Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (2003)(89)ECC276
1. The above captioned appeals have been preferred against the common Order-in-Original dated 4.5.2000 vide which the Commissioner of Customs has ordered the confiscation of the seized goods (polyester curtain cloth and polyester suiting cloth) and imposed penalty of various amounts, as detailed therein, on the appellants.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeals may briefly be stated as under: On 27.1.1998, the Preventive Branch of New Customs House, New Delhi, conducted raid on the premises of appellant, M/s Prakash Transport at East Moti Bagh, Sarai Rohila, Delhi. As a result of search, polyester textile fabric for curtains and suitings, measuring 66,061.2 metres valued at Rs. 66,06,120 was recovered which was seized after preparing Panchnama at the spot. On demand, Shri Vinod Jindal, Manager, who was present in the premises, could produce only one Bill of Entry No. 345/98 dated 14.1.1998. The scrutiny of said Bill of Entry revealed the names of the importer and exp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (2003)(88)ECC404
1. The original authority had absolutely confiscated 1000 kgs of small cardamom and Truck No. DLIG 4437 under Section 111 (d) and Section 115 (2) respectively of the Customs Act and had also imposed personal penalties of Rs. 25,000 each on the appellants under Section 112(b) of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeals preferred against the decision of the original authority. Hence these appeals before the Tribunal.3. The truck carrying 1000 kgs. of small cardamom, found deserted on a by-lane of Lucknow-Faizabad road near Polytechnic crossing, Lucknow was intercepted by officers of Customs on 26.5.98. The vehicle was brought to the Customs hqrs., Lucknow, and the cardamom was unloaded and got examined by local grocery merchants summoned by the officers. The examiners opined that the cardamom was of Guatemalan origin and could be valued at around Rs. 400 per kg. The Customs officers also noted that the goods were found packed in Nepali newspapers. They did not find any b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2003(26)PTC377(Del); 2004(1)RAJ377
A.K. Sikri, J. 1. The petitioner in this writ petition is seeking direction against first respondent namely, Commissioner of Customs, Hand Container Depot, Tuglakabad, New Delhi to release its consignment and to permit the petitioner to remove the said consignment from customs without let or hindrance. The direction is also sought against first respondent to compensate the petitioner all the moneys paid by the petitioner towards demurrages or ground rent to NLS Agency (India) Pvt. Ltd., and/or to the Container Corporation of India and/or any other person for any other charges whatsoever arising from the delay in releasing the consignment to the petitioner. 2. As would be clear from the prayer clause, the petitioner has imported certain goods, but as the respondent No. 1 did not clear the same this petition has been filed with aforesaid prayers. The facts which emerge from the petition and counter-affidavits of the respondents may be recapitulated. 3. The petitioner is a Private Limited...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (2003)(161)ELT173TriDel
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 3-9-2002 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the order-in-original of the Addl. Commissioner.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal may briefly be stated as under - On 19-7-2000 at around 12.30 hrs. Officers of the Customs Varanasi conducted raid at the house of the appellant and recovered 20 gaddas Chinese Tussar Silk Yarn, 2 gaddas foreign origin silk yarn and 9 pieces of Chinese Silk Yarn Fabrics from a room adjacent to a room on the outer periphery of his house. On conducting search of the residential premises of the appellant, Rs. 1,98,000/- from an almirah and Rs. 42,000/- from a suitcase, a cash-memo dated 18-11-1999 issued by a firm, namely, M/s. Ajit Kumar, Vishal Kumar, a piece of bansi paper, a paper chit containing some details of weight and amount and one/two rupees Nepali currency, were recovered, which were taken into possession through a Panchnama...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2003CriLJ3301; 2003(2)MPHT289; 2003(2)MPLJ600
Rajeev Gupta, J.1. Appellant Prem Nepali @ Prem Bahadur stands convicted under Section 302, IPC with sentence of imprisonment for life, vide impugned judgment dated 30-11-91 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, in Sessions Trial No. 201/88.2. The appellant has been found guilty of causing injuries on the right thigh of deceased Guddu @ Shahzad by means of knife, in the evening of 26-8-88, leading to his death the same night.3. At the trial, accused Prem Nepali @ Prem Bahadur abjured hisguilt and pleaded false implication to the charge framed by the Trial Court under Section 302, IPC.4. The charge of 'murder' against the accused was sought to be proved on the evidence of Bhole Shafiq (P.W. 1), Mohd. Nazir (P.W. 2), Dr. Abdul Hakeem (P.W. 3), Rameshwar Pandey (P.W. 4), Ram Palat Pandey (P.W. 5), Brijwasi Prasad (P.W. 6), Laxman Singh (P.W. 7), Dr. Suneet Kaur (P.W. 8), Dr. Daryav Singh Badkur (P.W. 9), J.P. Garg (P.W. 10), Abdul Majid (P.W. 11), Vishnu Prasad Tiwari (P.W. 12)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B. Lamare, J. 1. Heard Mr. R. Iralu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. N. Rhetso, learned Addl. Central Govt. Standing Counsel. 