Delhi Court September 2005 Judgments

Emkay Automobile Industries Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(190)ELT394TriDel

1. Heard both sides. The impugned order proceeds to deny Cenvat credit on the ground that the input received by the appellant was not liable to Central Excise Duty, notwithstanding the fact that duty had been paid on the consignments.2. The contention of the Id. Counsel is that after recovering duty from the manufacturer, it is not open to the Revenue to deny credit.3. Prima facie, there is merit in the appellant's contention.Requirement for pre-deposit is waived and stay is allowed till the disposal of the appeal....

Naresh Datt Sharma Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 124(2005)DLT322; 2005(84)DRJ390

R.S. Sodhi, J.1. Crl.Rev.P.182/2005 is directed against the order dated 15.3.2005 of the Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.6/2004 whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the appeal while modifying the sentence of imprisonment from two years to one year under Section 409 IPC as also under Section 477A IPC.2. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that he does not wish to challenge the order of conviction on merits. He confines his arguments only to the question of sentence. He submits that the petitioner is an old man and is a heart patient and admitted to hospital and has already lost his job. Counsel prays that the petitioner be given the benefit of Section 360 Cr.P.C.3. Heard counsel. Vide order dated 08.08.2005, a report of the Probation Officer was called for, which has been placed on record. From a perusal of the report it appears that the petitioner is educated, well behaved and sincere old man. The over all report about his conduct and behavior from his locality as we...

Filex Systems Vs. Rotomac Pens

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(31)PTC662(Del)

O.P. Dwivedi, J.1. Plaintiff company was incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. Plaintiff is manufacturing and selling variety of stationery products including presentation holders and envelopes, presentation clear books, clip files, ring binders, report files and covers, business card holders, expansion cases, document cases, CD Rom Holders and zipper wallets, conference holder which includes writing pads and pens, office stationery, adhesives, packaging, paper and paper products etc. In September, 1996, plaintiff adopted the trade mark SOLO in respect of stationery items of its manufacture and sale and has continuously and extensively used the same in the course of trade since March, 1997. It is pleaded that the goods manufactured and marketed by the plaintiff are of high quality and are identified and recognized as quality products originating from the plaintiff's source of manufacture and none else. The said trade mark SOLO is being identified and recognized by the...

Kola Shipping Limited Vs. Shakti Bhog Foods Limited

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR228(Delhi); 124(2005)DLT359; 2005(84)DRJ415

ORDERO.P. Dwivedi, J.1. The petitioner, above named, has filed this petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking interim measures in the matter of discharge of 1,100 metric tons of Sorghum loaded by the respondent company on board the petitioner's vessel M.V. Kapitan Nazarev at Kakinada port Andhra Pradesh.2. Briefly stated the facts leading to the petition are that an agreement (charter party) dated 18th July, 2005 was executed between the parties at New Delhi wherein the respondent agreed to load 13,500 metric tons of bagged Sorghum on board the petitioner's vessel (M.V. Kapitan Nazarev) at the port of Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh for carriage to and discharge at the port of Cotonou, Benin (East Africa). The said agreement provided for freight to be paid at the rate of US% 60.00 per metric ton and demurrage at the rate of US $8,000/- per day. Under the said agreement, all the disputes were to be referred to arbitration ...

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Vs. Bal Kishan

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Being persuaded by the advertisement in the newspapers given by the appellant that talk time of Rs. 2,000 shall be given on the mobile phone to the consumers, the respondent purchased a Trump Recharge coupon for Rs. 2,160 but he was given talk time of Rs. 1,500 only. Respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum seeking compensation for deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. The complaint of the respondent was allowed vide impugned order dated 20.1.2005, passed by the District Forum directing the appellant to provide full talk time of Rs. 2,000/- or refund the balance amount of Rs. 500 and also pay a sum of Rs. 2,000 as compensation for the mental agony and Rs. 500 as cost of litigation. 2. Through this appeal, the impugned order has been assailed mainly on the ground that there was no such scheme at the time the sim card was purchased and, therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. It is admitted that the...

New Industrial Security Force Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)2STR66

1. The appellant has challenged the order of the Commissioner (appeals) by which demand of Rs. 1,12,856/- made under Section 73 of Chapter-V of Finance Act, 1994, was confirmed along with imposition of penalty and Payment of interest.2. There is no dispute about the fact that the amount of service tax sought to be recovered includes salary of the security personnel.Section 67(V) of the Finance Act 1994, defines the value of taxable service in relation to service provided by a security agency to a client as under: - "Gross amount charged by such agency from the client for services rendered in connection with the security of any property or person, and includes services of investigation, detection or verification of any fact or activity including services of providing security personnel." The Commissioner (appeals) observed that it was clear from this definition that gross amount means the total amount billed to the client. According to him, "the total service tax was chargeable on the ...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Friends Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(193)ELT469TriDel

1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order in appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the confiscation of the goods which were found excess in the factory is set aside.2. The contention of the Revenue is that weighment done in the presence of partner of the assessee and who signed the verification chart. In this case on the visit by the Revenue officers, the 20.810 MT of Angles and Channels of different sizes were found to be in excess as mentioned in the statutory record. The adjudicating authority confiscated the excess found in factory. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order for confiscation on the ground that there was no actual weighment of the goods and difference was only calculated on the assumptions and presumptions basis.3. Revenue produced the copy of Panchnama, which only shows, on verification, the certain goods were found in excess. The total quantity of goods found in the factory is 535.870 M.T. The Revenue has not produced any evidence in this a...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. India Glycols Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

2. Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the benefit of MODVAT credit as capital goods was allowed on the following items: 3. The contention of the Revenue is that period in dispute is from September 94 to February, 95 and during this period the definition of capital goods as per the provisions of Rule 57Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules covers machines, machinery, plant, equipment, apparatus, appliances or tools etc. used or producing or processing of any goods or for bringing about any change or substance for the manufacture of the final products. The components spare parts; accessories of the machines/machinery etc. used in the manufacture of final product were also covered under the definition. The contention of the Revenue is that research and development equipment cannot be said considered to be covered under the definition of capital goods as this equipment is not used for manufacture or processing of the goods in rela...

Deepak Kumar Rajput Vs. the Council of Scientific and Industrial Resea ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 124(2005)DLT365; 2005(84)DRJ503; [2006(108)FLR172]; (2006)ILLJ930Del

Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. The petitioner herein has filed the present writ petition as against the order dated 29th October, 2004 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, dismissing the Original Application of the petitioner. In the said Original Application, the petitioner had prayed that the respondents be directed to pass a similar order as in identical matter i.e., OA No. 442/00, dated 1st September,2000 which had been confirmed by the Calcutta Bench of the Tribunal. The petitioner had also sought for a direction for grant of salary to him for the months of March, 2004 onwards and also to give him the benefit of the Casual Workers Absorption Scheme, 1990.2. The said Original Application was filed contending that the petitioner was appointed on contractual basis and was awarded work of data compilation and inputting for a period of six months with effect from 17.8.2001 vide order dated 5.9.2001 on a consolidated salary of Rs. 26,100/- to be paid in three equal Installments under...

State Through Cbi Vs. Gurpal Singh

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 124(2005)DLT282

Manju Goel, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of acquittal passed by Shri R.K. Gauba, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in the case of FIR No. 130/85 GRP Jaipur which was subsequently also registered as RC No. 9/85-CIU(P). Although the incident, on which FIR was registered, took place at Jaipur the trial was transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court on an application of the accused-respondent.2. The facts as disclosed in the charge-sheet submitted by the CBI, who eventually took over the investigation, can be narrated, sans details, as under:On 24.11.1985 at about 10.15 p.m. a dead body was noticed near Ajmer Pulia on the railway track in Jaipur by two Gangman at Jaipur Railway Station. A `Marg' at Seriall No. 35/85 was registered at police station GRP, Jaipur. From a card recovered from the body the same was suspected to be of Suresh Chand Gupta, Advocate. It was so identified by his relatives. Inquest report was prepared at 8.00 a.m. on 25.11.1985. A post-mortem examination was...