Delhi Court August 2006 Judgments

Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Dusad Transformer and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(110)ECC481

1. The common issue is involved in both the appeals, therefore, are being taken up together.2. Revenue filed these appeals against the order in appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the demand of Service Tax was dropped that respondent had not provided any service of maintenance and repair.3. The contention of the Revenue is that as per the agreement entered between the respondents and Electricity Board shows that respondents provided maintenance and repair services. On the other hand, the contention of the respondents is that the contract is not for maintenance and repair but it is only a rate contract and respondents relied upon the Board Circular dated 27-7-2005. It is submitted by the respondent that prior to 16-6-2005, repair of servicing carried out under a contract other than maintenance contract or agreement was not entered within the purview of Service Tax.4. We pursued the agreement in question. It is a work contract. The contract provides rates for repair of t...

Forum of Acrylic Fibre Vs. Designated Authority

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Facts: Both the appeals though against different final findings and notifications have been preferred by the same domestic industry and are argued together in view of common legal issues involved.2. Customs Appeal No. 848 of 2005-AD has been preferred by the domestic industry under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 against the impugned notification dated 19th May, 2005 rescinding the earlier notification dated 9-10-2002 by which anti-dumping duty was imposed on the subject goods, accepting the final findings of the designated authority in its mid-term dated 7th April, 2005, recommending withdrawal of anti-dumping duty on imports of acrylic fibre originating in or exported from the subject countries, namely, U.K., Germany, Bulgaria and Brazil.2.1 On the basis of a written application from the International Rayon and Synthetic Fibres Committee (CIRFS), Brussels on behalf of the exporters from U.K. and Germany for review of anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of the subject ...

National Productivity Council Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. M/s. National Productivity Council, Chandigarh is in appeal against the finding that they were rendering 'Management Consultancy Service', during the period October 1998 to August 2001 and, therefore, they are liable to Service Tax,- in regard to the charges collected by them. The accompanying stay application seeks waiver of requirement for pre-deposit of tax demanded along with penalty.3. The contention of the appellant is that it is a registered society and its experts are mostly engineers and the advise/consultancy rendered by them is in the area of scientific/engineering matters. It is contended that such service cannot be treated as Management Consultancy service. The appellant's counsel also points out that the practice of the Revenue differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction inasmuch as they are being treated as scientific and technical consultants/engineers in some jurisdictions.4. When the matter came up before the adjudicating authority it noted as under: All their agreem...

Cce Vs. Urvashi Synthetic Processors (P)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(113)ECC23

1. This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order in appeal dated 15/12/2003 which allowed the refund claim filed by the respondent.2. The relevant fact that arise for consideration are the respondent were engaged in processing of Cotton Fabric/Man Made Fabric/ Embroidery Fabric etc. on job work basis under the provisions of Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944. During the relevant period, the annual capacity of production under Section 3A was determined by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur on 29/03/99, after considering the galleries attached to the stenter installed in the factory of the appellant. The respondent discharged the duty liability as per the capacity determination by the Commissioner. Subsequently vide notification No. 14/2000 dated 01/03/2000, clarification was given that the galleries attached to the stenter should be excluded from the calculation for arriving at annual capacity of production. Relying upon this, the respondent filed refund claim of ex...

Smt. Raj Kumari D/O Shri Pyare Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through th ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By this OA, applicant has challenged order dated 13.8.2004. She has also sought direction to the respondents to reinstate the applicant in service with full back wages, etc.2. It is submitted by applicant that she was appointed as Substitute Bunglow Khalasi-cum-Telephone attendant in the pay scale of Rs.2550-3200. She was attached with Shri Amrish Gupta, Dy. CMO, Headquarters, Baroda House. She joined on 13.3.2003. She was declared temporary Railway servant vide order dated September, 2003 where after she was allowed the facility of pass P.T.O. leave, increment, PF and medical facilities.3. Shri Amrish Gupta and his wife had made up their mind in June, 2004 to terminate her services, therefore, being aggrieved, she had given representation to the C.P.O but without investigating it, applicants services were terminated by an incompetent authority.4. It is submitted by applicant that she was admitted in Hospital as she was unwell, therefore, she gave an appeal also against her termina...

