Delhi Court January 2010 Judgments

M/S. Saboo Alloys (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Responde ...

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Per M. Veeraiyan: This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 553/CE/CHD/2007 dated 2.11.07. 2. Heard both sides. 3.1. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellant is a manufacturer of steel ingots and having their unit at Himachal Pradesh and availing the benefit of notification No. 50/03 dated 10.6.03 with effect from 11.4.05. They reversed a sum of Rs. 1,59,728/- from Cenvat Credit and paid a sum of Rs. 1,36,164/- from PLA towards Cenvat credit on the inputs contained in the stock of finished goods lying in stock at the time of opting for the exemption and credit availed on capital goods . 3.2. Whether they should have reversed the credit attributable to inputs and capital goods was in dispute and settled by the Tribunal in their favour vide Final Order dated 10.1.08 reported in [2008 (87) RLT 179 (CESTAT-Del) ] by upholding the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) which was in favour of the party. In pursuance of the favourable order of the Commis...

Glaverbel S.A. Vs. Dave Rose and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 167(2010)DLT6

Manmohan Singh, J.1. By this order I shall dispose of LA. No. 3756/2007 filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') for an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from manufacturing, selling and offering for sale copper free mirrors infringing the plaintiffs registered patent No. 190380.Case of the Plaintiff2. In the plaint, it is stated that the plaintiff is a company incorporated under the laws of Belgium. In India, the plaintiffs sales and marketing etc. are carried out by Glavindia Pvt. Ltd., 507 Gateway Plaza, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400076, Maharashtra.3. The plaintiff claims to be engaged in the business of manufacturing, marketing and selling glasses, mirrors of world class quality. The plaintiff claims in the suit to be the innovator of the technology which has lead to the manufacture of mirrors of improved quality.4. The plaintiff in the present suit claims to be owner of the process as well as ...

Sh. Bhupendra P. Watal Vs. M.J. Investment and Financial Consultants a ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2010]154CompCas82(Delhi)

Manmohan Singh, J.1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for declaration, rendition of accounts and recovery of money. As per amended plaint dated 24th July, 2006 against twelve defendants, the plaintiff sought the following reliefs:a) That a decree for declaration be passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants that the 1300 shares of M/s. Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Limited mentioned in para No. 5 above are not stolen property and that the plaintiff had validly introduced and transacted the said shares in the market on the floor of the Delhi Stock Exchange and as a consequential relief, the defendant No. 11 be directed to register the transfer of the said shares in favour of the transferee. And in the alternative:b) Decree for the payment of Rs. 1,49,400/- (Rupees one lac forty nine thousand four hundred only) or the value of the shares at the time of the passing of the decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants No. 1-3.bb) A de...

Sholay Media Entrtainment and anr. Vs. Yogesh Patel and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: LC2010(1)268

S. Ravindra Bhat, J. 1. This order will dispose off an application IA 12828/2009 whereby the defendants seek dismissal of this suit for injunction, on the ground that this Court lacks territorial jurisdiction.2. The plaintiffs in this suit seek permanent injunction to restrain the defendants or their representatives from using selling, soliciting, exporting, displaying, or advertising their goods and the services under the mark 'SHOLAY', which the plaintiffs owns. The plaintiffs company is engaged in film production, and avers to being one of the foremost concerns in that regard. The suit speaks of the plaintiffs. extensive reputation, and production of prominent and well- known films. It is alleged that the plaintiffs produced the blockbuster 'SHOLAY' in 1975, which became one of the most successful and renowned films ever. The plaintiffs allege that 'SHOLAY' and its appeal has transcended films, and it has cut across barriers of geography, language, ideology and class. It also allude...

M/S Anant Raj Industries Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Delhi Iii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Per M. Veeraiyan: This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner No. 471/KKG/GGN/2007 dated 15.11.2007. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The appellants manufacture ceramic glazed tiles and avail concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No.6/2002 dated 1.3.2002 as amended. As a condition to avail the benefit of the said notification the appellants were not availing credit on the duty paid on the inputs under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules. The appellants claimed refund of proportional credit involved on the inputs attributable to the portion of goods exported by them. 4. The very same issue relating to the very same appellant has been decided against them vide Final Order No.103-204/2010-SM(Br) dated 5.1.2010 with the following findings: “6.1. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. It is not in dispute that the appellants did not avail the Cenvat credit under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit rules. If they had availed the credit under Rule 3, admittedly, ...

Bikanervala Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anand V. Khatri

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

M.L. Sahni, Member: 1. The OP in complaint case No. 1194/09 filed before District Consumer Redressal Forum, K.G. Marg, New Delhi has filed the present appeal impugning the order dated 29.10.2009 passed by the District Forum directing as follows: (i) that, OP shall display the placard Table Service at the table by Special request to the manager at a conspicuous place preferably by the side of displaying plate (Self Service only), (ii) that, on account of mental agony and harassment OP will pay Rs. 30,000 to the Complainant as compensation, (iii) that, OP will pay Rs. 10,000 to the Complainant towards the cost of litigation. 2. Aggrieved by this order the appellant has submitted that the Learned District Forum failed to consider Self-Service and Compass System prevailing in the Eating House of the appellant as is in vogue all over the world including India. It is contended that under Self-Service-System the appellant was not responsible for providing services desired by...

Mahabir Yadav Versus Union of India Through Its Secretary Ministry of ...

Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi

1. This petition has been brought for quashing the order dated 12.08.1989 passed by the respondents whereby he was held guilty for the offences under section 52 (b) and was sentenced to reduction in rank and imprisonment for two months and as a consequence of which was dismissed from service. It is alleged that the finding of guilt against the petitioner was recorded merely on conjectures and surmises and whatever the evidence was recorded that does not inspire confidence. Moreover other senior officers were involved in the misappropriation of petrol and whatever supplies were made by him in the capacity of In-charge of supply depot that was under the instruction of senior officers. When this matter of alleged unauthorised issuance of petrol came to light, he was persuaded to accept the plea of guilt to protect those senior officers. Moreover assurance was also given to him by them that he would be leniently dealt with in the event he confessed his guilt. It has further been submitted ...

Ex Sepoy Raj Bahadur Singh Versus the Union of India Through the Secre ...

Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi

1. This petition was brought by convict Raj Bahadur Singh for quashing the GCM proceedings and also the order dated 11.07.2004 passed by respondent no.2 whereby holding him guilty for the offence under Army Act Section 69 R/w. 302 IPC and also dismissing him from service. Simultaneous prayer has also been made for his reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits. This petition has been received on transfer from Delhi High Court by this Tribunal and is treated to be Appeal u/s.15 of Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. 2. It is contended that the petitioner has falsely been roped in this case. As a matter of fact on 25.11.1999 he was sent on temporary duty to "A" Coy of 5004 ASC Bn (MT) to perform guard duties. This Unit was located at Tezpur (Assam). The petitioner along with Sepoy G. Prusti was detailed to perform Sentry duty at main gate of "A" Coy from 2000 hrs. to 2200 hrs. with one rifle and and 20 rounds of ammunition. On 24.12.1999, at about 2245 hours Sepoy G.Prusti had...

Shanker Sahani Vs. the State (Government of National Capital Territory ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 167(2010)DLT91

V.K. Jain, J.1. This is an appeal against the Judgment dated 16th January, 2008 and the Order on Sentence dated 21st January, 2008, whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 376 IPC read with Section 511 thereof and under Section 506 of IPC. He was sentenced to RI for 4 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- or to undergo SI for six months, in default under Section 376/511 of IPC and was further sentenced to undergo RI for one year under Section 506 of IPC.2. On 30th August, 2002, the prosecutrix, accompanied by her mother Smt. Shashi Devi and one Jallaluddin, went to the Police Post, Prem Nagar and lodged a report, alleging therein that on 2nd June, 2002, at about 4.00 am, when she went to the nearby temple for the purpose of cleaning it, the appellant started loud speaker of the temple on a high volume and took her to the open space behind the temple. After removing his undergarment, the appellant stuffed a cloth in the mouth of the prosecutrix and made her lie on the ground. ...

M/S. Murarka Suitings P. Ltd. and Others Vs. Cce, Jaipur-ii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Per Rakesh Kumar: The appellants in this group of appeals are manufacturers of Grey Fabrics. All of them purchased yarn from the manufacturers in Nepal. The yarn was supplied to the appellants by the Nepalese manufacturers on F.O.R. basis and accordingly, the arrangement of transportation of the yarn from Nepal to the appellants premises was made to the suppliers and it is the supplier who paid freight to the transporters. The invoices of the suppliers are in two parts first invoice gives the basic price of the goods and the second invoice contains statement of expenses incurred on transportation, handling, customs duty etc. The Department was of the view that the appellants who reimbursed freight charges to the suppliers are receiver of GTA service and accordingly they would be liable to pay service tax on the transportation charges. It is on this basis that the show cause notices were issued to the appellants for recovery of service tax on GTA alongwith interest and also imposition o...