Delhi Court February 2007 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Dr. Harsh Wardhan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2007
Reported in: 138(2007)DLT197
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This petition is directed against the orders/ demand letters dated 26.07.2002, 12.11.2003, 10.08.2004 and 12.10.2004, cancelling the allotment of the flat provided to the petitioner retrospectively with effect from 04.02.1996. The flat in question is situated at No. D-II/9/59, Lodi Road Complex. The same falls under the General Pool and was provided to the petitioner as he was entitled for the same when he was working as a doctor with RML Hospital. On 04.12.1995 the petitioner was transferred to Safdarjung Hospital. The case for the respondents is that upon the transfer of the petitioner, he became disentitled to retain the General Pool accommodation inasmuch as Safdarjung Hospital has its own residential pool. It is for this reason that the petitioner was required to vacate the flat in question and to take up accommodation provided by the Safdarjung Hospital from its own residential pool. 2. Unfortunately, what has happened is that for no fault on the part of ...
Tide Water Oil Co. (i) Ltd. Vs. Greaseoil (i) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2007
Reported in: II(2007)BC531; 139(2007)DLT32; 2007(94)DRJ611
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. The petitioner has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court in respect of an order dated 13.9.2002 by which the respondent was discharged and the complaint preferred by the petitioner alleging commission of offences under Sections 138/142, was dismissed. 2. The petitioner's case is that 3 cheques for the sum of Rs. 33,74,732/- were issued on 31.8.1998 by the respondent. They were presented to the bank on 3.9.1998. It is contended that after presentation on 4.9.1998 the petitioner received a letter from the complainant requesting it not to present the cheques and further requesting that they be presented after 30.9.1998. The cheques had been presented; they were returned dishonoured. 3. The petitioner caused a legal notice to be issued on 17.9.1998. Thereafter the cheques were again presented but returned, dishonoured. Two notices dated 23.10.1998 and 6.11.1998 were issued subsequently to the respondent/drawer. Thereafter claiming that the respondent had ...
Ex. Clk. Sajjan Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2007
Reported in: 141(2007)DLT661; 2007(95)DRJ162
ORDERT.S. Thakur, J.1. In this petition for a writ of certiorari, the petitioner calls in question the correctness of an order dated 17.01.2005 passed by the Officer-in-charge Artillery, Records, Nasik Road Camp discharging the petitioner from service at his request, which request according to the petitioner, stood withdrawn by him before the discharge was sanctioned. 2. The petitioner was enrolled as Naik Clerk in 74, Medium Regiment of the Indian Army on 31.01.2001. In July, 2004 he was transferred in the same capacity to 27, Mountain Artillery Brigade where he reported for duty on 30.07.2004. The authorities in charge of 27, Mountain Artillery Brigade found the petitioner to be professionally weak and described him as an unwilling worker who lacked initiative and was not able to work under stress and strain. In terms of an order dated 30.09.2004 issued by 27, Mountain Artillery Brigade, the petitioner was repatriated back to his parent regiment. The communication also indicated that...
Vijay Sharma and Co. and N.K. Chugh Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2007
Reported in: (2007)7STR518
2. The appellants are sub-brokers of a main broker named Master Capital Services Ltd. They received certain commissions from the main broker in connection with the brokerage undertaken by them. Service tax demands have been confirmed against the appellants on the ground that their commission is liable to service tax as 'stock broker service'.3. The contention of the appellants is that, in these cases, stock broker service is rendered only by the main broker and the main broker pays service tax on the gross amount of commission received in connection with the sales and purchase of securities. The submission is that when tax has been deposited on the brokerage commission as a whole by the main broker, there is no justification to tax the sub-brokers separately. It is also being pointed out that in another Commissionerate, in the case of another sub-broker, an order has been passed that the sub-brokers' commission does not attract service tax.4. The learned SDR pointed out that sub-broke...
Quick Car Wash Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2007
Reported in: (2007)(118)ECC233
1. In January 2002, the appellant imported two consignments at Ludhiana of sheet metal rest from Germany and sought clearance of the consignment upon payment of duty as applicable to items falling under Heading 7204 of the Customs Tariff. Customs authorities subjected the goods to examination and obtained the opinion of chartered engineer Shri J.S. Oberoi. His opinion dated 29.1.02 read as under: As requested by Customs Deptt. CFS (OWPL), Ludhiana, I visited the Import Section for inspection of Sheet Metal Rest, imported from Kallweit, Germany by M/s. Quick Car Wash Pvt. Ltd. Jalandhar vide Invoice No. 59379 dated 19.11.01. After due inspection of the cargo alongwith Customs officials in the presence of party's representative, I have the following observation to certify: The material received is inform of sheets, mixture of Hot/Cold rolled and of varying length, width and thickness. The material is secondary/defective and approx. 50% of this is rusty. Material seems to be rejection of...
