Delhi Court June 2012 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd Vs. Cce, Jaipur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
Per Rakesh Kumar (Oral): 1. The appellant are manufacturers of cement chargeable to Central Excise duty. They availed cenvat credit in respect of inputs and capital goods in or in relation to the final product. A show cause notice dated 28.7.2010 was issued to the appellant for denial of cenvat credit in respect of number of items of capital goods and demand of such wrongly taken cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,30,69,226/-, alongwith interest and imposition penalty on them. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 24.11.2011 by which the cenvat credit demand of only Rs. 10,06,487/- was confirmed in respect of liner plate, nose ring segment, steel castings, tail ring segment, CIS plate, CFG plate, RFT plate, replaceable lip, HRCS grade 7 and 9, alongwith interest and the demand for the remaining amount was dropped. The Commissioner also imposed penalty of Rs. 2.50 lakh on the appellant. Agains...
M/S Markwell Paper Plast Pvt. Ltd and Others Vs. Ccandce, Noida
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-14-2012
Per. Justice Ajit Bharihoke: 1. By this order we propose to dispose above referred four appeals involving common question of law and facts. i) In Excise Appeal No.1644 of 2009-Ex, the appellant M/s Markwell Paper Plast Pvt. Ltd. has challenged the order-in-original dated 29.04.2009 of Commissioner (Adjudication) whereby for the period w.e.f. April 2007 to February, 2008 the adjudicating authority disallowed the cenvat credit availed by the appellant and confirmed the demand of Rs.63,74,221/- with interest and also imposed penalty of Rs. 40 lakhs on the appellant. ii) In Excise Appeal No. 45 of 2010, the appellant M/s Chawla Packaging (P) Ltd. has challenged the order-in-original No. 3/2009 dated 8.9.2009 passed by the Commissioner (Adjudication) whereby he disallowed the cenvat credit availed by the appellant and confirmed duty demand of Rs.1,48,43,003/- in respect of period July, 2007 to February, 2008, with interest and also imposed penalty of Rs. ...
Secretariat Vs. Nitish Kumar Tripathi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-14-2012
VIPIN SANGHI, J. 1. The petitioner President’s Secretariat, through its Secretary, has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the order dated 4th May, 2012 passed by the Central Information Commission, New Delhi (CIC), whereby the appeal preferred before it by the respondent has been allowed, and directions have been issued to the petitioner to provide information under the Right to Information Act (the Act) sought by the respondent in relation to the donations made by the President from time to time. A direction has also been issued to the petitioner to take steps to publish the details regarding the donations made i.e. the names of the recipients of the donations, their addresses and the amount of donation in each case, on the website of the President’s Secretariat at the earliest. 2. Nine RTI applications had been moved by the respondent before the petitioner. Most of the information had been provided. However, infor...
Vipul Gupta Vs. State and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-14-2012
VIPIN SANGHI, J. 1. The aforesaid writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners, assailing the communication dated 13.12.2011 issued by the Director of Prosecution, Delhi, to the Principal Secretary (Home) bearing No. 4383/DOP/2011 Dated 13.12.2011, whereby the Director of Prosecution sought instructions whether the concerned APP has to press the application filed before the court of the Learned ACMM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Under Section 321 Cr.P.C. for withdrawal from prosecution in case FIR Nos. 90/2000, 99/2002 and 148/2002 registered at P.S. Connaught Place and Defence Colony. The petitioners also assail the order passed by the Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor on 15.12.2011 agreeing with the proposal not to press the applications for withdrawal of the aforesaid cases under Section 321 Cr.P.C. before the competent court, so that the trial may be allowed to proceed on merits. The petitioners also seek orders declaring that the revocation of the previous decision to withdr...
M/S. Indian Potash Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-13-2012
Per Archna Wadhwa: 1. After hearing both the sides, I find that proceedings were initiated against the appellant for denial of modvat credit vide show cause notice dated 10.4.96. The said show cause notice culminated into an order passed by original adjudicating authority disallowing the credit. The appellant, accordingly, debited the amount from their Cenvat credit. 2. On an appeal filed against the said order, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the denial of modvat credit vide his order in appeal No. 71-CE/ALLD/97 dated 23/25.3.97. There against the revenue again approached the appellant for deposit of rejected cenvat credit. Without realizing that they have already reversed the credit, appellant again paid the duty through their PLA on 28.5.97. 3. The said order of Commissioner (Appeals) was challenged before Tribunal and vide its order dated 6.10.2000, the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals). In remand proceedings Commissioner (Ap...
Cc and Ce, Raipur Vs. M/S Ind Synergy Ltd
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-13-2012
Per. Justice Ajit Bharihoke: 1. M/s Ind Synergy Limited is engaged in the manufacture of sponge iron, billets etc. falling under chapter 68 of the schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 07.10.2008, the appellant cleared a consignment of sponge iron / billet to its depot on payment of excise duty on the basis of provisional valuation @ Rs. 27,915/- PMT. Those goods were sold from the depot during the period 18.10.2008 to 03.11.2008 at different rates. The invoice value of the goods sold by the respondent from his depot on 18.10.2008 was Rs. 30862/- PMT. However, after 18.08.2009 and most of the depot sales were at a rate lesser then the transaction value on which the excise duty was paid at the time of clearance of goods from the factory to the depot. The respondent thus applied for refund of Rs. 11,25,653/- on differential of the rate at which excise duty was paid at the time of clearance and the rate on which the goods were sold from depot....
Global Vectra Helicorp Vs. Directorate General of Civil Aviation and A ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-11-2012
ORDER VIPIN SANGHI, J. C.M. Nos. 5957/2012 and 6842/2012 W.P.(C.) Nos. 2775/2012 and 3197/2012 Page 2 of 54 1. The petitioners have preferred the aforesaid writ petitions to seek a writ of mandamus quashing and setting aside the order No. AV.1404/48/97-80.I dated 07.05.2012 issued by respondent No. 1, i.e. the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), whereby the DGCA has suspended, with immediate effect, the Non-Scheduled Operator’s Permit (NSOP) No. 08/1998 issued to the petitioner, by invoking sub-Rule (6) of Rule 134A of the Aircrafts Rules, 1937 (the Rules). The impugned order is premised upon the withdrawal of security clearance of the petitioner company Global Vectra and it’s Director–Sh. Ravi Rishi, by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Government of India. The petitioner also assails the action of respondent No. 2, i.e. the MHA in withdrawing the security clearance of the petitioner company. 2. The case of the petitioners in W.P.(C.) No. 2775/2012 is tha...
Manakpur Chini Mills Vs. C.C.E, Allahabad
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-2012
Per Mr. Rakesh Kumar: 1. The appellant are manufacturers of sugar and molasses. In course of manufacture of sugar two waste products are generated - pressmud and waste water which for complying with the environmental regulations, are mixed together and converted into bio-compost which is sold by them. The department was of the view that since bio-compost is an excisable product under Chapter 31 of the Central Excise Tariff with nil rate of duty, same would be an exempted goods as defined in Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and since common Cenvat credit availed inputs have been used for manufacture of dutiable final products - (sugar and molasses) and exempted final- (product bio-compost) and since no separate account and inventory have been maintained in terms of the provisions of Rule 6 (2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the appellant in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6(3) would be required to pay an amount equal to 5% of the sale value of bio-compost. It is on this basis that demand...
Sunil Madan Vs. Mrs. Rachna Madan and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-02-2012
M.L. MEHTA, J. 1. This petition under Section 482 CrPC is filed seeking quashing of the criminal complaint No. 2622/1 filed against the petitioner by his wife and daughter (respondents No. 1 and 2 herein) under Section 12 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short the ‘Act’). 2. At the outset, it may be noted that in the aforesaid complaint of the respondents, no order other than that of maintenance @ Rs. 30,000/- per month was passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate and even none of the parties have challenged the said order of maintenance. Thus, there is no order which is sought to be impugned in the present petition. Under the Act and particularly Chapter IV thereto, the Magistrate has been empowered to hear and dispose of the applications for various reliefs. This is the Magistrate alone having jurisdiction, who has been empowered to pass the order of protection as also of residence including interim etc. under the Act. Then, the provisions also e...
Manushi Sangathan, Delhi and Others Vs. Govt. of Delhi and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-02-2012
S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) C.M. APPL. 626/2012, 2724/2012, 2801/2012, 3663/2012 and 793/2012 Left Slip Road 1. At a special sitting today, the Court was shown several presentations. One of these included a presentation by M/s. Pradeep Sachdeva and Associates, the Architects commissioned by the MCD. This presentation was about the road segregation on the S.P. Mukherjee Marg for the purpose of pilot project for implementation of the directions contained in this Court’s judgment dated 10.02.2010. The Court is informed that this presentation was also made before the UTTIPEC which has approved it in principle. According to the proposal, the free-left slip road turning on to the S.P. Mukherjee Marg would no longer exist. Instead a separate lane has been created in the main carriageway to cater to the left-turning motorized vehicle (MV) traffic. The proposal also envisions a multi-utility zone (MUZ) which is to act as a buffer between non-motorized vehicle (NMV, a term which refers t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »