Delhi Court January 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 12 of about 723 results (0.024 seconds)M/S. Samtech Industries and Others Vs. C.C.E. Kanpur and and Others
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Rakesh Kumar, J. The appellants in these appeals are engaged in the business of manufacture as well as repair of transformers. In course of repair of transformers they very often replace certain components like HV/LV coils etc. and also the used transformer oil for filling. They are liable to pay service tax in respect of the service of repair of old transformer provided by them to their clients and for which they have service tax registration. In the invoices issued by them to their customers they show the service charges and the value of the transformers oil and other consumables and of the components parts replaced, separately. While Service Tax/VAT is paid on the amount charged for the transfer oil/ consumables and the components used for repair, service tax was being paid by them only on the service/ Labour charges. The Department was of the view that the service tax is chargeable on the gross amount charged for repair of the transformers including value of consumables like transf...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Anand Sales Corporation and Others Vs. Cce, Kanpur, Allahabad and ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
G. Raghuram, J. 1. At the stage of consideration of the stay applications, we notice that the issues presented in the substantive appeals are covered by the judgment of this Tribunal in final order dated 06/11/12 in Service Tax appeal Nos. 684 to 687 of 2012 CU (DB), an appeal preferred by M/s Martand Food and Dehydrates Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Kanpur. Hence we waive pre-deposit and dispose of the appeals. 2. Since identical issues arising in all these appeals, except for the periods of the transactions in issue, we consider the facts in Service Tax appeal No. 1751 of 2011 as representing the relevant facts common to all the appeals. Service Tax Appeal No. 1751 of 2011:- The appellant is the assessee and is admittedly engaged in purchase and sale of pre-paid Sim Cards and Recharge Coupons of various denominations for mobile phones of M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL). The assessee entered into an agreement dated 12/01/2005, with BSNL termed as a Franchiseeship Agreement. Proceedings were...
Tag this Judgment!Riverside Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
1. This Application is filed under Section 18 (1) read with Sections 14 and 15 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. M/s Riverside Resort Pvt. Ltd., the Applicant, herein, is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The Applicant, for the purpose of brevity, will be hereafter referred to as œM/s Riverside Resort?. 2. The Application is mainly filed against the construction of a crematorium activities of Respondent No.1, Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC). Respondent No.2, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB), and Respondent No.4, Collector, Pune are the formal parties. Respondent No.3- M/s Yashak Associates, is a building contractor, in whose favour tender work is allegedly given by the PCMC for construction of the crematorium in question. The Respondent No.5, Irrigation Department, is also a formal party, but seems to have been joined, because it is supervisory authority over flood line areas of the rivers. 3. From the pleadings of the Ap...
Tag this Judgment!Sunita Sharma and anr. Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A.458/1998 SUNITA SHARMA & ANR. Through : .....Appellants Mr.K.B.Andley, Senior Advocate with Mr.M.L.Yadav, Adv. versus STATE OF DELHI Through : % ..... Respondent Mr.Narender Kr.Chouhdary, APP for the State. Pronounced on : January 28, 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J1 The Appellants Sunita Sharma and Sudhir Sharma have preferred this appeal impugning the judgment dated 07.10.1998 and order on sentence dated 08.10.1998 whereby they have been convicted under Sections 302/324/323/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- each for committing the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC, further to undergo RI for six months for committing the offence punishable under Section 324/34 IPC and also to undergo RI for one month for committing the offence punishable under Section 323/34 IPC.2. Briefly stating, the prosecution case is that the Appella...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Sh. Kunj Vihari Shukla and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h January, 2014 % + MAC.APP.No.210/2012 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. J.P.N.Shahi, Advocate. Versus SH. KUNJ VIHARI SHUKLA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Umesh Mishra, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr.R.S. Nirwal, Advocate for Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 15.11.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.4,14,466/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued the instant appeal only on the ground that on the date of accident, the deceased was 24 years of age and the respondents/claimants failed to prove his employment, however, the learned Tribunal has ass...
Tag this Judgment!Hazzan Farkhanda Naaz Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : January 27, 2014 DECIDED ON : January 28, 2014 + CRL.A. 368/2011 HAZZAN FARKHANDA NAAZ ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. VERSUS STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. None for Respondent No.2. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Present appeal has been preferred by the complainant-Hazzan Farkhanda Naaz against the judgment dated 29.06.2010 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate in FIR No.12/2003 registered at Police Station Jama Masjid by which the respondent No.2-Ashima Begum was acquitted. It is relevant to note that the State did not challenge her acquittal.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have examined the Trial Court record. Allegations against the respondent No.2 were that on 08.01.2003 at about 08.30 P.M. at house No.726, Haveli Azam Khan, Kala Mahal, Jama Masjid, she committed house trespass after breaking open the lock and committed theft of variou...
Tag this Judgment!K.Sarojini Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
#60-61 $~ * 60. + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 7159/2012 K.SAROJINI Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Mohit Mathur with Mr. D.K. Mathur, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari, CGSC with Mr. Raujyot Singh, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Yeeshu Jain with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for R-3/Asst. Collector. AND61 + W.P.(C) 7160/2012 & CM APPL. 18485/2012 T.P.KARUNKARAN Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Mohit Mathur with Mr. D.K. Mathur, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, CGSC with Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for UOI. % Date of Decision :28. h January, 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petitions have been filed seeking quashing of the orders dated 20th November, 2003 passed by Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement under The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 imposing penalty of Rs. 50 lacs on each of the petitioners.2. Mr. Mohit ...
Tag this Judgment!Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. and anr. Vs. M/S.Aravali International
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: January 17, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: January 28, 2014 + RFA(OS)91/2012 JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD. & ANR. .....Appellant Represented by: Mr.G.M.Kawoosa, Advocate versus M/S.ARAVALI INTERNATIONAL ..... Defendant Represented by: Mr.Janendra Lal and Ms.Yasmin Tarapore, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. The present Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 CPC seeking to challenge the decree dated 13.4.2012 passed in favour of the respondent for a sum of `23,73,364.38 alongwith pendent lite and future interest @ 9% per annum with quarterly rests and costs.2. The present suit was filed by the respondent for recovery on account of non receipt of payment from the appellant pursuant to invocation of Bank Guarantee issued by the appellant in favour of the respondent being Bank Guarantee No.18/94 dated 14.5.1994 for a sum of `21,50,000/-.3. As per the ...
Tag this Judgment!Rahul @ Sunny Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : January 16, 2014 DECIDED ON : January 28, 2014 + CRL.A. 803/2012 & CRL.M.B. 115/2014 RAHUL @ SUNNY Through : ..... Appellant Mr.H.S.Phoolka, Sr.Advocate with Mr.HJS Ahluwalia and Mr.Gursimran Jit Singh, Advocates. VERSUS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. SI Rajesh Kumar, PS Kanjhawala. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Rahul @ Sunny questions the correctness and legality of a judgment dated 09.05.2012 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.107/2011 arising out of FIR No.243/2007 registered at Police Station Kanjhawala by which he was convicted under Section 307 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act. By an order dated 17.05.2012 he was awarded rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine `10,000/- under Section under Section 25/27 Arms Act. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 15.12.2007 at about 02.30 P.M. near Dada M...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Smt. Atina Khatoon and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h January, 2014 % + MAC.APP.No.209/2012 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. J.P.N.Shahi, Advocate. Versus SMT. ATINA KHATOON & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr.R.S. Nirwal, Advocate for Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 15.11.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.4,14,466/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued the instant appeal only on the ground that on the date of accident, the deceased was 19 years of age and the respondents/claimants failed to prove his employment, however, the learned Tribunal has assessed...
Tag this Judgment!