K.L. Arora S/O Shri Ishwardas Ji Vs. Union of India (Uoi) (Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Challenge in the OA is made to order dated 14.7.2005. A direction is also sought to retain applicant in Delhi in terms of Railway Board instructions dated 14.3.1974.2. Admitted facts of the case are that applicant joined Railway service in Bikaner Division as Signal Inspector on 09.2.1978. DRM, North Western Railway, Bikaner invited applications for the post of Sectional Engineer in grade of Rs. 6500-10500/- in R.D.S.O. Department. He was selected and offered said post vide letter dated 07.2.2001. He was relieved from Bikaner Division and joined the post of Sectional Engineer at Lucknow on 20.7.2001. One of the conditions as enumerated under the offer of appointment had been that the post of Sectional Engineer is an ex-cadre post having tenure of four years, which was liable to be extended/curtailed.3. His grievance has been that on expiry of said four years, he has been repatriated vide impugned communication dated 14.7.2005. He submitted representations on 03rd, 18th and 30th Aug...

Braham Pal S/O Shri Kanhiya Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Penalty of removal imposed on 12.10.2000, as maintained by the Appellate Authority rejecting applicant's appeal vide communication dated 16.11.2004, has been questioned in present OA.2. Admitted facts of case are that applicant was appointed as Khallasi w.e.f. 17.7.1987. He was an accused in FIR No. 366/1992 under Section 302/34 IPC. He was in judicial custody w.e.f. 19.7.1991 to 25.5.1992 and was released after grant of bail on 27.5.1992. Thereafter, vide order dated 02.5.1995, he was acquitted in aforesaid criminal case by the Court of Learned Session Judge, Bulandshaher. Since he remained unauthorizedly absent from 19.7.1991 and approached department for joining duty on 08.11.1995, a charge memorandum under Rule 9 of Railway Servants (Disciplinary & Appeal) Rules had been issued vide memorandum dated 29.12.1997. During the course of departmental proceedings, he made a statement on 24.04.1999 whereby he, in unequivocal term, admitted that he was in judicial custody from 19.7....

Nand Lal Das S/O Shiv Ram, Babu Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By virtue of this application the following orders of respondents have been challenged: Annexure A/1 dated 31.10.2003 whereby respondents took a decision that in the case of Diesel Assistants the date of joining the working post on completion of pre-requisite training will determine the seniority of candidates irrespective of the mode of recruitment, i.e., through Railway Recruitment Board, CG appointment or against promotee quota, and not from the date of joining the working post. Annexure A/2 dated 1.11.2004 issued by DRM in compliance of Tribunal's directions in applicants' earlier OA No. 1334/2004 conveying that seniority list of Diesel Assistants has been revised on 23.8.2004 by adopting the following criteria: (1) The Direct Recruits appointed in Nov. 1989 have been assigned their seniority from the date of completion of pre-requisite training i.e. two years from the date of commencement of training. For those direct recruits appointed before 1989, seniority was fixed after a...

Shri Babu Ram S/O Late Sh. Ganga Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. MA 94/2006 has been filed by Respondent No. 4 seeking deletion from array of parties.2. None is present on behalf of applicant. None was present on his behalf even on 01.08.2006. Thus, we proceed to adjudicate the matter in terms of Rule 15 of CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987 after taking into consideration respective pleadings, material on record and hearing learned Counsel for Respondents.3. In this OA, applicant seeks direction to Respondents to grant him notional seniority as observed vide order dated 08.12.1999 by Honble Delhi High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 4283/1999 w.e.f. 20.08.1999 i.e. the date when his junior (Respondent No. 4) was allowed to join.Further relief sought is to remove anomaly between basic pay of applicant and Respondent No. 4 by granting him equal pay as of said respondent as on 23.10.2000 thereby bringing his pay at par with said respondent.4. Admitted facts are that in June 1998 in response to an advertisement in National dailies calling applications fo...

Masroor Ali Khan S/O Sh. M.A. Khan Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through t ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By the present OA, applicant seeks quashing of impugned communication dated 30.9.2004 (Annexure A-1) vide which applicants request to re-fix his pay in pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040/-, revised to Rs. 4000-6000/- w.e.f. 22.11.1996 has been rejected. He also seeks direction to respondents to re-fix his pay with all consequential benefits and difference of pay & allowances. In alternate, a direction is sought to respondents to grant him second financial upgradation under ACP Scheme from the date he completed twenty-four years of service with all consequential benefits.2. The facts as stated in OA are that applicant was initially appointed on 31.12.1968 as Pointsman. He was promoted as Cabinman on 01.8.1982 in grade of Rs. 260-400/- and further as Switchman in grade of Rs. 1200-2040/- some time in the year 1988. While working as Switchman he was declared medically unfit by the Chief Medical Superintendent, Allahabad vide order dated 01.3.1996 observing that: The Board is of the opinio...