Controls and Switchgear Company Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2007
Reported in: (2007)9STT315
2. Service tax demand has been made against the appellant by holding that the appellant had rendered clearing and forwarding agency service to its sister concern M/s. RAAS Controls, Noida, and therefore, service tax at the rate of 5% was payable on its receipts during the year 2000-2001, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003. Impugned order has been passed by rejecting the appellant's contention that the appellant was only procuring the orders for sales and it did not deal with the goods in any manner and that procurement of orders did not amount to clearing and forwarding. The order has been passed by relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Prabhat Zarda Factory .3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that in the present case, the appellant was only procuring and forwarding purchase orders to the manufacturer for effecting sales. It is being emphasised that once the orders were received by the manufacturer, it was executing the sales and sending the goods to ...
Rajasthan State Warehousing Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2007
Reported in: (2007)7STR172
2. The appellant is a state warehousing corporation. It warehoused fertiliser and other items. Since that service is liable to service tax, the tax was being discharged also. However, upon finding from its Balance Sheet that the appellant had some other income in relation to 'supervision charges', show cause notice was issued alleging that the supervision charges were in relation to cargo handling charges and service tax should have been discharged on this income also. The impugned order has confirmed the demands on this count.3. It is to be seen that levy is on 'any service provided to any person, by a cargo handling agency in relation to cargo handling'. The appellant, which was created by a statute is not a cargo handling agency, but a warehousing agency. Therefore, the additional amounts realised is in relation to other items, other than warehousing, may not come under the levy.4. The appellant has also contended such a demand could not be raised beyond the normal period of limita...
Eicher Motors and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2007
Reported in: (2007)(116)ECC582
1. In these appeals, the appellants have challenged the order of the Commissioner by which demand of Rs. 6,93,87,731/- is confirmed against the appellant Bhagirath Coach and Metal Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. with a penalty of the like amount imposed on it with an order to pay interest on the duty amount and penalties of Rs. 1 crore (one crore) and Rs. 5 lacs (five lacs) have been imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2004, on the appellant Eicher Motors Ltd. and Mr. Ashok Sharma, Director of Bhagirath Coach and Metal Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. 2. The questions arising in these appeals center around interpretation and application of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. The appellant Bhagirath Coach and Metal Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. is engaged in the manufacturing and clearing of complete body built motor vehicles on-job work basis for the automobile manufacturer, who is the appellant Eicher Motors Ltd. The job work is done by f...
Rajesh Kumar @ Raju Vs. the State (Delhi Admn.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(94)DRJ676
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 13th November, 1998 whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 307 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code as well as against order on sentence dated 17th November, 1998 whereby he was sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-under Section 307 of the IPC and the same sentence under Section 452 IPC. Both sentences were to run concurrently.2. Brief facts are that appellant was an ex-servant at the shop/office of the husband of the complainant. On 11th August, 1993, the appellant went to the house of the complainant at about 1 pm. The complainant was teaching her children and her son Deepu was taking meals. The appellant told the complainant that he had come from Firozabad and was hungry, he be given food to eat. The complainant told him that no food was ready at that time. On this, the appellant picked up her son Deepu, who was taking food, along with his food plate and took h...
Sewa International Fashions and Anr. Vs. Employees' Provident Fund Org ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2007
Reported in: 138(2007)DLT185; [2007(113)FLR754]
ORDER TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD WORK THAT YOU HAVE PUT IN DURING THIS PERIOD, MANAGEMENT HAS DECIDED TO GIVE YOU A RAISE OF Rs. 1500/- PER MONTH WITH EFFECT FROM 1ST MARCH, 1999. YOURS TRULY,(D.M.VERMA)12. The recovery officer of ESI recorded statement of Mrs. Charanjit Batalvi on 23.1.2006 and she stated before the Recovery Officer that she was merely an employee of M/s Sewa International Fashions and had been shown as proprietor of another firm under a phony arrangement. The copy of proceedings had been placed on record by the respondents. It would be worthwhile to mention that M/s Sewa International Pvt. Ltd. which got allegedly registered with RPFC, Faridabad had obtained only provisional registration from Faridabad in June, 1997 much after the raid. A letter dated 29.4.1999 was written by RPFC Faridabad to RPFC, Delhi that M/s Sewa International Fashions Pvt. Ltd. had not produced records of any of other concerns on the ground that the records got burnt. The other establishments ref...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »