Delhi Court July 2005 Judgments

Lubrizol (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Designated Authority

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(187)ELT402TriDel

1. Brief Facts : Both these appeals raise identical issues and, therefore, have been argued together for common disposal. Both the sides have referred to the record of appeal No. C/41/2003 during their arguments.2. These appeals have been preferred against the final findings dated 5-9-2002 of the Designated Authority and the Notification dated 31-10-2002 issued by the Central Government in the exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (5) of Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and Rules 18 and 20 of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, imposing anti-dumping duty on imports of Poly-Iso-Butene (PIB) at the rate which is equivalent to the difference between the amount specified in column 4 of the table (non-injurious price) and the landed value in US Dollars per MT of such imported PIB exported from the countries specified in column 2 of the ta...

Mahabir Steels Tubes Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Heard both sides. Appellants filed this apeal against the order in appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Brief facts of the case are that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Pipes. The Revenue authority visited the manufacturing premise of the appellant on 22.01.2001. On verification of the stock, it was found that there was a shortage of 14.700 M.T M.S.Pipes and there is also the shortage of 5.0500 M.T. of M.S. Scrap. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant demanding duty and for imposing of penalty. The Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand-imposed penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants.3. The contention of the appellants is that entry made in the RG-I record showing balance of the final product and M.S. Scrap made in haste and due to negligence of their concerned employee, the actual production of M.S. Pipes and scrap was to mention correctly. The submission is that in fact there is no shortage of the...

ircon International Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)STR46

1. The appeal is directed against demand of service tax of about Rs. 12 lakhs and penalties. The demand is in regard to the appellant's receipts in connection with the construction of a hanger for Air India at Mumbai. The lower authorities have held that appellant's role in the construction of the hanger was that of consulting engineer and attracted levy of service tax under the heading "consulting engineering service". According to the order, appellant is an consulting engineer and Air India the client in regard to the hanger construction.2. The contention of the appellant is that the role of the appellant in the hanger project is one of getting the construction project executed and not one of rendering any consultancy service. During the hearing of the case, learned Counsel for the appellant has taken us through various provisions in the contract to show that appellant was not rendering any engineering consultancy service and the project was basically one of construction and the app...

Varun Associates Vs. Army Welfare Housing Organisation

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR39(Delhi); 2005(83)DRJ500

Swatanter Kumar, J.1. The Army Welfare Housing Organisation is a society registered with the Registrar of Societies, Delhi under the Societies Registration Act 21 of 1860 with its head office located at South Hutments, Kashmir House, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi. The object of the society is chiefly to promote and provide dwelling units to the servicing, retired army personnel and their widows all over India on 'No profit No Loss Basis'. In normal course of its business the Society invited tenders for the execution of the work under the name and style of External Electricals Works for Army Welfare Housing Organisation at Sector 68, Mohali on 24th January, 2003. The Petitioner M/s Varun Associates, a partner firm having its registered office at A-37 (basement) Nirman Vihar, Delhi submitted its tender for that work which was accepted by the Society. The acceptance of the tender was communicated by the Society to the Contractor. The date of commencement of the work was 12th March, 2003 and comp...

Ram Pat and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(83)DRJ676

B.C. Patel, C.J.1. On the last date of hearing we heard the parties at length and pronounced judgment on certain issues. The order passed is as under :'1. 'Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued on 13.11.1959 in respect of the land in question situated in village Lado Sarai. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 16.5.1996 which resulted in award No. 38/80-81. The Land Acquisition Collector fixed different values of land in respect of different categories being Category 'A', 'B', 'C' and 'D'.2. The appellant aggrieved by the same preferred reference under Section 18 of the said Act and in respect of categories 'B' and 'C' some enhancement was granted.3. The dispute really is not confined only to the quantum of compensation but also to entitlement of the appellant in view of the fact that in pursuance of the order of Revenue Assistant the land stood vested in the Gaon Sabha. Both the Land Acquisition...

