Delhi Court March 2012 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.
Lady Cadet Shivanjali Sharma Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-2012
ANIL KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner has sought the quashing of resignation letter dated 30th October, 2010 and has also sought directions to the respondents to issue the Joining Instructions for the next ensuing course in accordance with the rules. 2. Brief facts to comprehend the disputes between the parties are that the petitioner, as a Lady Cadet, was undergoing training at the Officers”Training Academy (OTA) for being enlisted as a Commissioned Officer in the Judge Advocate”s Department with the Indian Army. She had applied for the said post in the year 2010. Her application was accepted by the respondents and she was intimated by letter dated 29th May, 2010 to appear for the tests before the Service Selection Board, Bangalore. The petitioner appeared for the said tests and qualified the same. However, she was not allowed to join on medical grounds as she was overweight and she had gall bladder stones with evidence of Chronic Cholecystitis. This was intimated to the petiti...
M/S. thermospares India Vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-2012
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. 1. The agreement(s) between the parties, having an arbitration clause, two claims in sum of Rs.3,36,13,692.50 raised by the appellant were referred to a Sole Arbitrator. 2. As per the appellant, on November 03, 1976 and May 10, 1977, the respondent issued two Work Orders No.529/VA/103/60049 and No.07/PPN/60049 respectively on the appellant for transportation from project stores, erection, testing and commissioning of pressure parts of Units I and II of Panipat Thermal Power Plant, Panipat. Thereafter, on August 17/22, 1977 the respondent issued a third Work Order No.27/PPN/60049 on the appellant for transportation from project stores/Railway siding, pre-assembly, erection, testing and commissioning of external pipelines and auxiliaries of Units I and II of Panipat Thermal Power Plant, Panipat. Whereas the Work Orders Nos.529/VA/103/60049 and 07/PPN/60049 required the appellant to erect, test and commission the pressure parts of Unit I and II by “ARC Welding&...
Shri Dinesh Kumar Manocha Vs. Dda and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
G. George Paracken: The applicant is aggrieved by the Annexure A-3 Charge Memo dated 20.12.2004, Annexure A-1 order of the disciplinary authority dated 04.12.2009 imposing upon him the penalty of ‘reduction of pay by two stages (equivalent to two increments) with cumulative effect with further stipulation that during the penalty period, he will not earn the increments and that on the expiry of this period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments’ and the Annexure A-2 appellate order dated 27.04.2010 rejecting his appeals dated 18.01.2010 and 19.02.2010 holding that there was no reason to interfere with the orders of the disciplinary authority dated 04.12.2009. 2. The charge against the applicant was as under: “ARTICLE-I Shri Dinesh Kumar Minocha while working as AAO in HAU-IX during the year 1999-2000 was responsible for recommending the revision of cost in respect of flat no. 12-S, Sector 8, Cat.III, SFS Jasola allotted to Shri Ashutosh...
M/S. Shree Cement Ltd Vs. Cce, Jaipur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
Per D.N. PANDA, J. 1. Learned Counsel submits that when the deposit of service tax by service provider is not questioned, the stationery issued by such provider in this regard is only in question. The document available at page 51 to 55 of appal folder exhibit the nature of service availed by the appellant from the service provider who has issued debit note. In whatever name an invoice is called, that is not material to grant Cenvat credit, if necessary requirement under Rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 is fulfilled.2. It is further submission of the appellant that the department insisted that invoice should be issued while relevant requirement of invoices mainly identity of service provided and tax element is not in dispute.3. On the other hand, Revenue relies on Rule 9(1) of Cenvat credit Rules, 2004 to deny Cenvat credit. 2. Heard both sides and perused the record. 3. Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is a compendium Rule to deal Cenvat credit relating to good...
M/S. Dscl Sugar-ajbapur Vs. Cce, Lucknow
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
Per D.N. Panda, J. 1. Shri Kamra, learned Counsel says that insurance that has been paid for the following services availed have suffered tax: 1. Company-owned vehicles; 2. Insurance of finished goods inventory lying in the go-downs located inside as well outside the factory; 3. Transit insurance covering insurance of finished goods under transportation from factory premises to the company’s depot (place of removal) maintained outside factory; 4. Insurance of cash in box, cash in transit, cash at various counters, personal insurance of cashier. 2. All the services pertain to either manufacture or in relation to manufacture or in relation to business. Revenue has not brought out its case to disintegrate these services to prove that those are not attributable to manufacture or business. Therefore, not only pre-deposit may be waived but also appeal may be allowed. 3. Learned Representative for Revenue says that how these jeep and other vehicles were used was not brought on re...
M/S. Cords Cable Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce, Jaipur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
D.N. Panda, Judicial Member Shri Mittal on the earlier occasion i.e. on 19.3.2012 has argued that the whole adjudication was made violating Principle of Natural Justice in view of failing to provide copy of the statement of truck owner and denying his cross-examination as well as Director of the supplier. Placing page 49 of the appeal folder i.e. invoice, learned Counsel submitted that the material date the goods had crossed through sales tax check post which is verifiable from rubber stamp affixed on the respective page exhibiting impugned invoices. Page 50 is proof of inward register showing receipt of goods covered page 49. Similarly, page 51 is copy of the form RG23A, Part I. Page 53 exhibit daily store record of the impugned goods. 2. Shri Mittal relying on page 99 to 102 of the appeal folder says that the goods which resulted in interstate sale are supported by ‘C’ forms. Similarly, page 101 is the evidence in that regard. All goods received for value, for which payme...
M/S. Shakumbari Sugar and Allied Industries Ltd Vs. Cce, Meerut-i
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
Per: Rakesh Kumar (Oral), J. 1. The facts leading to this appeal are, in brief, as under:- 1.1 Appellant are manufacturer of Sugar chargeable to central excise duty. The period of dispute in this case is from November, 1994 to August 1995 when they availed Modvat credit of central excise duty paid on inputs and capital goods as per the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Assistant Commissioner, vide order-in-original dated 17.4.97- (a) Disallowed modvat credit of Rs. 48,14,702/- on various items of capital goods on the ground that the items are not covered by the definition of ‘capital goods’, as given in Rule 57Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and disallowed modvat credit of Rs. 4,99,229/- on the ground that credit has been taken without any valid documents; and (b) Ordered the recovery of the above credit from the appellant.The matter traveled upto the Tribunal, where it was disposed of vide Final Order No. A/551/2001-NB (DB) dt. 29.06.2001 by which while...
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
Per Justice Ajit Bharihoke, J. 1. By this order, we propose to dispose of the appeals of M/s Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (HPCL) being Appeal No.E/538/2006 and 2062/2008 and two appeals of M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) being Appeal No.E/1675 and 1676/2009 involving similar question of law and facts. 2. The appellants M/s HPCL and BPCL are in the business of marketing of motor spirit and petrol. They purchase duty paid motor spirit/ petrol from refineries and store it at their depots. The petrol and diesel are blended with Multifunctional Additives (MFA) to the extent of 0.04 to 0.06% with a view to enhance the performance of the motor sprit and also to reduce the carbon deposit in the engine. The blended products are sold by HPCL under brand name ‘Power’, ‘Turbojet’ and by BPCL under the brand name ‘Speed’ and ‘High Spee’ Diesel. 3. The Department was of the view that the blending of MFAs in the diesel a...
M/S. Sudhir Tobacco Company, V.P. Singh, G.M Vs. Cce, Lucknow
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
Per D.N. Panda, J. 1. Learned Consultant Shri Handa mentions that without any clandestine removal of cigarettes being made the authority seized the goods and confiscated the same with an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine. The goods were valued at 53,955/-, calculating the excise duty involvement of Rs. 1,52,358/- holding that the goods to have been manufactured illegally and unaccounted. It was also alleged that the said goods were intended to be removed clandestinely. So far as shortage of goods is detected the authority alleged that the goods were clandestinely removed. Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,11,351/- was determined on that account. 2. Apart from the above liability, there was penalty of Rs. 1,11,351/- imposed under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, read with Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. So also penalty of Rs. 1,11,351/- was imposed on Shri V.P. Singh, General Manager under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2...
Sanjay Mishra Vs. Govt.of Nct of Delhi and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
M.L. MEHTA, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the Complaint under Section 500 IPC in Case No. 1832/1 and proceedings emanating thereof, pending before the Ld. M.M. The petitioner was summoned in the case on 09.03.2007 and the case is at the stage of post summoning evidence. 2. The complaint was filed against the petitioner by the respondent no. 2 who is his mother-in-law. The petitioner had filed a petition for divorce against his wife i.e. the daughter of respondent no.2. The said divorce case already stands dismissed. Allegedly in the rejoinder and additional submissions to the written statement filed by his wife in the divorce case, the petitioner had made some serious allegations about the character of the respondent no.2 and his wife. 3. The criminal complaint of defamation is sought to be quashed by the petitioner on the ground that the Ld. M.M. has not appreciated the facts of the case and the publication of the alleged defamatory statements mad...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »