Delhi Court September 2004 Judgments

Electrolux Voltas Ltd. Vs. R.C. Mittal and Others

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. One Deep Freezer was purchased by the respondent for Rs. 8,950/- on 26.8.1998 from M/s. Hindustan Refrigeration Stores, Daryaganj. New Delhi. Since the Deep Freezer was not functioning properly, on 7.10.1998 the compressor was found defective and accordingly changed but in spite of this the defect continued resulting in change of thermostat on 11.11.1998 and the same machine was again replaced and adjusted but there was no improvement in the functioning of the freezer. Vide order dated 5.10.2000 the appellant as well as respondent No. 2 the dealer and M/s. Voltas Limited, the manufactuer were held jointly and severally liable and directed to supply a new deep freezer of same quality and type or refund the amount paid by the respondent along with interest of 18% p.a. 2. The perusal of the impugned order shows that none of the O.Ps. including the appellant appeared before the District Forum despite service of the notice of the complaint. According to the appell...

Airports Authority of India Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(117)LC166Tri(Delhi)

1. The common issue involved in these two appeals is whether a claim for refund of customs duty can be filed without challenging the assessment order made on Bill of Entry.2. Shri J.M. Sharma, learned Consultant submitted that Airports Authority of India imported one runway road marking machine under Bill of Entry dated 28.11.1996 which was cleared by them on payment of duty as per rate prescribed in the Customs Tariff; that Notification No.36/96-Cus dated 23.7.1996 (Serial No. 143) exempts navigation, communication, air traffic and landing equipments from payment of Customs duty in excess of 25% and full additional Customs duty provided Airport Authority of India produces a certificate from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation that such equipment is required to be used in the modernization of Airport facilities; that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation had issued a certificate dated 19.11.1996 and accordingly appellants were eligible for the benefit of the exemption notifi...

Cce Vs. Emtee Poly Yarn

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC121

1. The issue for determination in the these appeals filed by the Revenue against the orders passed by the Commissioner (Adjudication) Central Excise, Mumbai is whether the Commissioner was justified in holding that the Department has failed to prove under-valuation at the instance of the assessees as alleged in the show cause notices.2. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of PTY Twisted Yarn falling under Chapter sub-heading 54.02 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Intelligence was received that they were indulging in evasion of central excise duty by resorting to undervaluation and clandestine clearance of PTY; that they were clearing PTY from their factory gate at a very low value in the name of fictitious/or non-existing firms, while the goods were actually being cleared to godown at Bhiwandi etc. from where they were subsequently being sold to actual buyers at higher value. Show cause notices were therefore issued alleging that the respondents had i...

Cce Vs. Stainless India Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(117)LC572Tri(Delhi)

1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (appeals).2. The respondents are manufacturers of M.S. ingots, slabs and billets etc. falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. They were availing modvat credit on asbestos yarn and texti packing. They were denied modvat credit on asbestos yarn and texti packing under heading "capital goods". But on appeal, when the case was remanded back by the Tribunal to the Commissioner (appeals) to examine the same as inputs; Under the impugned order, the Commissioner (appeals) allowed the credit on asbestos yarn and taxti packing as inputs under Rule 57A of the Rules.3. Shri Randhir Singh, learned JDR appearing for the Revenue pleaded that asbestos/texti is not used in the manufacture of final products but it is used as wrapping on the pipe lines carrying gases. He therefore pleaded that these do not take part in or in relation to the manufacture of final product and, therefore, the order of Commissione...

Cc And Ce Vs. Havell'S Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC193

1. In these two appeals, filed by M/s. Havell's Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and the Revenue against a common Order-in-Appeal No. 326/03 dated 26.8.2003, the issue involved relates to allowing of deduction on account cash discount and turnover discount from the assessable value.2. Shri A.L. Malhotra, learned Consultant, submitted that M/s. Havell's Electronics Pvt. Ltd., manufacture electrical change over switch, electrical fuse unit, electrical board and pannel and parts thereof which are marketed through the dealers; that the Deputy Commissioner, under the Order-in-Original Nos. 41-49/2001 dated 28.9.2001, disallowed the deduction on account of cash discount and turnover discount on the ground that these discounts were paid at the end of the financial year and as such were not known before hand and were not uniformly given to each concern; that on appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned order, had allowed the deduction on account of cash discount holding that the scheme of c...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ravi Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT185TriDel

