Delhi Court August 2006 Judgments

Poly Plast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shri Shiv Prasad

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 132(2006)DLT281; [2006(111)FLR537]; (2007)ILLJ47Del

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 18.4.2002 passed by the claim authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 ( for short the Act ) whereby the claim authority directed that the difference between the minimum wages amounting to Rs. 2544/- along with ten times compensation of Rs. 25,440/- be paid to the applicant Shiv Prasad Yadav within 30 days.2. The brief facts are that claimant Shiv Prasad Yadav filed an application before the claim authority under Section 20 of the Act that since September 1999 to February 2000 he was being paid Rs. 424/- less than the minimum wages applicable to him. He was working as machine man but he was being paid Rs. 2348/- while the minimum wages for machine man as per notification were Rs. 2772/-. The management had been taking work of machine man from him but paying minimum wages of a helper to him. When he requested the management to pay him minimum wages of a machine man, management threatened to...

Mrs. Jojiana Lakra Vs. National Council for Teachers Education and anr ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 131(2006)DLT671

J.M. Malik, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has called into question the transfer order dated 19.05.2006. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant on temporary basis with the respondent on 22nd June, 1998. She was promoted as Section Officer vide office order dated 22nd April, 2004 On 19.5.2006, the petitioner came to know that she was being transferred to Bangalore. She made a representation on the same day. Its relevant portion runs as follows:My son is 3+ and his admission process is going on in various schools for which already forms had been filled up. Further to submit that my husband is in private business(Financial Consultant) and all his clients are based in Delhi. He is in this business for about 20 years. There would not be any future earning of my husband in other cities. My husband is the eldest son in the family with a younger brother and parents. The whole family depends on the earning of my husband. The responsibility of marriage of brother-in-law is also...

Cit Vs. Glocom Impex (P) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2006)205CTR(Del)571; [2008]299ITR39(Delhi); [2006]157TAXMAN308(Delhi)

ORDERBy the CourtThe revenue is aggrieved by an order dated 29-3-2005 passed by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A' in ITA No. 5185/Del/2004 relevant for the assessment year 2001-02.2. The assessed had received an amount of Rs. 15 lacs towards share capital contribution from one of its directors that is Sint. Kavita Kothari.To ascertain the source of investment, Smt. Kavita Kothari was summoned by the assessing officer. She appeared before the assessing officer and produced her bank statement which indicated that she had issued three cheques of Rs. 5 lakhs each to the assessed. Prior to this she had received1hree cheques of Rs. 5 lakhs each from the State bank of India, Fateh Puri, Delhi and these cheques were issued by M/s Mahal Chand Moti Lal Kothari & Co. The assessing officer tried to find out the source of the amounts given by M/s Mahal Chand Moti Lal Kothari to Smt. Kavita Kothari and found that cash deposits were made in the bank account of M/s Mahal Chand Moti Lal Kothari. The assess...

Shree Cement Limited Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This appeal is taken up for final hearing at the request of both the sides since the question involved is short and is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Vikram Cement v.Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore reported in 2006 (197) ELT 145 (S.C.) warranting a remand as was done in that case which is evident from para 5 of the judgment.2. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the appellant stated that the disallowance of modvat credit or Rs. 2302/-, taken on invoices which were not in the name of the appellant, is not challenged due to the smallness of the amount. Therefore, the only question regarding disallowance of credit of Rs. 1,72,662/- taken on goods used in the mines survives for consideration. The requirement of pre-deposit is waived in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the matter is taken up for final hearing.3. The Commissioner (Appeals), in paragraph 21.2 of the impugned order, has observed that from the definition of Rule 57Q ...

Regal Apartments P. Ltd. Vs. Lilawati Gupta Decdt. thr. LR'

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 132(2006)DLT445

Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 19th April, 2006 whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 14(1) of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, being is No. 1912/2006 was dismissed and consequently, the suit being CS(OS) No. 570/2005 filed by it for mandatory injunction, specific performance of an agreement dated 1.9.1993, damages and declaration was also dismissed.2. The learned Single Judge considered the facts of the case and in the light of the same, considered the submissions made in the application filed by the appellant herein, plaintiff in the suit. The learned Single Judge has referred to the fact of the appellant filing a suit in the year 1995, in the District Court praying inter alias for a decree for permanent injunction restraining Smt. Lila Wati, who is also the defendant No. 1 in the suit in which the impugned order is passed, from interfering in ...

