Delhi Court September 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.
Texplas India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(186)ELT562TriDel
1. M/s. Texplas India Pvt. Ltd. have filed the present appeal Order-in-Appeal No. 199/2003 dated 14-8-2003 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the demand of duty against them.2. Shri P.R. Mullick, Chartered Accountant, submitted that the Appellants manufacture, inter alia parts of arms & ammunition falling under Heading 93.06 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act which is not covered by the SSI Exemption Notification No. 9/2001; that the Notification No. 9/2001 was amended by Notification No.47/2001-C.E., dated 1-10-2001 by which a proviso was inserted providing that the clearance for home consumption of goods falling under Heading 93.06 or 93.07 between 1-4-2001 and 30-9-2001 shall be taken into account while computing the aggregate value of clearances at nil rate of duty under Sl. No. 1 of the table for the financial year 2001-2002; that after that amendment the department has confirmed the demand of duty in respect of other goods cleared by them covered...
Gna Udyog Limited Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT153TriDel
1. In this appeal against the impugned order-in-appeal, the appellants have only challenged the imposition of penalty of Rs.50,000/- on them.2. The learned counsel has contended that no penalty could be imposed as payment of duty by four cheques during the period in dispute was in order especially when cheques were encashed. Therefore, no penalty could be imposed. He has placed reliance on the ratio of law laid down by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, jaipur Vs.Grenus Overseas Electronics Ltd.- 2003 (155) ELT-541.3. On the other hand, learned JDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order.5. From the record it is evident that during the year 95-96, 96-97 and 97-98 the appellants issued four cheques for Rs. 3,00,000/-, Rs. 2,00,000/-, Rs. 6,00,000/- and Rs. 6,00,000/- in favour of the Chief Accounts Officer for discharge of duty and took credit in PLA immediately on the date of issuance of the cheques. No doubt the cheques were cleared by the bank but afte...
Arya Filaments (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT140TriDel
1. The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Arya Filaments (P) Ltd., is whether the benefit of Notification No. 3/2001-CE., dated 1-3-2001, is available in respect of vacuum gas filled bulbs of retail price not exceeding Rs. 20/- per bulb.2. Shri A. Upadhayay, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants, are manufacturing tungsten wire and tungsten filament and vacuum gas filled bulbs falling under Chapters 81 & 85 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act; that they availed of the Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of tungsten filament/tungsten wire; that since 1999-2000, they also started manufacturing vacuum gas filled bulbs for which a separate hall had been constructed by them in the same factory premises; that they discharged duty liability whenever tungsten wire/tungsten filament are captively cleared to their bulb unit; that as they were paying Central Excise duty on tungsten filament/tungsten wire; whi...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Viman Chemical (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT208TriDel
1. The common issue is involved in these appeals, therefore, are being taking up together.2. The Revenue filed these appeals against orders-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).3. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of specialty solvent chemical of different grades. The respondent claimed the classification under sub-heading 2710.90 of Central Excise Tariff as other 'Petroleum Oil'.4. A show cause notice was issued to the respondents to classify the products as Special Boiling Point Spirits falling under sub-headings 2710.11, 2710.12 and 2710.13 of Central Excise Tariff Act. The adjudicating authority confirmed the classification as proposed in the show cause notice. On appeal filed by the respondents, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal on the ground that there is no evidence to show that the product in question by itself or in admixture with any other substance which is suitable for use as fuel in spark ignition eng...
Giriraj Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC481
1. None has come present for the appellants, as they have prayed decision of their stay application as well as appeal on merits through the letter receiving in Registry on 13.9.2004.2. The appellants have already deposited Rs. 35,000 vide TR-6 challan dated 9.9.2003. That deposit, in may view, in sufficient for hearing of the appeal. Therefore the pre-deposit of the balance duty amount and penalty is waived and recovery stayed during the pendency of the appeal.3. Since the appellants have also prayed for disposal of their appeal on merits, therefore, I proceed to decide the appeal after hearing the learned JDR.4. I have gone through the record and its perusal shows that the demand of Rs. 4,147 and Rs. 17,181 had been confirmed against the appellants on account of shortage of finished goods namely hydraulic pipe fittings and hydraulic pipe, rubber hose and steel rods. Penalty of Rs. 5,000 has also been imposed on them. It is also evident from the record that stock of rubber hose assemb...