2. Shri V. Valte, learned SDR appearing for the Revenue pleaded that the respondents are manufacturing forged products and they have claimed Modvat credit on LDO as inputs in the manufacture of final products.The period involved in this case is from April, 1994 to December, 1994 and the amount of Modvat credit involved is Rs. 34,525/-. The Original Authority has allowed the Modvat credit on LDO under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the original authority. Now the department has come in appeal before the Tribunal on the ground that the LDO is capable of producing electricity and it can be used as an alternative source of power. It was only by an amendment vide Notification No. 11/95-C.E. (N.T.), dated 16-3-1995 that Rule 57A for the first time provided that input used for generation of electricity used within the factory of production for manufacture of final products or for any other purpose would be modvatable. The inclu...

Seksaria Biswan Sugar Factory (P) Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT363TriDel

2. Shri Kapil Vaish, learned C.A, appearing for the appellants pleaded that the Commissioner of Central Excise under the impugned order rejected their application for remission of duty of Rs. 3,45,487.50. He pleaded that the appellants are manufacturing sugar and molasses is generated during the process of manufacture which is stored in steel tanks. The molasses is under the physical control of the State Excise Department and it cannot be cleared from the factory without the permission from the State Excise department. The appellants are maintaining record of storage of quantity of molasses in each tank under their record MF-5 Part-11 as prescribed by the State Government and the consolidated quantity is recorded in MF-5 Part-I. The molasses stored in tank is liable to evaporation losses and the Central Board of Excise and Customs under Circular No. 261/15/CC/l /82/CX-8, dated 6-2-1982 as amended has prescribed that storage losses up to 2% may be condoned. In the present case, the Com...

Stainless India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT73TriDel

2. Shri O.P. Agarwal, learned C.A., appearing for the appellants pleaded that the appellants are receiving steel plates which arc used for maintenance and repair of platform where raw material is fed into converter. He pleaded that platform is essential for feeding raw material into converter. Therefore, it takes part in or in relation to the manufacture of the goods and the Modvat credit should be allowed on the steel sheets/plates which are used for repair and maintenance of platform. He relied on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Shri Ramakrishna Steel Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Madras [1996 (82) E.L.T. 575] and of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CCE, Chandigarh v.Zenith Papers [2002 (146) E.L.T. 518]. Relying on these decisions, he pleaded that steel sheets should be taken as an inputs and Modvat credit should be allowed on these sheets.3. Shri Randhir Singh, learned ]DR appearing for the Revenue pleaded that it is an admitted fact that steel sheets are being used...

Nem Chand Gupta Vs. Dy. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)2SOT37(Delhi)

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the assessing officer i.e. Dy, Commissioner of Income-tax Special Range-13, New Delhi dated 29-8-1997 passed under section 143(3)/I58BC for the block period from 1986-87 to 29-8-1996.In this case, a search and seizure operation under section 132(1) was carried out at the residential and business premises of the assessee and his family members on 29-8-1996. During the course of search, some incriminating documents besides cash and jewellery were found and seized. Consequent to the search, a notice under section 158BC was issued by the assessing officer to the assessee on 6-3-1997 in response to which a return of income in Form No. 2B was filed by the assessee declaring his undisclosed income for the block period at Rs. 4,50,000.The assessment, however, was completed by the assessing officer under section 143(3)/158BC by his impugned order assessing the undisclosed income of the assessee for the block period at Rs. 22,02,591. ...

Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sewa Ram S/O Shri Risal Singh and Pres ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 114(2004)DLT215

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Petitioner has challenged an order dated 3rd September, 2001 passed by the Industrial Tribunal whereby a domestic enquiry conducted by the Petitioner against the Respondent/workman was found to be vitiated for non-compliance with the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner has also challenged an order dated 24th December, 2002 by which the learned Tribunal, acting under the provisions of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act) declined to grant approval for removal of the Respondent/workman from service. 2. The allegation against the Respondent/workman was that on 25th June, 1993 while working as a conductor in a bus, he had accepted the fare from two passengers but did not issue them tickets. Teeka Ram (Traffic Inspector) and Raghunath (Assistant Traffic Inspector), members of a checking staff, discovered this when they routinely intercepted the bus. 3.The checking staff confronted the Respondent/workman with this situat...