Delhi Court March 2007 Judgments

Kanhaiya Lal Verma and VipIn Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. These appeals are directed against the order-in-appeal dated 30.11.2005, which upheld the order-in-original, that absolutely confiscated the seized gold biscuits and also imposed penalty on the appellants. Since the issue in both the appeals is arising out of the same impugned order, they are being decided and disposed by a common order.2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the police officers of Babansa police station intercepted both the appellants at the Babansa bust stand and recovered Three foreign marked gold biscuits from Shri Kanhiya Lal Verma (Appellant in Appeal No. C/419/06) and two and half pieces of foreign marked gold biscuits from Shri Vipin Kumar Verma (Appellant in Appeal No. C/418/06). As both the appellants could not produce any documents regarding the licit possession of the gold biscuits, police officers handed over both the appellants and recovered gold biscuits to the Customs authorities. Customs authorities recorded statements of both t...

Bsl Limited Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)(118)ECC404

1. The appellant filed this appeal against the rejection of refund claim of Rs. 4,10,529/-. The appellant filed the refund claim on the ground that they were not in a position to utilize the cenvat credit in respect of AED (T&TA) paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of export goods. The appellant exported the goods and claimed rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 in respect of basic excise duty. They filed refund claim on AED (T&TA) under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 wherein rebate of duty was not availed.The learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant submits that in the similar issue, the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Rohtak v. Indo Dane Textile Industries and Ors. vide final Order No. 288-293/07-SM(BR) dated 9.2.2007 dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenues.3. The learned authorized representative (DR) on behalf of the Revenue submits that they have availed the rebate of duty in respect of the exported goods under Rule 18 of Central E...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Adhunik Steel Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The applicant filed Misc. application to amend the prayer in application for recalling of the Tribunal's final order allowing the appeal filed by the revenue in the absence of the applicant. The prayer is allowed and in view of the reasons explained in the application, the final order passed by the Tribunal is recalled and matter is reheard.2. The contention of the revenue is that the respondent are providing the service as clearing and forwarding agent as relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Medpro Pharma Pvt. Ltd. v.Commissioner reported in 2006 (3) S.T.R. 355. In reply to the arguments raised by the revenue, the contention of the respondent is that regarding demand, they have no case as the issue is decided in favour of revenue by the Tribunal. The only contention raised by the respondent is that they are not liable for any penalty in view of the fact that the Tribunal in the case of Mahavir Generics v. CCE held in favour of assessee and the Commissioner s...

Vashist Ispat Product and Lakshmi Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)(117)ECC434

1. These two appeals have been preferred against the common order of the Commissioner (Appeals) made on 22nd March, 2005 by which he upheld the order-in-original confirming the demand of Rs. 45,467/- against the appellant (Appeal No. E/2224/2005), M/s Lakshmi Steel Rolling Mills, and imposed penalty of Rs. 45,467/- upon the appellant (Appeal No.E/2223/2005), M/s Vashist Ispat Product, under Rule 13 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002.2. According to the Revenue, on scrutiny of ER-1 Return for the month of March, 2003 filed by the appellant, M/s Lakshmi Steel Rolling Mills (the original noticee No. 1), it was observed that, they had taken CENVAT credit of Rs. 1,94,830/- on 95.510 MTs of iron and steel, which was ship breakage input, sold to it "as such" by the other appellant, M/s Vashist Ispat Product, (the original noticee No. 2). The appellant, M/s Vashist Ispat Product, had received the inputs from M/s Vijay Sharma & Sons through the invoices on which the said appellant had availe...

Allengers Medical Systems Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2008)12STT65

1. Heard both sides and perused the record. The appellant manufactures and sells medical equipments. Service tax has been demanded on the invoice value of sales of equipment on the ground that the price of the machinery included charges towards installation and commissioning, which are liable to Service tax.2. It is being pointed out that the items in question are portable/movable equipment requiring no erection and commissioning.Another point made is that on the entire value of the machine, excise duty has been paid. Contention being that, if at all, a portion of the value is to be treated as cost of installation/commissioning, the demand can be made only after abetting the excise duty paid on the same.3. The basis of demand does not appear to be, prima facie, sustainable.Stay application is allowed and recovery stayed till disposal of appeal....

