Delhi Court November 2006 Judgments

Vijay Kumar Kaul and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2009(93)DRJ37

Vipin Sanghi, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners, who are four in number, seek a writ or certiorari to quash the order dated 10.3.2005, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (the Tribunal) in OA No. 2082/2004 and the order dated 9.5.2005 passed in review application No. 102/2005 in the aforesaid original application filed by the petitioners.2. Petitioners also seek quashing of the order dated 21.7.2004 and 31.7.2004 passed by the respondents whereby the respondents rejected the claim made by the petitioners seeking anti-dating of their date of appointment to the year 1985 based on the judgment passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Union of India v. Parveen Kumar and Ors. in W.P (C) No. 1158/2001 dated 12.7.2001, on the ground that they are similarly placed as the respondents in the said petition, namely, Parveen Kumar and others.3. The facts in brief are that the petitioners ...

Universal Cables Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)8STJ364CESTATNew(Delhi)

1. This stay application is directed against the Order-in-Original dated 21-7-06.2. Considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. It is seen from the record that demand of duty has arisen out of the denial of Cenvat credit to the applicant on the courier services and internet services utilized by him for despatching of his final products and the internet services are used in the office. It can be seen that the internet services which are used by the applicant could be for doing research of final products manufactured in his factory and courier service is for the despatch of the final products.The definition of input service as indicated in Rule 2(1) on interpretation would indicate that availment of Cenvat credit on the courier services, for despatch of final products may be correct. As such, I find that the applicant has made out a strong, prima facie, case for waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax and penalty involved in this case. Accordingly, the ...

Uttaranchal Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. These stay applications and the appeals arise from the denial of benefit under Notification No. 50/2003, dated 10-6-2003 to the appellant-manufacturer M/s. Uttaranchal Steel Pvt. Ltd. 2. We have perused the record and heard both sides at length. It is seen that the appeals themselves are to be disposed of. Accordingly, we waive the requirement for pre-deposit and proceed with the appeals.3. The contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants is that denial of exemption is contrary to the terms of the exemption notification as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Uttaranchal in the case of S.S. Poles v. The Secretary, Industries Department and Ors. in Writ Petition No. 333/2005. It is also pointed out that in the case of M/s. Purshottam Industries Ltd., Roorkee, the Commissioner has taken a contrary view.4. The learned SDR would point out that notification did not cover the industrial growth centre, or Industrial Infrastructure Development centre etc. which ...

Anju Devi Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This appeal is directed against the order in original dated 2.11.99 which ordered absolute confiscation of the seized goods.2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the officers of the Central Excise, Aligarh searched the premises of one Shri Subhash Chand at Mathura and seized 37 silver bullions of different sizes weighing 367.701 kgs on the belief that these bullions are of foreign origin. The officers recorded the statement of Shri Subhash Chand who in his statement mentioned that the sard 367.701 kgs of silver bullions belonged to Shri O.K. Agarwal. Panchnama was drawn on the same day by the officers and the silver bullions were seized.The authorities requested a local assayer to check the purity of the silver bullions who gave a certificate that out of the said bullions, 3 bullions were of foreign origin and the purity of silver content is 99.9%. The officers recorded the statement of Shri D.K. Agarwal and issued show cause notices to both the persons propos...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Flair Filtration (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against order-in-appeal dated 25-5-06, which set aside the order-in-original dated 6-1-2006.2. The relevant fact that arises for consideration is that appellants were manufacturers of filter elements and were registered with the Central Excise department. They are exporting the excisable goods stuffed in the container in their factory and sealed by the Central Excise officers in their factory premises. During the course of audit, the audit party observed that the respondents were liable to pay Merchant Overtime Charges (MOT). Accordingly, the Revenue asked the respondent to pay such MOT charges which was not paid by the respondent. Show-cause notice was issued to the respondent demanding amount of MOT charges and for imposition of penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the amount and also imposed penalty. On an appeal, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order-in-appeal. Hence this appeal.3. The ld, DR appearing on behalf of the R...

Jcb India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(110)ECC478

1. In this appeal, preferred against the order of the Commissioner ordering recovery of Rs. 73,47,984/- as service tax after adjusting exempted amount of Rs. 1,22,46,640/- due to payment of R&D Cess, in view of the exemption Notification made on 16-12-02 issued under Section 93(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, ordering payment of interest on the said amount, imposing penalty of Rs. 500/-under Section 75A of the Act, and penalty of Rs. 100/- for every day under Section 76 of the Act not exceeding the amount of service tax amount payable, imposing penalty of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 77 and imposing penalty of Rs. 73,47,984/- under Section 78 of the Act, the appellant seeks interim stay of the impugned order.2. The learned authorised representative for the appellant contended that what was agreed to between the parties was not rendering of any service but it was transfer of technical know-how. The learned authorised representative placed reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in Comm...

Shri Satish Kumar S/O Shri Chaman Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through (th ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Validity of speaking order dated 31.08.2005 has been challenged in the present OA besides seeking directions to Respondents for re-engaging as well as regularizing applicant as per the policy discussed in the judgment dated 21.04.2005 in OA 1387/2004. Applicant also challenges his oral termination and seeks direction to respondents to consider him against future vacancy in preference to outsiders and juniors with consequential benefits.2. This is the second round of litigation. Earlier he had instituted OA No. 1387/2004 seeking a declaration that termination of his services by an order w.e.f. 20.01.2003 was illegal and to treat him in service from 21.01.2003 onwards as well as to consider him for future vacancy in preference to outsiders and persons with lesser services. His contention had been that he had worked on an average for 240 days in a single year. He was engaged as casual labourer on 11.05.1987 by respondents and worked till 20.01.2003. He had relied upon DOP & T OM d...

Shri Satish Kumar S/O Shri Chaman Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Validity of speaking order dated 31.08.2005 has been challenged in the present OA besides seeking directions to Respondents for re-engaging as well as regularizing applicant as per the policy discussed in the judgment dated 21.04.2005 in OA 1387/2004. Applicant also challenges his oral termination and seeks direction to respondents to consider him against future vacancy in preference to outsiders and juniors with consequential benefits.2. This is the second round of litigation. Earlier he had instituted OA No. 1387/2004 seeking a declaration that termination of his services by an order w.e.f. 20.01.2003 was illegal and to treat him in service from 21.01.2003 onwards as well as to consider him for future vacancy in preference to outsiders and persons with lesser services. His contention had been that he had worked on an average for 240 days in a single year. He was engaged as casual labourer on 11.05.1987 by respondents and worked till 20.01.2003. He had relied upon DOP & T OM d...

Ram Tirath Pandey S/O Shri Devi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

2. As regards the request of the applicant directed against an order passed by the respondents imposing upon him a major penalty on 27.2.2002 and also appellate order dated 24.9.2003, learned Counsel for applicant forgoes this part of relief and maintains this OA only on the question of treatment of the suspension period as not spent on duty except for pensionary benefits.3. A long history of the present case transpires that the applicant while working as Mate in the DMS was subjected to a disciplinary proceeding, which on culmination into a punishment of compulsory retirement, was assailed before the Tribunal in OA-1842/1994. An order passed by the Division Bench of this Tribunal on 5.8.1999 set aside of the order with liberty to the respondents to proceed further on violation of Rule 14(18) of CCS (CCA) Rules. Accordingly, on resumption of the inquiry on a disagreement and on receipt of the representation of the applicant, a major penalty imposed when affirmed in appeal also gives r...

Sunil Kumar S/O Shiv Prasad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Its

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Applicant, an extra departmental stamp vendor (EDSV, for short), impugns an action of respondents, whereby his services have been terminated without communicating him an order but publishing it in the newspaper on 26.4.2003. Reinstatement with all consequential benefits has been sought.2. A post of EDSV fell vacant at Sarai Labaria, Aligarh due to promotion of the incumbent and accordingly applicant was engaged on 7.4.1999 on provisional basis having fulfilled all the qualifications.In order to regularize the appointment, a requisition was sent to the Employment Exchange. Applicant has also submitted his candidature. On an enquiry applicant was selected for the post on 28.9.1999 and on completion of all formalities he had been working w.e.f. 7.4.1999. A memorandum dated 29.1.2003 declared applicant as surplus from the post which resulted in his relieving. He was also asked to work as GDS Packer in D.S. College sub Post Office. It transpired that due to less marks in matriculation, ...