2. The petitioner is the father of late Ms. Rukhiezonuo. The petitioner has three daughters and four sons. The deceased late Rukhiezonuo was the eldest daughter. The said daughter of the petitioner was shot dead by one Rifleman No. 13747927 U, Ram Rattan of the 5th Bn. J&K; Rifles on 29.6.1996. The story leading to the death of the deceased is clearly mentioned in paragraph 2 and 3 of the writ petition which reads as follows ;- 'That there is an army post at Chiephobozou Village which is not very far from the petitioner's village of Nerhema. On 29.6.1996 the 'C' company 5th Battalion, Jammu and Kashmir Rifles, then posted at Indira Gandhi Stadium, Kohima, moved to Chiephobozou army post. On the same day, sometime in the evening Rifleman No. 13747927 Y, Ram Rattan, 5th Battalion & A.K. Rifles, left the post fully equipped with rams and ammunition wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2003(1)AWC455
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus directing the respondents and their subordinates and other officers not to evict the petitioners from their residences and not to harass them.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. In this case on 19.11.2002, learned standing counsel prayed for time to seek instructions. Today learned standing counsel has submitted written instructions before us which shall be placed on record and shall be treated as the counter-affidavit in this case.4. It is alleged in paragraph 8 of the writ petition that the petitioners have been doing the profession of singing and dancing for the last several years and have nothing to do with prostitution nor have they violated the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. They are living in their respective residences coming within the area of police station Brahmapuri, district Meerut. It is alleged in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that after coming into force of the amending Act No. 44 of 198...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(4)AWC2787
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-tenant against the order dated 14.9.2001, Annexure-2 to the writ petition, passed by the revislonal court, whereby the revisional court has allowed the revision filed by the respondent No. 2 and set aside the order dated 27.3.1999, passed by the trial court.2. The facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are that the landlord-respondent No. 2, Sharad Chandra Mishra filed a suit bearingSuit No, 156 of 1994 for ejectment of the petitioner-tenant from House No. CK-32/1, 2, 3, Mohalla Nepali Khapra, Varanasi, which is a non-residential accommodation in which one late Smt. Gangajali was the tenant. Originally it was let out to Kedar Nath, who was tenant and after his death, tenancy was inherited by his wife. Kedar Nath had no offspring and the petitioner is his foster son. Gangajali died and the petitioner who is foster son continued in possession and he claimed inheritance in tenancy firstly on the ground of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2002CriLJ3426
ORDERR.C. Kathuria, J.1. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 18-10-2001 (Annexure P5) passed by Shri R.C. Godara, Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, dismissing the application dated 3-9-2001 (Annexure-P4) filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the prosecution to hold identification parade for identifying the petitioner by the three eyewitnesses in the case titled State v. Raju Gurung bearing FIR No. 73 dated 13-4-2001 registered under Sections 308 and 506, I.P.C. with Police Station, Sector 19, Chandigarh but at the time of submission of report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') offence under Section 304, I.P.C. was added.2. For the purpose of adjudication of the present petition, a few facts need to be noticed. The present case was registered on the statement of Sitla Parshad resident of village Ramapur, Police Station Amethi, District Amethi (U.P.), who on the date of occurrence was residing in Koth...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chhattisgarh
Reported in : 2002(2)MPHT7(CG)
Fakhruddin, J. 1. Heard.2. This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 19-12-2001, passed by A.D.J., Durg, whereby application for withdrawal of F.D.R. amount has been rejected.3. Counsel for the applicants submits that the deceased was a Nepali and he died in an accident and the claimants are widow and children. He further submits that the amount is needed for treatment of the child of the deceased, who is seriously ill in Nepal. Her permanent address is Village Paharipur, Post Patharia, Dist. Kelali Sethi Anchal, Nepal. At present she is temporarily staying Bhilai. Counsel for the applicants relied upon a judgment reported in 2000(2) M.P.H.T. 357 (Mangibai v. Suresh) and a judgment of this reported in 2001(1) C.G.L.J. (Bharat Ram v. Abdul Murad and Ors.) and submitted the relevant medical documents. Counsel for the applicants submits that he himself is satisfied.4. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, material on record, the revision petition i...
Tag this Judgment!