Delhi Court October 2005 Judgments

Crown Steel Co. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The applicant filed this application for restoration of the appeal on the ground that the Hon'ble Supreme Court on appeal filed by them vide order dated 15-7-2005 directed them to deposit the amount in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal and applicant had complied with the condition of the stay order.2. The Id. SDR pointed out that the applicant had not filed any appeal on the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order dated 15-7-05 is not in respect of the present applicant. On pointing out this, the Id. Counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant submitted that they had filed a Misc. application for amending this ROA application on the ground that there is no order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of applicant. The applicant had not approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court.3. In this case the applicant filed this application for restoration of the appeal. The appeal filed by the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn at the request made by the applicant. Now, the applicant fi...

Cce Vs. Moser Baer India Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

2. The Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) while confirming the demand of Service Tax proportionate amount into two parts i.e. 50% towards installation, commissioning and final acceptance test and 50% towards technical assistance. The Revenue filed this appeal against this finding. The contention of the Revenue is that this proportionate against the evidence on record and that the respondents are liable to pay Service Tax in respect of the entire amount.3. The Revenue also made a prayer in the appeal for enhancement of penalty.4. The respondent brought to our notice that the Tribunal in the appeal filed by the appellant against the same impugned order set aside the demand on the ground that prior to 16.8.02 the appellants are not liable to pay any Service Tax and set aside the demand of Service Tax, the decision of the Tribunal reported as 2005 TIOL 786.5. As the demand has alread...

Shivratan Advertisers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). In this case, the appellant is an advertising agency. The appellants are collecting amounts from their customers for making advertising in the newspapers. The appellants are retaining 15% of the gross amount charged from their customer and 85% of that amount was further paid to the newspapers in which the advertisement is made. The Revenue is charging Service Tax at the amount which is retained by the appellant as advertising agency.3. The only contention of the appellant is that they are not retaining 15% of the gross amount received from the customers 85% they are paying to the newspapers and difference of the 15% retained by them, some amount they are giving to their customers as rebate. The contention is that the Service Tax is to be payable on the exact amount received from their customer as commission. As the appellants are not retaining 15% of the amount, therefore, they are not...

Indian Telecom Service Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(3)SLJ196CAT

1. By virtue of these applications has been assailed respondents' O.M.A-11013/l/2005-Admn.II(ITS)/TTS/TFS dated 24.3.2005 (Annexure P-l in O.A. No. 1963/2005) whereby option has been called for absorption of Group 'A' officers of Indian Telecom Service (ITS)/Telegraph Traffic Service (TTS)/Telecom Factory Service (TFS) in Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL)/Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), alleging that respondents have resorted to enforce illegal conditions on applicants coercing them into exercising options for absorption in MTNL/BSNL.2. All these O. As. have raised more or less identical facts and issues and have, therefore, been clubbed together for disposal by the present common order. For the sake of brevity, the facts have been culled out from O.A. No. 1963/2005.3. Apart from seeking quashment of O.M. dated 24.3.2005 applicants have further sought directions to respondents to formulate a just, fair and comprehensive policy for absorption of the applicants in BSNL or MT...

Royal Airways Ltd. Vs. Additional Director of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)98ITD259(Delhi)

1. These 19 appeals have been filed by the assessee on 29th Nov., 2004 against the consolidated order of the learned CIT(A)-XXIX, New Delhi dt. 24th Sept., 2004 in relation to 19 appeals filed by the assessee under the provisions of s. 248 of the Act.2. In these appeals, the assessee has taken 7 grounds of appeal. Some of the grounds of appeal have been further divided into several sub-divisions. During the course of hearing before us the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that mainly there were two issues in these appeals, viz., (i) condonation of delay in filing the appeals before the learned CIT(A), and (ii) the contention of the assessee that it was not liable to deduct any tax at source. The learned Counsel argued that the second issue already stood covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by several earlier decisions of the Tribunal.3. Facts of the case leading to these appeals briefly are that the assessee, a domestic company, started airline operations in...

