Delhi Court December 2005 Judgments

Cce Vs. Gajra Gears Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This Rectification of Mistake application has been filed by the Revenue under Section 35-C(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 on the ground that while passing its final order on 21.06.2005 "it appears" that this Tribunal had not considered the supplementary/additional grounds filed subsequently by the appellants, CCE, Indore, on 21.5.2004. It is contended here that the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 20.02.2003 had wrongly allowed Modvat Credit on HSD prior to the amendment of Rule 57B on 2.3.1998, keeping in view the Apex Court's judgment in the case of CCE, Hyderabad v. ACC Ltd. While delivering the said judgment, the Apex Court had not taken into consideration the validation of the denial of credit of duty paid on HSD from 16.03.1995 onwards. It is also contended that while filing the appeal, the appellants had not appealed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this particular issue. As the said matter was not appealed, they filed supplementary/additional gr...

Anil Impex Vs. Designated Authority

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. By these applications the appellants have prayed for condonation of delay of 786 days in filing of the appeals against the impugned notification issued by the Central Government under Section 9A(1) and (5) of the Customs Tariff Act. It is stated in the applications for condonation of delay that the provisional assessments of anti-dumping duty were finalised only in May 2004 and the applicants had pursued the remedy before the Commissioner (Appeals). They challenged paragraph 2 of the impugned notification in Writ Petition No. C/16370-71/2004, which came to be decided on 4-4-2005. According to the applicants, in view of the said petition, they did not file the appeals against the impugned notification. However, in view of the directions of the High Court, they have now filed the appeals with a prayer to condone the delay in filing of the appeals.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the designated authority. He submitted that the petitions were filed before the High Court on 8-9-...

Mrs. Saroj Dassani Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)99TTJ(Delhi)345

1. This appeal by the assessee relates to the asst. yr. 2001-02. The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of export of garments and made-up articles.3. The second and fourth grounds are connected. They are directed against the assessment of the interest income of Rs. 5,10,008 under the head "Income from other sources". The assessee received the aforesaid interest in respect of fixed deposit receipts placed as margin money with the bank for the purpose of availing various credit facilities such as packing credit, etc. The assessee contended before the IT authorities that the interest income must be assessed under the head 'business' and consequently, the deduction under Section 80HHC should also be correspondingly allowed. The contention was rejected by the IT authorities who took the view that the interest has to be assessed under the head 'Income from other sources'. They further held that the interest income was not derived from the export activities and was, therefore,...

C.D. Sharma Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 126(2006)DLT639; 2006(86)DRJ492

Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment of learned single Judge dated 18th August, 1982 passed in W.P.(C) No. 664/74 titled C.D. Sharma v. MCD and Ors. By the impugned judgment the learned single Judge dismissed the aforesaid writ petition and has, inter alia, upheld the stand of the respondents that the seniority of the petitioner as Head Master is to be reckoned from the date Management of Bhartiya Middle School was taken over by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, i.e., with effect from 25.7.1963 and not from 16.7.1958, the date the appellant was appointed as a head master in the Bhartiya Middle School.2. The brief facts relevant for the adjudication of the present appeal are as under:-3. The appellant was appointed as Head Master in Bhartiya Middle School on 16.7.1958. The said School was recognised and aided by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The contention of the appellant is that this School was getting aid from government to th...

Satish Kumar and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 126(2006)DLT611

Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. The present writ petitions have been filed by the 14 casual labourers working at Swatantra Sangram Senghralaya, Red Fort, Delhi under the Archaeological Survey of India and is directed against order dated 30th December, 2003 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing the original application No. 2426/2003.2. By the impugned order the learned Tribunal dismissed the said original application, inter alia, holding that the same was not maintainable and was barred by principle of rest judicata in view of the decision of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 6900/2002 decided vide order dated 6th May, 2002. By this decision, this Court had allowed the writ petition filed by the Archaeological Survey of India and had set aside the earlier order of the Tribunal dated 14.10.2001 passed in O.A. No. 719/2001 holding that the petitioners herein were not entitled to regularisation under the 1993 scheme was framed by the Government of India in view of the decision of th...

