Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1998)(62)ECC591
1. These appeals have been filed against Order-in-Original No. 3/95, dated 29-12-1995 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi.Following are the particulars of the appellants :______________________________________________________________Appeal No. Name of the appellant Referred to asE/ 209/ 96- A M/s. I.T.C. Ltd. ITCE/210/96-A J.N. Sapru -E/211/96-A J. Narayan -E/288/96-A M/s. Asia Tobacco Ltd. ATCE/289/96-A M/s. Hyderabad Deccan Cigarette HDCF Factory Ltd.E/290/96-A M/s. Lakshmi Tobacco Co. LTCE/291/96-A M/s. Reliable Cigarettes RCTI and Tobacco IndustriesE/292/96-A M/s. Master Tobacco Co. MTCE/293/96 M/s. Crown Tobacco Co. CTCE/294/96-A R. Bhoothalingam 2. The particulars of demand of duty proposed in the show cause notice for the period 1-3-1983 to 28-2-1987 and demand confirmed and penalty imposed on the assessees are as follows :-_____________________________________________________________Concern Duty proposed Duty confirmed Penalty Penalty (in rupees) (in rupees) in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2007(2)CTLJ179(Del)
Gita Mittal, J.1. The present case is a unique case where one governmental authority is complaining of an illegality by a statutory authority. Grievance has been made by the Public Works Department (hereinafter PWD) that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter MCD) has entered into a contract which is in violation of the law laid down by the Apex Court in several judgments and now by a Division Bench of this Court as well.Interesting questions of law have arisen for consideration in the present case. It is not only the law laid down by the Apex Court but also statutory provisions which would require to be considered and also the public policy which is involved.2. It is said that a great city is defined by its history and its people. Delhi is one such city. Known as a city of great resilience, it has been witness to a number of upheavals, battles and natural calamities in its long history, but has always emerged victorious. traveling through Delhi in the 1930s, Robert Byron, a t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2000IVAD(Delhi)342; 86(2000)DLT246
ORDERS.N. Variava C.J.1. This Writ Petition arises out of an unfortunate incident which took place in Uphaar theatre in the evening of 13th June, 1997. A fire took place in which a number of people were killed and/or injured. All the Petitioners are those who were injured in the fire or relatives of those who were injured or killed in the fire. By this Writ Petition the Petitioners seek to highlight, what according to them are a shocking state of affairs. They claim that there is complete disregard of statutory obligations, prescribed under the law, for prevention of fire hazards in public places.2. The grievance of the Petitioners is that each and every public authority, not only failed in the discharge of its statutory obligations, but in fact acted in a manner which was hostile and foreign to the discharge of their public duties. The standards set under the statute and the rules framed for the purpose of preventing public hazards were observed only by their breach. license and permi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:03. 12.2016 Judgment Pronounced On:12. 05.2017 CRL.REV.P. 262/2016 ANOOP SINGH versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 263/2016 D. V. MALHOTRA versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 GOPAL ANSAL versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 SUSHIL ANSAL versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner STATE ..... Respondent CRL.REV.P. 262/2016, CRL.REV.P. 263/2016, CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 & CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 Page 1 of 106 Advocates who appeared in the cases: For the... Petitioners : Mr. Puneet Mittal, Advocate with Ms. Arushi Tangri, Advocate, for Mr. Anoop Singh in CRL.REV.P.262/2016. Mr. Pawan Narang, Advocate with Ms. Vasundhara Chauhan and Mr. Karan Jain, Advocates, for Mr. D.V. Malhotra in CRL.REV. P. 263/2016 Mr. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jha, Advocate for Mr. Gopal Ansal in CRL.REV.P.264/2016. Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gurpre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:03. 12.2016 Judgment Pronounced On:12. 05.2017 CRL.REV.P. 262/2016 ANOOP SINGH versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 263/2016 D. V. MALHOTRA versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 GOPAL ANSAL versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 SUSHIL ANSAL versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner STATE ..... Respondent CRL.REV.P. 262/2016, CRL.REV.P. 263/2016, CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 & CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 Page 1 of 106 Advocates who appeared in the cases: For the... Petitioners : Mr. Puneet Mittal, Advocate with Ms. Arushi Tangri, Advocate, for Mr. Anoop Singh in CRL.REV.P.262/2016. Mr. Pawan Narang, Advocate with Ms. Vasundhara Chauhan and Mr. Karan Jain, Advocates, for Mr. D.V. Malhotra in CRL.REV. P. 263/2016 Mr. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jha, Advocate for Mr. Gopal Ansal in CRL.REV.P.264/2016. Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gurpre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:03. 12.2016 Judgment Pronounced On:12. 05.2017 CRL.REV.P. 262/2016 ANOOP SINGH versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 263/2016 D. V. MALHOTRA versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 GOPAL ANSAL versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 SUSHIL ANSAL versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner STATE ..... Respondent CRL.REV.P. 262/2016, CRL.REV.P. 263/2016, CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 & CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 Page 1 of 106 Advocates who appeared in the cases: For the... Petitioners : Mr. Puneet Mittal, Advocate with Ms. Arushi Tangri, Advocate, for Mr. Anoop Singh in CRL.REV.P.262/2016. Mr. Pawan Narang, Advocate with Ms. Vasundhara Chauhan and Mr. Karan Jain, Advocates, for Mr. D.V. Malhotra in CRL.REV. P. 263/2016 Mr. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jha, Advocate for Mr. Gopal Ansal in CRL.REV.P.264/2016. Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gurpre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:03. 12.2016 Judgment Pronounced On:12. 05.2017 CRL.REV.P. 262/2016 ANOOP SINGH versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 263/2016 D. V. MALHOTRA versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 GOPAL ANSAL versus STATE CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 SUSHIL ANSAL versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner STATE ..... Respondent CRL.REV.P. 262/2016, CRL.REV.P. 263/2016, CRL.REV.P. 264/2016 & CRL.REV.P. 265/2016 Page 1 of 106 Advocates who appeared in the cases: For the... Petitioners : Mr. Puneet Mittal, Advocate with Ms. Arushi Tangri, Advocate, for Mr. Anoop Singh in CRL.REV.P.262/2016. Mr. Pawan Narang, Advocate with Ms. Vasundhara Chauhan and Mr. Karan Jain, Advocates, for Mr. D.V. Malhotra in CRL.REV. P. 263/2016 Mr. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jha, Advocate for Mr. Gopal Ansal in CRL.REV.P.264/2016. Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gurpre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. h December, 2017 FAO3452016 and CM Appln.26849/2016 BRIJESH KUMAR VERMA ...... Appellant Through: Mr. Harvinder Singh, Mr.Jatin Kumar, Advocates versus AURANGJEB & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Pratima N. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr.Sanjoy Ghose, ASC GNCTD. for CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT1 The appellant has challenged the order dated 6th May, 2016 passed by the Commissioner, Employees Compensation whereby compensation of Rs.10,69,008/- along with interest @ 12% per annum has been awarded to respondent no.1.2. The appellant is the owner of property bearing No.BU-48, Pitampura, Delhi on which a four storey building was being constructed in March 2012. On 6th March, 2012, the roof (lintel) of the third floor was being laid. Respondent no.1 and his father were FAO3452016 Page 1 of 72 working as labourers on the construction site, along with 12-13 other labourers. According to res...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on : February 25, 2019/ March 27, 2019 Decided on : April 02, 2019 + CRL.A. 143/2018 & Crl.M.A. 2262/2018 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mohammed Faraz & Ms. Mallika Hiremath, Advs. versus AXIS BANK & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Shri Singh, Advocate with Mr. Pradyumna Sharma, Ms. Maneka Khanna & Ms. Sayali Kadu, Advocates for R-1. CRL.A. 210/2018 & Crl.M.A. 3233/2018 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mohammed Faraz & Ms. Mallika Hiremath, Advs. versus STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate for R-1. + Crl. Appeal No.143/2018 & others Page 1 of 105 + CRL.A. 623/2018 & Crl.M.A. 10886-87/2018, 48245/2018 DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mohammed Faraz & Ms. Mallika Hiremath, Advs. vers...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on : February 25, 2019/ March 27, 2019 Decided on : April 02, 2019 + CRL.A. 143/2018 & Crl.M.A. 2262/2018 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mohammed Faraz & Ms. Mallika Hiremath, Advs. versus AXIS BANK & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Shri Singh, Advocate with Mr. Pradyumna Sharma, Ms. Maneka Khanna & Ms. Sayali Kadu, Advocates for R-1. CRL.A. 210/2018 & Crl.M.A. 3233/2018 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mohammed Faraz & Ms. Mallika Hiremath, Advs. versus STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate for R-1. + Crl. Appeal No.143/2018 & others Page 1 of 105 + CRL.A. 623/2018 & Crl.M.A. 10886-87/2018, 48245/2018 DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mohammed Faraz & Ms. Mallika Hiremath, Advs. vers...
Tag this Judgment!