Rayalaseema Concrete Sleepers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(111)ECC659

1. This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 20.7.04 of the Commisioner (Appeals) upholding the order-in-original, by which the Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand of Rs. 40,569/- by way of duty leviable on 63.150 MT, HTS wire 28.5 Kg, PVC Dowel 4187 Nos. and binding wire 3 trips found short as compared to recorded book balance in the raw material stock register of cement, confiscating 818 Nos. of fencing poles valued at Rs. 41,718/-, with an option to the party to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1000/-, imposing penalty under Section 11AC of the Act of Rs. 15,309/- for removing the inputs, fencing poles, without payment of Cenvat duty by contravening the relevant provisions with intention to evade payment of duty and imposing interest, as directed.2. The assessee-appellant has sent a communication dated 31.5.06 stating that the assessee did not desire any personal hearing and that the case may be decided on merits. The appeal is, th...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Bhp Engineers Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(111)ECC645

1. This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order in appeal dated 21.7.04 made by the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order-in-original directing that the amount of Rs. 2,46,210/- being the amount of refund payable to the assessee should be diverted to the consumer welfare fund under Section 11B read with Section 12C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on the ground of unjust enrichment.2. The assessee was issued demand cum show cause notice in respect of Central Excise duty amount of Rs. 2,46210/-, on the ground that the notional interest accrued for advances received by the assessee from their customers was not included in the assessable value, which resulted in short payment of duty. The demand came to be confirmed by order dated 6.1.97 pursuant to which the assessee debited the amount on 31.3.97 under protest and preferred the appeal. In the appeal, admittedly the amount was treated as pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Act. The assessee ultimately succeeded in t...

Shavak Shiksha Samiti Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)104TTJ(Delhi)127

1. This appeal arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT), Ghaziabad, passed under Section 12AA of the IT Act, 1961 on 22nd July, 2002, in which registration was refused to the assessee-society. Before him, it was inter alia pointed out that the assessee is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, and it is establishing Shavak National School, which will be 10+2 standard school to cater to the needs of people in Noida and Greater Noida. The school will provide good education coupled with extra curricular activities for the pupil. For this purpose, land has already been allotted to the society and building plan has been submitted to the advisory board of the society. It was claimed that education is a charitable purpose and, therefore, it should be registered under the IT Act.1.2 The learned CIT referred to the definition of the expression "charitable purpose" in Section 2(15) of the Act and mentioned that it was mandatory that the object should b...

Philips Electronics Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(110)ECC464

1. There are two stay applications; (1) Stay Application No. 2017/06 filed along with Appeal No. E/2467/06 pertains to M/s. Philips Electronics Ny (hereinafter referred to 'Philips Holland'); and (2) Stay Application No. 1998/06 filed along with Appeal No. E/2442/06 pertains to M/s. Philips Electronics India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'PIL').2. Both these appeals have challenged the order of the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Chandigarh, made on 17-4-2006. In the impugned order, the Commissioner after sieving and weighing the fact of the matter has arrived at the conclusion that the appellants were engaged in activities in such a manner that the provisions of Central Excise Act got violated causing injury to the Revenue. It was also inferred that M/s. Punjab Anand Lamp Industries (hereinafter referred to as 'PALI') and M/s. Philips India were related persons in terms of Section 4(4)(c) of the Act and as a result, Central Excise Duty on excisable goods cleared by P...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Panamsat International Systems

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)103TTJ(Delhi)861

1. The appeals are both by the assessee and the Revenue, and the cross-objection is by the assessee all pertaining to the asst. yr.1997-98. These matters were heard over a long period of time spanning several months. ITA No. 2041/Del/2004 arises out of the reassessment made on 28th March, 2003 upon PanAmSat International Systems LLC, which is a non-resident company incorporated under the laws of the United States of America ("USA"). ITA No. 1796/Del/2001 and CO. No.274/Del/2004 arise out of the assessment made on the amalgamating company by name PanAmSat International Systems Inc., of Connecticut, USA. The question which arises in these matters simply is whether the payments made by some of the non-resident companies (referred to as broadcasters or television channels) to the assessee-company are subject to the tax under the IT Act, 1961.2. The assessee owns and operates a global network of telecommunication satellite which is located at a height of around 35,900 kms. (22,300 miles) a...