Jalan Steel Works (P) Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC758
1. In this appeal filed by M/s Jalan Steel Works (P) Limited, the issue involved in whether the bar of unjust enrichment is applicable to the refund of Central Excise duty sought by them.2. Shri Lajja Ram, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants manufacture re-rolled products of non-alloy steel in respect of which duty was discharged during the relevant period under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act; that they had changed the value of "d" (the pinion center distance of the pinion stand in millimetre), after the initial determination of their capacity by the Commissioner; that their request to redetermine the annual capacity of production on account of change in the value of the "d" was rejected by the Commissioner under Order-in-Original dated 24.5.2000; that on appeal filed by them the Tribunal, vide final Order No. A/129/133/2001-NB(D) dated 14.2.2001, allowed their appeal with consequential relied, if any; that consequently they had filed refund claim on 22.8.2002 for Rs...
ito Vs. Prakash Chand Lunia
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)1SOT392(Delhi)
This appeal is preferred by the revenue against the order of learned CIT (A), XXII, New Delhi dated 28-2-2001 and its grievance is projected in the following solitary ground raised therein : "Based on facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) has erred in directing the assessing officer to add the value of silver and cash to the income of the assessee on protective basis after having reached to the conclusion that the seized silver and cash belong to the assessee." The relevant facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are as follows. The assessee is an individual deriving income from the business of purchase and sale of silver. A search was carried out by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi on 6-1-1992 at factory near Village Surana. During the course of search, cash of Rs. 2,25,000 and silver weighing 5301.84 kgs. valued at Rs. 4,18,80,933 were found besides one register and three note books. During the course of search, statement of Shri Bishan Dayal, P...
Go-go International and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: 113(2004)DLT577; 2004(77)DRJ145; 2005(191)ELT51(Del)
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The petitioners being garment exporter and an association of garment exporters respectively are aggrieved by the quota policy instruction and circular imposing conditions for transfer of quota under the Garment Export Quota Policy.2. The EXIM Policy covers the issue of exports and specifically for garment export Garment Export Entitlement Policy (GEEP) is formulated. The Policy is stated to derive its legislative sanction from the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the said Act'). A notification was issued dated 12.11.1999 bringing into force the GEEP for 2000-2004 and the entitlements were permitted to be transferred, which were valid till 30th September of the year and could be extended till 31st December on payment of Bank Guarantee (BG) / Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) at specified rates. There are various categories of quotas including Past Performance Entitlement (PPE), Non-Quota Export Entitlement (NQE) a...
Basant Projects Ltd. Vs. D.D.A. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: 114(2004)DLT779; 2004(77)DRJ510
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. On 8.8.2001 DDA conducted an auction of commercial plots. One such plot being No.10(CS) Sector-7, Pocket E-I, Rohini, admeasuring 1717 sq. mtrs. was put to auction. Terms and conditions notified to the bidders, the following:-2. Bidding at auction and submission of application(i) ........(ii) The bid shall be for the amount of the premium offered for the perpetual lease hold rights in the plot. The plot is being auctioned on 'as is where is basis'. It is presumed that the intending purchaser has inspected the site and familiarised himself with the prevalent site conditions in all respects before giving the bid.(iii) .........(iv) .........(v) .........(vi) .........(vii) .........(viii) In case the payment is not received within the stipulated period indicated in the demand letter, the auction bid shall automatically stand cancelled and the 25% earnest money shall stand forfeited, without any notice.2. As per the terms of the auction, highest bidder was to depos...
Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and anr. Vs. Naval Kishore Goyal ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Reported in: 2004(29)PTC421(Del)
Vikramajit Sen, J.IA No. 8382/20031. This application has been filed by the Plaintiff for exemption from carrying out the second Local Commissioner ordered on 11.7.2003. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. IAs No. 7017/2002 & 9293/20032. By these Orders 1 shall dispose of the Plaintiffs application for an ad interim injunction (IA No. 7017/2002) and 1A No. 9293/2003 (Order XXXIX Rule 4) filed by the Defendant.3. On the first date of hearing, on 11.7.2003, the defendants, their directors, officers, servants, agents and representatives had been restrained from manufacturing, selling, and offering for sale pharmaceutical preparations under the trademark FENTEL or any other mark which may be deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs trademark ZENTEL.4. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff has reiterated the submission that the trademark ZENTEL is an invented word, having no dictionary meaning, and thus possession a highly distinctive character. ZENTEL has been registered in the name of the P...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »