Delhi Court March 2005 Judgments

Kehar Singh (Deceased) Through Represented by L.R. Smt. Jiwani and ors ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 119(2005)DLT189; 2005(81)DRJ370

B.C. Patel, C.J.1. These group of appeals are preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the award made by the reference court under Section 18 of the Act.2. A notification under Section 4, 6 and 17 was published on 31-10-1980 for acquisition of vast area of land of village Jaffarpur @ Hiran Kudna. Vide award No. 11/82-83 dated 3-5-1982 the Land Acquisition Collector determined the amount of compensation at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per bigha for A block land and Rs. 1000/- per bigha for B block land. The claimants moved the application under Section 18 of the Act and the reference court awarded compensation for land at the uniform rate of Rs. 10,750/. It is against this award the present appeals are preferred under Section 54 of the Act claiming higher compensation. 3. The appellants who are the claimants in appeal No. RFA 486 of 1989, which is taken as a lead case, were having 1/3rd share in the land bearing khas...

Sonu Vs. Mcd and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 120(2005)DLT400; [2006(106)FLR398]; (2005)IIILLJ70Del

ORDERVikramajit Sen, J. 1. Rule.The petitioner states that he is working as Safai Karamchari for a full working day since 1988 although he has been designated as a part-time worker. My attention has been drawn to the Office Order dated 5.2.1999 which prescribes the duty hours for part-time Safai Karamchari as follows:Ist shift -- 7.00 a.m. to 1 p.m.IInd shift -- 12.30 p.m. to 6.30 p.m.Single shift -- 7.30 a.m. to 2.00 p.m.2. The contention of learned Counsel for the respondent is that the petitioner is a part-time Safai Karamchari and works for only four hours in a day. This is strenuously opposed by learned Counsel for the petitioner. In my view it is not open to debate for the simple reason that the abovementioned Office Order stipulates the working hours which are certainly not four hours. On a perusal of the Office Order even though it does not show that there are eight hours of work but in view of Section 15 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 it is always open to the respondents to pr...

Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(100)ECC527

1. When the case was called none appeared for the appellants although date of hearing for today was noted by the advocate of the appellants and date was fixed on his own request. Since none has appeared for the appellants, therefore, I am taking up the case for decision on merits.2. Appellants are manufacturing and clearing hydrogen and nitrogen gases. Appellants have claimed that they are including the value of the cylinders in the assessable value of the gas. Show cause notice was issued to them that the cylinders are of returnable nature and cost of the same is not includible in the assessable value of the final products. Accordingly, the Modvat credit of Rs. 4,76,560/- during the period 4-8-1999 to 29-11-1999 was proposed to be recovered. The Appellate Authority after seeing their costs data allowed the Modvat credit of Rs. 4,02,560/- on hydrogen gases but disallowed Rs. 74,000/- taken on cylinders used for filling nitrogen gases as the appellants failed to substantiate that the c...

indus Communications Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(186)ELT336TriDel

1. Appellants are seeking stay of recovery of Rs. 24,337/- on the ground that the amount of service tax has been wrongly calculated by the lower authorities. They are giving advertisements through newspapers or periodicals on which they get 15% commission of the total value of the advertisements and they have paid service tax on 15% of the commission received by them. The case of the department is that the service tax should be paid on the full value of the advertisements.2. Shri S.P. Aggarwal, C.A., appearing for the applicants produced a circular issued by the Advertising Agencies Association of India to its members whereby it is clarified that "on all bills for advertisements in the print media (newspapers, periodicals, etc.) and the electronic media (Doordarshan, private TV channels, All India Radio, etc.) the service tax at 5% is leviable only on the agency commission component of the bill. In other words, 85% of these bills which constitute payments due on the above-mentioned me...

Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. C.C.E.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Duty demand of Rs. 3,44,667/- has been confirmed by disallowing cash discount as deduction from the value of cotton yarn and blended yarn manufactured and cleared by the appellants during the period August 1998 to June 2000.2. We have heard both sides. The appellants restrict their claim to those invoices bearing the endorsement of cash discount either typed or rubber-stamped. Since the cash discount was known to buyers prior to the removal of the goods by way of the endorsement on the invoices, the appellant are entitled to deduction of cash discount from the assessable value in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd. v. Union of India 1993 (65) ELT 186 (Bom) affirmed by the Apex Court in 1994 (73) ELT A58 and the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of H & R Jhonson (India) Ltd. v. Central Board of Excise and Customs 1998 (101) ELT 251 (Kar). We, therefore, hold that the appellants are entitled...

Mohd. Gujnabi Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(101)ECC136

2. The appellant filed this appeal against imposition of penalty of Rs. 50,000 each under Section 112 of Customs Act.3. The brief facts of the case are that on 31.3.2002 the appellants were apprehended at Railway Station and on their personal search currency notes of Rs. 500 denomination were recovered from the appellants. On investigation, it was found that these currency notes were counterfeit. Shri Mohd. Yasin appellant made a statement under Section 108 of Customs Act before the Custom Officers that these currency notes were purchased by them from on (sic) one Shri Bashir Bai. He also submitted that this counterfeit currency was brought from Kathmandu. After issuance of show-cause notice the currency was confiscated and personal penalties were imposed. The contention of the appellant is that no statement was made by the appellant and copy of statement was never supplied to the appellant. The contention is also that the appellant had not smuggled these currency notes from Nepal and...

Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(185)ELT336TriDel

1. The duty demand has followed a finding that the Self Priming Power Driven Pump manufactured by the appellant is required to be classified under sub-heading 8413.80 as against the classification under sub-heading 8413.11 made by the appellant at the time of clearance of the goods. The submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the dispute had come up earlier before this Tribunal and the Tribunal had remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) who had ordered classification under sub-heading 8413.11 (Order-in-Appeal No.269-CE/IND/APPL-II/2004, dated 28-6-2004); that no appeal was filed against that order-in-appeal. This position is not disputed by the learned SDR also.2. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, the present appeal is also required to be allowed. We do so, with consequential relief, if any, to the appellant....

Ok Play India Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(102)ECC269

1. Appellants are manufacturer of plastic toys. They are sending the plastic granules for pulverization to their job worker M/s. Rapid Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. Some of the toys manufactured by appellants are dutiable and some are exempted from duty. The Department has issued show cause notice to the job worker demanding duty on the pulverized plastic granules on the grounds that these are being used in the manufacture of exempted toys. The case against the job worker was finally dropped by the Tribunal under Final Order No. A/634/04-NB(C) dated 2.9.04 holding the demand as time barred. The present appeal is against the imposition of penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the appellants.The penalty was imposed on the appellants by the original Authority on the ground that M/s. O.K. Play India Ltd. sent the inputs under 57F(2) challans and received the excisable goods on the said challans without payment of duty, knowing fully well that they had not fulfilled the conditions of Notification N...

J.K. Paper Limited Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(100)ECC337

1. The appellant is a manufacturer of paper. It takes Modvat credit in respect of inputs used in such manufacture. Pulp emerges at the intermediate stage in the manufacture of paper. The appellant cleared a small portion of that pulp by way of sale or otherwise, while most of the pulp was captively used in the manufacture of paper. The appellant was keeping separate accounts of inputs used in the manufacture of captively consumed pulp and the pulp which is sold. The quantity of inputs used in both the uses was being worked out on the basis of input-output norm. There was no use wise (sic) separate storage of inputs. Under the impugned order, the appellant has been directed to pay 8% of the value of the pulp sold in terms of Rule 57CC of the Central Excise Rules. This rule is applicable to cases where no separate inventory is kept in respect of inputs used in dutiable and non-dutiable goods.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the Commissioner was not righ...

Jaiswal Equipments and Holdings Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(185)ELT306TriDel

1. M/s. Jaiswal Equipments and Holdings Pvt. Ltd. have filed this Appeal against Order-in-Appeal Nos. 17-18/2004 dated 15-1-2004 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the refund claim filed by them.2. Shri Shekhar Vyas, learned Advocate, mentioned that the appellants entered into the contract dated 3-12-1996 with Railway Board for supply of 2 lakhs rail clips at the rate of Rs. 25.10 per piece and delivery was to be completed by 2-12-1997; that due to delay in supply of the goods, they made an application for extension of delivery period which was granted from time to time up to 31-3-2001 on the condition that the rate of supply would be the lowest of the three tenders to be supplied suppler by railway; that under tender No. 3C-137/99 floated by the Railway Board, the supply rate was finalized at rate Rs. 20.60 per piece which was intimated to the Appellants by Railways on 31-5-2001; that pending the finalisation of new rates, they had supplied the impugned goods at the old...