Seema Kumari Vs. Jawaharlal Nehru University and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 123(2005)DLT5; 2005(84)DRJ192

Gita Mittal, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to give admission to her for undertaking the direct Ph.D. programme in the Group of Comparative Politics and Political Theory in the School of International Studies of the Jawaharlal Nehru University. In the alternative, the petitioner seeks a direction to the University to grant her extension of time to enable her to complete her remaining research/Ph.D. on the ground that she has completed substantial portion of the work.2. So far as the factual matrix is concerned, there is no real dispute. It has been contended that in the year 1996, the petitioner was successful in qualifying the entrance test and got herself enrolled for the M.Phil. programme in the South Asia Division, i.e., Centre for South Central Sought East Asian and South West Pacific Studies in the School of International Studies of the Jawaharlal Nehru University. She completed her M.Phil in the year 1998 under th...

R.K. Mehra Vs. State and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 123(2005)DLT355; 2005(31)PTC241(Del)

R.S.Sodhi, J.1. Criminal Revision Petition 105/2001 is directed against the order dated 04.11.2000 of the Metropolitan Magistrate, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondents of the charge under Section 63 of The Copyright Act, 1957 and Section 420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code.2. Brief facts of the case as noted by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate are as follows:-'...the prosecution has alleged against the accused persons that on receipt of complaint of Shri R.K. Mehra of M.S. Rupa & Co. on 13-9-91 regarding piracy of original literary works of the original author, copyright of which subsisted with the complainant, were being illegally and clandestinely reproduced being sold by M/s Modern Book Depot 22-A/1, Bhola Nath Nagar, Shahdara Delhi in conspiracy with M/s Zed Paper bags, Lawrence Road, Delhi. On this information a raiding party was organized and Mr.Vijay Kumar Sharma was deputed as decoy customer and was asked to purchase five books of PAN BOOKS and COLLINE...

Suresh Kumar Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 123(2005)DLT344; 2005(83)DRJ690

R.S. Sodhi, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Cr. Appeal No. 64/04, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the appeal, arising out of the judgment and order dated 4.2.2004 and 18.9.2004 respectively passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi.2. With the assistance of learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Counsel for the State I have gone through the material on record. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that she is not in a position to challenge the order of conviction on merit. I, thereforee, confirm the order of conviction. However, on the question of sentence, it is argued by learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the occurrence is of 1991 and the Petitioner has already suffered the rigors of trial for over 14 years. She submits that the Petitioner has undergone more than half of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him. She further submits that the fine imposed has already bee...

Sudesh Kumari Vs. State and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 123(2005)DLT382; II(2005)DMC539; 2005(83)DRJ682

R.S. Sodhi, J. 1. This Revision Petition is directed against the judgment dated 1st August, 2000, of the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, in Sessions Case No. 276/1997, whereby the learned Judge has held that the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of any of the accused persons and thereby acquitted the accused - Ashok Kumar, Rajender Prasad, Bimla and Suda of an offence under Section 328/498-A/406/34 IPC.2. The brief facts of the case, as has been noted by the Additional Sessions Judge, are as under:'As per the prosecution story the parents of complainant Sudesh Kumari performed her marriage with accused Ashok on 21.6.95 and at that time sufficient dowry articles were given in marriage. After four months of the marriage a demand of scooter was raised by husband Ashok, mother in law Gando Devi, Nanad Sudha, Jethani Bimla and Jeth Rajinder Prasad, who used to give beatings to her in order to press demand of dowry. It is also in allegations that on 13.5.96 prosecutrix was tur...

Mr. Jagdish Prasad Sharma Vs. Mastermind Publishing House

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(31)PTC243(Del)

Swatanter Kumar, J. 1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for a decree of permanent injunction against the defendant, its employees, agents, servants, restraining them from threatening the plaintiff of groundless and illegal threats of civil and criminal proceedings including search and seizure etc. by the police and to serve upon them notices, circulars etc. Further the plaintiff had prayed for a decree of declaration praying that the word `Mastermind' in respect of books or publications or guides or help books or printed material, is laudatory, descriptive and non-distinctive in nature and the same is incapable of any monopoly in favor of one person or the other for the purposes of registration or otherwise. 2. The above relief is prayed for by the plaintiff on the premise and as is evident from the averments made in the plaint that the plaintiff is carrying on his business of publication of books, help books, guide books and question banks on the basis of curriculum of various...