Sharad Chandra Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

2. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby Rs. One lakh under Section 112 of Customs Act was imposed on the appellant.3. The brief facts of the case are that on 16.12.95, the Revenue officers at Jhansi railway station recovered 1309 gms. of gold biscuits of foreign marking from the possession of Sh. Hari Kishan Soni. Shri Hari Kishan Soni in his statement submitted that he was carrier of Sh.Satish Kumar Verma and the gold in question was purchased from appellant. As the follow up action the residential premises of the appellant was searched but nothing recovered. The adjudicating authority confiscated the gold and imposed penalty of Rs. One lakh each on Sh. Hari Kishan Soni and on the present appellant.4. The contention of the appellant is that there is no evidence on record to show that the appellant is dealing in smuggled gold. There is only one statement of Sh. Hari Kishan Soni whose possession the gold was recovered. There is no other corroborative evide...

S.K. Sharma and ors. and Mrs. Radha Vs. Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sangathan

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(1)JCR116

1. Having founded on similar facts involving an identical question of law, both these Original Applications are being disposed of by this common order.2. In these Original Applications, Post Graduate Teachers (for short, PGTs) of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangthan (for short KVS) have assailed respondents' orders whereby their deputation as Principal has been terminated and they have been repatriated to their substantive post of PGT. Orders passed by respondents terminating the services of the applicants, who had been regularized, have also been assailed.3. Applicants, who are undisputedly PGTs working in different streams; in the wake of the Recruitment Notice published by the KVS inviting applications on all India basis to fill up the posts of Principal by deputation and also by direct recruitment to clear the backlog vacancies of SCs/STs, applied for the same. The notification inter alia included, as a condition precedent in the matter of selection, written examination and viva voce with ...

R.K. Soni Vs. Ito

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)6SOT292(Delhi)

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 21-7-2003 pertaining to the assessment year 1997-98 arising out of the order of the assessment passed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The assessee has preferred multiple grounds of appeal in its memo of appeal but the grievance of the assessee is on a single issue relating to the action of the Commissioner (Appeals) in sustaining the stand of the Assessing Officer that the sum of Rs. 15 lakhs was assessable in the hands of the assessee as deemed dividend in terms of section 2(22)(e) of the Act.The facts relevant for consideration of the impugned proceedings can be summarized as follows. The assessee is an individual who filed his return of income for the assessment year under consideration declaring an income of Rs. 7,80,454. The assessment has been framed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) at an income of Rs...

Bretton Woods Finlease Ltd. and anr. Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(2)CTLJ236(Del); 125(2005)DLT69; 2005(85)DRJ207

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. Rule.2. There are no disputed questions of fact as counsel for the parties have fully argued their respective cases on the basis of documents available on the record. I, thereforee, proceed to finally dispose of the Writ Petition.3. The Prayers in this Petition are for the issuance of a Writ, Order or Direction quashing the impugned Order dated 27.8.2004 and directing the Respondents to immediately release a sum of Rs.35,56,794/- to the Petitioner. The impugned Order reads as follows:'Sub: Call Centre-1500-Tender Enquiry No.AGM (Admn.) Sales-S/NTF/CC/2002-03 Reference this office letter No.GM (Sales)/MTNL/1500-Call Centre/2004-05/28 dated 12.8.2004 and your reply thereto dated 19.8.2004. The reply furnished by you has been examined in detail and has been duly considered. It is regretted that you have not even cared to address the main issues and have rather chosen to reiterate your earlier know stand on the issue of compliance with the provisions of Labour Laws. By...

Delhi Jal Board Vs. Vijay Kumar Goel and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR499(Delhi); 124(2005)DLT712; 2005(85)DRJ225

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. 1. The application for condensation of delay in refiling has not been filed. It is, however, pointed out to learned counsel for the petitioner that even assuming this delay in refiling is condoned, the objections cannot be entertained for the reasons set out in the Order dated 22.10.2005.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to urge, rightly so, that the objections as framed do not incorporate specifically the plea regarding the interpretation of escalation clause 10CC. The grounds which have been taken are all on the issue of re-appreciation of evidence, which cannot be gone into in these proceedings. The only other ground is that the Award is contrary to the terms of the Agreement. In this behalf, learned counsel for the petitioner states that this plea should be considered as the plea in respect of interpretation of escalation clause 10CC. In my considered view, this is not possible. If there was a plea to be taken by the petitioner impugning the Award d...