Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Mar-07-1994
Reported in : (1994)LC571Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellant, importer, is aggrieved with the order of the Collector of Customs, Bombay. The Importer had imported "Cat Scanner Equipment" and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 64/88-Cus., dt.1-3-1988. The Bill of Entry disclosed the value of the said item at Rs. 1,40,22,787.00 CIF. Alongwith the Bill of Entry, the importers had attached the following documents : (i) Invoice No. HH-001/90 dt. 24-3-1990 of M/s. Hightech Health Equipment Co., Hongkong. (ii) Insurance Certificate No. 15080322 (1064) dt. 30-3-1990 indicating the reference No. SDL/HH/29/80 relating to the goods imported. (v) Order confirmation No. CH. 001/90 dt. 14-3-1990 by M/s. High Tech Health Equipments Co., Hongkong. (vi) Packing list of M/s. High Tech Health Equipment Co., Hongkong relating to invoice No. NH-001/90 dt. 24-3-1990 indicating importer's reference number as SDL/HH/29/30. (vii) NMIC No. I/CC/5/88/397 dt. 25-5-1988 endorsed on application No. NMIC/1-88 dt. 15-4-1988 for CT-SE 600 Syner view Scann...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Nov-30-1994
Reported in : (1995)LC703Tri(Delhi)
1. The only issue involved in the instant case is whether "Ad-vitamin Massage Oil Forte" manufactured by the appellants is classifiable under sub-heading 3003.19 of GET, 1985 as claimed by the appellants or under sub-heading 3304.00 as held by the authorities below.2. The facts leading to the said controversy lie in a very narrow compass that is to say the appellants M/s. Sunny Industries (P) Ltd. files their classification list No. 2/86, dated 3-3-1986 claiming classification of their said product, namely, Ad-vitamin Massage Oil Forte under sub-heading 3003.19 of GET, 1985 as patent or proprietary medicine which was modified during approval by the Assistant Collector to sub-heading 3304.00 as preparation of skin on the ground that use of medicinal ingredients in the subject goods does not take it away from the purview of the above Tariff Heading.3. The said question of classification of the subject product, namely, Ad-vitamin Massage Oil Forte stands already decided by this Tribunal ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-20-1994
Reported in : 1995IAD(Delhi)533; 57(1995)DLT490; 1995(32)DRJ89; 1995RLR307
M. Jagannadha Rao, C.J.(1) This is an appeal filed by the appellants under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act and Order 43 Rule l(r) of the Civil Procedure Code dated 2.12.1994 passed by the learned Single Judge issuing 'notice' to the defendants in is No. 10356/94 in Suit No. 2630/94. The suit was filed for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 30.9.1986 executed by Mrs. Kaula (predecessor in title of defendants 1 to 4) in favor of the appellants for sale of property. In the Ia, the appellants prayed for a restraint order against the defendants 1 to 4 from parting with possession or encumbering the property in any manner. When the is came up before the learned trial Judge, the said defendants who had filed caveat took notice and it was ordered 'Notice for 4th January,1995'. It is against this order that this appeal has been preferred. The defendants 1 to 4 have again appeared through counsel and opposed the grant of any order. They have contended that the appeal is n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-08-1994
Reported in : 1994IVAD(Delhi)25; 1994(2)ARBLR332(Delhi); 55(1994)DLT694; 1994(31)DRJ397
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. This order disposes of I.A. 4412/94 and I.A. No. 5240/94, p/2. 2. These proceedings have arisen out of a petition under Section 41 read with Schedule II of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. 3. The petitioner is a public sector undertaking. The respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. They are parties to an agreement under which the respondent has availed advances for making tests on portable steel bridges superstructures using patented Quadricori system for procurement of plant, machinery, equipment as also raw material for execution of tendered work of Government of Bangladesh awarded to the respondent. Between the parties there have arisen disputes which form subject matter of arbitration which is pending. The respondent has entered into yet another contract with the Chief Engineer (Purchases) of the Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi. The work under that contract is known as Akbnoor Bridge Project. According to the petitioner, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-22-1994
Reported in : 1995(32)DRJ447
M.J. Rao, C.J. (1) The first petitioner Dr. Vandana Shiva, is a Director of Research and Foundation for Science, Technology and Natural Resource Policy, Second petitioner is Shri N.D. Jayal, Director General (Natural Heritage), Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage, the third petitioner is Prof. M.D. Nanjundaswamy, President, Karnataka Rajya Ryota Sangha and the fourth petitioner is Srilata Swaminathan, State Secretary, Rajasthan Kisan Sangathana. These four petitioner have filed this writ petition on the 7th April, 1994 seeking a writ of mandamus restraining the. Union of India from signing/ratifying the existing version of Gatt Treaty,' or to restrained the Union of India from, agreeing to sign and signing Art. 27.5.3(b) of the TRIPs Agreement. They also seek a direction for exclusion of patents on life-forms including plants, animals, human beings produced through biological or microbiological processes, whether natural or modified on grounds of public morality and pub...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-22-1994
