Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-18-2006
Reported in : 2006(194)ELT3(SC); JT2006(1)SC385; 2006(1)SCALE327; (2006)2SCC351
..... the duty payable thereon. as far as the explanation is concerned, the inputs are restricted to inputs notified under rule 57a. there is no dispute that both explosives and limestone are notified under section 57a for manufacture of the final product viz. cement.5. the next relevant rule is rule 57f. what we are concerned with is sub-rule (4) ..... 1. the question whether the decision in jaypee rewa cement v. cce : 2001ecr193(sc) would apply to the cenvat rules 2000 framed under the central excise tariff act 1985 (referred to as the 'act') is to be decided on a reference made in this case. a bench of two judges of this court in commissioner of central excise, jaipur v. j ..... (hereinafter referred to as the cenvat credit) of.-(i) the duty of excise specified in the first schedule to the central excise tariff act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the said first schedule) , leviable under the act;(ii) xxx xxx xxx xxx(iii) xxx xxx xxx xxx(iv) xxx xxx xxx xxx(v) xxx xxx xxx xxxpaid on any inputs .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-10-2006
Reported in : AIR2006SC3699; 2006(2)AWC1162(SC); 2006(1)JKJ42[SC]; JT2006(2)SC294; 2006(2)SCALE284; (2006)3SCC129
..... behalf of' each of the manufacturers and enclosed a draft of the undertaking to be signed. finally, the letter stated:.your (m/s indian explosives ltd.) willingness to participate in the retention price scheme communicated, and undertaking the enclosed form duly executed by a competent authority on behalf of ..... appellant') is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling urea (a fertilizer). in 1993, the first appellant acquired the urea plant of m/'s indian explosives ltd. (a unit of ici india ltd.). the second appellant is a shareholder in the first appellant-company (hereinafter, collectively 'the appellants').4. in 1957 ..... notified fertilizers (including urea) as an 'essential commodity', under the essential commodities act, 1955 (hereinafter 'the ec act'). the fertilizer (control) order, 1957 (hereinafter 'the fertilizer (control) order') was made in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the ec act. the fertilizer (control) order has been revised from time to time. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-10-2006
Reported in : JT2006(3)SC544; (2006)143PLR159; 2006(3)SCALE178; (2006)3SCC620; [2006]145STC350(SC)
..... 2 ch. 1]. a retrospective effect to an amendment by way of a delegated legislation could be given, thus, only after coming into force of sub-section (2a) of section 64 of the act and not prior thereto.35. by reason of note 2, certain rights were conferred. although there lies a distinction between vested rights and accrued rights as by ..... dates. furthermore, on 6.09.1996, civil construction work started at site. plans submitted by the appellant for getting permission for storage of hexane were sanctioned by the explosives department on 19.9.1996 and licence was finally given on 11.3.1997. on 26.09.1996, process of installation of the plant started at the site. on ..... a promise. it was held:in this case the scheme being notified under the power in the state government to grant exemptions both under section 15 of the rst act and section 8(5) of the cst act in the public interest, the state government was competent to modify or revoke the grant for the same reason. thus what is granted .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-24-2006
Reported in : AIR2006SC1599; (2006)3GLR2304; JT2006(4)SC34; 2006(3)SCALE414; (2006)4SCC584
..... rival political parties at subhash sarobar and the case was registered as case no. 111 of 2001 for offences punishable under sections 148, 149 and 336 ipc read with sections 3 & 5 of explosive substances act, 1908 against the deceased and others and investigation started. the appellant, along with other police officers, rushed to the spot ..... what is relevant for our purpose is to notice that investigations into the two crimes registered, namely, case no. 111 under sections 148, 149, 336 ipc read with sections 3 and 5 of explosive substances act and case no. 112, registered on the complaint made by the complainant herein on 11.5.2001, have not been completed ..... being phoolbagan police station case no. 111 dated 10.5.2001 against 20/30 persons including robindranath das under section 148/149/336 of the india penal code and section 3 and 5 of explosive substance act.that the petitioner submits that initially the opposite party no. 1 lodged an information against some unknown police personnel .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-12-2006
Reported in : AIR2006SC2157; 2006CriLJ2791; 130(2006)DLT602(SC); JT2006(5)SC468; 2006(5)SCALE682; (2006)5SCC584
..... placed by mr. mishra on bhoop ram v. state of u.p. : 1990crilj2671 , wherein the appellant was treated to be a child within the meaning of section 2(4) of the act; upon taking into consideration three factors: (i) that the appellant had produced a school certificate and correctness whereof was not questioned; (ii) the learned trial judge ..... was upon the election petitioner but for proving the facts which were within the special knowledge of the respondent, the burden was upon him in terms of section 106 of the evidence act. it is also trite that when both parties have adduced evidence, the question of the onus of proof becomes academic [see union of india v. sugauli ..... basis of the materials on records. it will be a matter of appreciation of evidence adduced by the parties. different standards having regard to the provision of section 35 of the evidence act cannot be applied in a civil case or a criminal case. mr. mishra, however, would urge that while in a civil dispute a strict proof may .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-12-2006
Reported in : 2006(13)SCALE467; (2007)1Crimes321; 2007(1)KCCRSN23(SC); (2007)12SCC230
..... mamata dutta are concerned, the only evidence against them was the judicial confession of mrinal dutta. the same was admissible against them only under section 30 of the indian evidence act.section 30:69. it is not in dispute that apart from general evidence in regard to commission of forgery etc., only evidence of involvement ..... of the high court to award death penalty, observed:the very idea of attacking and overpowering a sovereign democratic institution by using powerful arms and explosives and imperiling the safety of a multitude of peoples' representatives, constitutional functionaries and officials of government of india and engaging into a combat with security forces ..... admissibility in evidence. if the confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise such as is mentioned in section 24, evidence act, it must be excluded and rejected brevi manu. in such a case, the question of proceeding further to apply the second test does not arise .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-03-2006
Reported in : 2006(1)BLJR140; [2006(1)JCR254(SC)]; JT2006(1)SC195; 2006(1)SCALE122; (2006)2SCC545
..... term 'eminent domain.62. in bishambhar dayal (supra) this court held that seizure of the food stuff in terms of an order made under section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 would not be hit by article 300a of the constitution of india but categorically stated that such a course could not have been taken ..... of private schools. had the legislature of the state of bihar made an enactment nationalizing the schools like bihar non-government elementary schools 'taking over' control act, 1976 the terms and conditions for taking over of the services of the teaching and non-teaching staff could have been laid down therein so that as ..... that the services of the teaching and non-teaching staff had been regularized. the expression 'regularization' has a definite connotation. regularization of services must be preceded by a legislative act or in absence of legislation, rules framed in terms of proviso appended to article 309 of the constitution of india. [see state of up v. neeraj awasthi - .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-03-2006
Reported in : AIR2006SC839; 2006(86)DRJ400; [2006(108)FLR733]; JT2006(1)SC252; (2006)ILLJ748SC; 2006(1)SCALE59; (2006)1SCC530; 2006(1)LC617(SC)
..... in violation of 'service conditions provided in different bank awards as well as bipartite settlement'. it was alleged that the bank had violated the provisions of section 25h of the act and also paragraph 497 of the shastri award which was applicable to the bank.5. the appellant filed a written statement opposing the claim of the respondent ..... labour court and said that the labour court was right and that the appellant's appointment amounted to unfair labour practice and was against the mandate of section 25h of the act.8. the appellant challenged the decision of the high court by way of a special leave petition under article 136 of the constitution. while issuing notice ..... meantime and during the pendency of the proceedings before the high court the appellant has paid the respondent a sum of approximately rs. 3.80 lakhs under section 17-b of the act.9. mr. v.a. bobde, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, has contended that there was no unfair labour practice indulged in by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-03-2006
Reported in : AIR2006SC845; 2006(1)CTC414; [2006(109)FLR18]; JT2006(1)SC84; 2006(2)KarLJ1; (2006)ILLJ691SC; RLW2006(2)SC1156; 2006(1)SCALE85; (2006)1SCC567; 2006(2)SLJ129(SC)
..... persons working in the canteen would be the employees of the establishment. therefore, even assuming that respondent 1 is a specified industry within the meaning of section 46 of the factories act, 1946, this by itself would not lead to the inevitable conclusion that the employees in the canteen are the employees of respondent 1.28. in ..... it may be carried out wholly or substantially by the establishment itself or the burden may be delegated to an independent contractor. there is nothing in section 46 of the factories act, nor has any provision of any other statute been pointed out to us by the appellants, which provides for the mode in which the specified ..... in the saraspur mills co. ltd. v. ramanlal chimanlal and ors. : (1973)iillj130sc where the management was under a statutory obligation in terms of section 46 of the factories act and the rules made thereunder to maintain the canteen for the workers which was being run by a co-operative society wherewith the management had nothing to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-04-2006
Reported in : AIR2006SC928; 2006(2)ALT9(SC); JT2006(1)SC107; 2006(1)SCALE147; (2006)1SCC597; [2006]144STC342(SC)
..... in union of india v. bombay tyre international ltd. : 1983ecr653d(sc) . tracing the principles from the leading authority of a reference under the government of ireland act, 1920 and section 3 of the finance act (northern ireland) 1934, re. 1936 ac 352, passing through ralla ram v. province of east punjab, , and treading through the law as it has ..... 9. simultaneously, the state government, in order to see that the value of the packing materials is not taxed twice, exercised the power conferred under section 9(1) of the act and provided for set off of the tax paid on packing materials. it was provided that the tax levied and collected on packing materials in respect of ..... be construed uninfluenced by the decision of the court in raj steel's case where pathak, c.j. construed the deeming provisions in section 6-c of the andhra act in a narrow sense. section 6-c did not contain any specific provisions for including the turnover of the containers of the packing materials in the turnover of the .....
Tag this Judgment!