Cce Vs. Barkat Dyeing Works

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)(118)ECC493

1. Heard ld. SDR. The respondent made a request to decide the appeal on merit.2. The Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby penalty imposed on the respondent was set aside on the ground that duty paid even prior to show-cause notice.3. The contention of the Revenue is that the Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Machino Montell (I) Ltd. which has already been set aside by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. The finding of the adjudicating authority is that the respondents clandestinely removed the goods without payment of duty, therefore, the respondents are liable for penalty. The respondents in their written submissions relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CCE v. Malbro Appliances Pvt.Ltd. 4. In this case, as the respondent suppressed the fact regarding clearance of goods without payment of duty therefore, are liable for penalty. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mal...

V.K. Sareen S/O Late Shri D.N. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) (Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Applicant, a PAO, has assailed the memorandum dated 28.2.2003 issued under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, initiating disciplinary proceedings against him. Quashing of the aforesaid as well as enquiry report dated 1.7.2005 on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay in initiating and concluding the proceedings has been sought.2. Learned Counsel of applicant would contend that whereas the allegations framed against applicant do not involve any grave misconduct or any corrupt motive imputed, yet initiating an enquiry on the allegations of 1988 in 2003 is not only inordinate but unexplained, which has resulted in deprivation of a reasonable opportunity to defend as the objections raised consistently before the authorities of belated enquiry, causing prejudice having been taken into consideration and as a result thereof certain documents which could not be procured by the respondents at this remotest point of time has caused prejudice to applicant. Learned Counsel has relie...

Shri M.L. Chandna S/O Late Shri Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through Chie ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Applicant, who retired on 31.12.2005, as Foreman, has sought for following reliefs: (i) to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the Applicant for the post of Lecturer or on the post of Foreman-Instructor in the scale of Rs. 2200-4000, as illegal, arbitrary and the same action may be quashed. (ii) to direct the respondents to consider the case of the Applicant for the post of Lecturer/Foreman-Instructor in the scale of Rs. 2200-4000 from the due date, forthwith with all consequential benefits; (iii) to pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.2. Applicant, who joined as Foreman, possesses a Bachelor's Degree in Electronic and Telecommunication. The Madan Committee constituted on staff structure in Engineering Institutions, insofar as Engineering Colleges are concerned, recommended minimum rung as Lecturer but for Polytechnics, Lecturer has been recommended as the lowest formation of teaching facility wherea...

Rakesh Kumar S/O Shri V.R. Gupta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. The applicant herein had, during May, 2006 submitted this application, incorporating a prayer that Office Memorandum dated 20.6.1997 issued to him is to be quashed, including the further proceedings that might have been contemplated. Application also included a prayer that he was entitled to be extended the benefits, which normally might have come to him, and which stands denied because of the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, evidenced by the Office Memorandum, referred to earlier (Annexure A-1).2. Interim orders have been passed on 12.7.2006, whereby the respondents had been restrained from passing final orders in the pending disciplinary proceedings. Practically, the defence of the respondents had been struck off because they failed to come up with the counter statement and the matter was heard at length. Of course, the Department had been permitted to address us citing from the files, which they were presumed to be having.3. Indeed, a dismal picture, has become evident....

Ashok Kumar Sharma S/O Siri Chand Vs. Vice Chairman, K

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Challenge is made to penalty of dismissal inflicted vide order dated 5.11.2002 as upheld vide appellate and revisional authorities' orders dated 29.9.2003 and 23.3.2006 with all consequential benefits including reinstatement, costs, etc.2. Applicant was initially appointed to the post of Audit Assistant in the year 1984, re-designated as Assistant Superintendent. He was proceeded for certain misconducts vide charge-Memorandum dated 16.5.2000, which contained six articles of charges, namely: Article-I During 1999-2000 remained absent from duty willfully. Moreover on some occasions Shri Sharma putting his signature in the staff attendance register left the office without any information. Article-II During 1999-2000 failed to perform his assigned duties willfully. Article-III During 1999-2000 on 15.10.99 abused the Administrative Officer during morning hours and also to Education Officer Shri M.S. Chauhan and Shri R.K. Nair, Superintendent (Admn) at about 1730 hrs. in the presence of ...