Reported in : (1994)(73)ELT812TriDel
1. This is an application for condonation of delay with reference to appeal arising out of order-in-appeal No. 369-C.E./APPL/IND/91, dated 8/9-6-1993 of Collector (Appeals), Indore under which the appellant claims for refund of excise duty for the period 1-1-1977 to 31-3-1989 was rejected as time barred.2. The applicant, M.P. Electricity Board are a body corporate duly constituted under Section 5(1) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 with its registered office at Rampur Jabalpur (MP) and have territorial jurisdiction throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh.3. The admitted facts are that the order-in-appeal dated 8/9-6-1993 was received by the applicant on 14-6-1993, limitation period expired on 13/14-9-1993 and the applicant's application for condonation of delay was received in the Registry at New Delhi on 18-10-1993.4. Ld. Advocate for the appellant Shri L.P. Asthana drawing our attention to the sequence of events listed in the Misc. application filed subsequently containing addit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-01-1994
Reported in : 1994(30)DRJ687
R. Lahoti, J. (1) This Order dispose of I.A. No.456 of 1993, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condensation of delay in filing objections under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The applicant is Union of India, the Respondent No.1.(2) It appears that the petitioners had entered into a contract with the Union of India, Ministry of Urban Development, New Delhi. Some disputes arose between the parties. Consistently with the arbitration clause contained in the contract between the parties, the disputes were referred to the arbitration of Shri H.N. Chandwani. The arbitrator made an award. It has been filed in the Court.(3) Notice of filing of the award was issued by the Court to the Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development. It was served on him on 15.5.91. The objections have been filed on 7.8.91. There is thus a delay of about 53 days in preferring the objections.(4) It is stated in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act that before the arbi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Nov-01-1994
Reported in : (1996)(85)ELT345TriDel
1. The appellant company manufacture Titanium Substrate insoluble anodoes (hereinafter called as TSI anodes) using the know-how supplied by the National Research Development Corporation (hereinafter called as NRDC) a Government of India Undertaking.2. Under an agreement dated 18-3-1976 entered into between the appellant company the said NRDC, the appellant company was to collect royalty from the manufacturers of caustic soda who used the TSI anodes to manufacture caustic soda. Accordingly, the appellant company had in its contract for manufacture and supply of TSI anodes incorporated clauses whereby the buyers would pay the appellant company recurring royalty calculated pro rata to the quantum of caustic soda manufactured by them and the royalty so collected was passed on to NRDC after deducting administrative charges.A notice dated 18-11-1985 was issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise to the Appellant Company directing them to show cause as to why the Royalty so collected by ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-02-1994
Reported in : 1994IAD(Delhi)962; AIR1994Delhi242; 53(1994)DLT751; 1994(28)DRJ664
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) The petitioners numbering two, a Chartered Accountant and an Advocate, have Filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking the following reliefs :- (I)Issue .appropriate writ order or direction in the nature of writ of prohibition, prohibiting the Registrar of Trade Marks, Respondent. No.3. from registering any purported trade marks of foreign newspaper which are already registered with the Registrar of Newspapers, Respondent No.2, under Section 6 of the Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867. having same or similar names as that of the applicants Newspapers. (II)To issue appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of mandamus directing the Registrar of Trade Marks, Respondent No. 3 to strictly comply, and not to ignore or violate Section 6 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, while registering the purported trade mark of any foreign newspaper. (III)To issue appropriate order or direction in the nature of prohibition o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Dec-08-1994
Reported in : (1995)(80)ELT712TriDel
1. The Collector of Customs, Bombay has filed this appeal being aggrieved with the order dated 10-11-1993 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. The brief facts are as follows :- M/s. Hero Honda Motors Ltd., New Delhi the respondents herein have entered into Technical Collaboration Agreement on 24-1-1984 with M/s. Honda Motors Co. Ltd., Japan. M/s. Honda Motors IKCDo. Ltd., Japan have equity participation of 26% in the Indian Company. M/s. Honda Motors Co. Ltd., New Delhi among other things, designs, drawings, standards, specifications or other data etc. were also granted industrial property rights like patents, utility models, symbols, designs, trade-marks, brand services marks and other abbreviations relating to the products. They have also granted know-how pertaining to parts which will be manufactured by those who will be granted sub-contracts. In consideration of the services provided by the licensor M/s. Honda Motors Co. Ltd., Japan, Indian Company shall pay a lum...
Tag this Judgment!