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ivp Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(98)ECC134

1. The issue referred for consideration of the Larger Bench is whether "AA Nozzles" made of ceramic nozzles manufactured by M/s. IVP Ltd. are classifiable under Heading No. 69.01 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act or under Heading 85.15 of the Central Excise Tariff.2. Mrs. Krishna A. Mishra, learned Senior Departmental Representative, submitted that the respondents M/s. IVP Ltd. manufacture industrial ceramic nozzles and has sought classification under Heading 85.15 of the tariff on the ground that these are suitable for use solely with welding machines which fall under Heading 85.15; that the Appellate Tribunal in the case of NTB Hitech Ceramics v. CCE & Customs, Pune [2001 (127) E.L.T. 200 (Tri.)] has classified ceramic nozzles under 1 leading 85.15 on the ground that there is no exclusion of goods of Chapter 69 in Chapter 85 of the Tariff and as the impugned goods are for use solely or principally in the welding machine, they are classifiable under Heading 85.15; ...