Shri Rajan Suri and anr. Vs. the State and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2006Delhi148; 125(2005)DLT433; 2006(86)DRJ34

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The petitioners have filed a petition under Sections 276 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1995, (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') in respect of the estate of Late Shri Mela Ram son of late Shri Ghasita Mal last resident of 33, Pusa Rad, New Delhi, who died on 25.09.1978.2. Late Shri Mela Ram was the paternal grandfather of the petitioners and respondent No. 2, Shri Aman Suri. Late Shri Mela Ram had two sons and three daughters. The petitioners are grandsons from one son while respondent No. 2 is the grandson from the other son.3. Late Shri Mela Ram is stated to have executed a registered Will dated 26.12.1974 in favor of the petitioners and respondent No. 2. The original Will is not traceable but since the Will was registered, a certified copy of the Will has been placed on record. It is the case of the petitioners that they had no knowledge of the said earlier Will and it is only about five months prior to the filing of the petition that one Shr...

N. Ranga Rao and Sons Vs. Anil Garg and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 128(2006)DLT649; 2006(32)PTC15(Del)

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The colours of a rainbow are striking and universal. A combination of colours creates its own kaleidoscope. A colour is not the property of any individual, but colour combinations used in a particular pattern may create identification with a product.2. 'What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would also smell as sweet', said William Shakespeare. There is but still a tendency to copy the names because a rose is a rose. An amalgam of colour combinations, names and logos may create a total identification with a product and the allegation of copying the same has given rise to the present litigation.3. The plaintiff is a registered partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacture of incense sticks or agarbathies. Initially, the business was established as a proprietorship concern in 1948 by the father of the present partners of the plaintiff firm and is stated to be now a part of the RANGSONS GROUP started by late Shri N. Ranga Rao. The ...

Suresh Vs. the State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005CriLJ282; 126(2006)DLT176

Manmohan Sarin, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by appellant-Suresh against the judgment dated 18th July, 2003 and the order of sentence dated 19th July, 2003, by which appellant was convicted for offence under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000, in default of payment of fine, further SI for one year. Appellant was also sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years RI with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default, SI for six months for the offence under section 506-II IPC.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that a minor girl `A' aged about 8 years had been living with her brother-in-law Nand Kishore and her sister following the death of her parents.3. On 21st July, 2000, Nand Kishore, her brother-in-law gave her Rs. 2/- to purchase medicine for eye. `A' who had gone to purchase medicine did not return till late night. Nand Kishore lodged a missing person report at Police Post Prem Nagar and searched for her. On the next day, at about 1.30 a.m., Suresh the ...

Silkways Travels Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: I(2006)BC343(NULL)

ORDERJ.P. Singh, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 3.12.2001 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi summoning the petitioners under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, and also for quashing the order dated 25.10.2005 regarding notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. given to the petitioners.2. I have heard Mr. Ramesh Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners, on the point of admission, and have gone though the copies of the documents placed on the file.3. Vide order dated 3.12.2001, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate after examining the affidavit evidence of the complainant opined that there was a prima facie case under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and issued summons. Vide order dated 25.10.2005, accused Nos. 2, 5 and 6 were declared proclaimed offenders (PO's) and notices under Section 251 Cr.P.C. were given to other persons who pleaded not guilty and the matter has been adjourned to 31.1.2006 for evidenc...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Npi Packaging (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. A common issue of classification is the subject matter of these appeals. The items are EPS moulded products, EPS sheets and EPS blocks.These are insulation mouldings for freezer door, insulation drip tray and insulation pan buffle. The items are moulded out of thremocol to specified size and shape. These are placed inside the freezer door, drip tray and pan buffle. They perform the function of insulation.Revenue authorities contend that the items must be classified under tariff sub-heading 8418 which is for "parts of refrigerators, freezer and other refrigerator or freezer equipment". This contention is based on the fact that the mouldings are made for specific use in refrigerator doors etc. Revenue also contends that even though the items are not ready-to-fit parts of refrigerator, they will merit classification as parts of refrigerators since part of a part is also classified as part.2. The learned Counsel for the assessee points out that only parts that are identifiable as parts...