Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009(168)LC177(SC); 2009(241)ELT321(SC); JT2009(13)SC186; 2009(11)SCALE401; 2009(8)LC3695(SC)
ORDER1. This batch of appeals, by the Revenue, under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short 'the Act') is directed against the orders passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'). By the impugned orders, the Tribunal has held that despite insertion of amended Section 4 of the Act w.e.f. 1st July, 2000 introducing the concept of 'transaction value' in Section 4(1)(a) of the Act, the ratio of the decision of this Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Madras v. Indian Oxygen Ltd. : (1988) 4 SCC 139, still holds the field. Therefore, the charges recovered by the assessees from their customers for providing them the containers and/or canisters etc. for supply of gases or other items etc., manufactured by them are not to be added to the price of the goods etc., for the purpose of determination of the assessable value under Section 4 of the Act, as substituted by Section 94 of Finance Act of 2000.2. The factual positi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 161(2009)DLT330(SC); JT2009(10)SC137; (2009)6MLJ375(SC); 2009(10)SCALE273; (2009)8SCC582
P. Sathasivam, J.1. All these special leave petitions are directed against the common judgment and order dated 03.11.2008 of the High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) Nos. 6729 & 7506 of 2007 which, inter alia, issued certain directions for setting up of a Committee to enquire as to whether the Commonwealth Games Village (CGV) site complex is situated on the Yamuna 'riverbed' or 'floodplain' and further observed that any construction made or third party rights created are at the peril and risk of the Organisers/Government. Aggrieved by the said judgment, Delhi Development Authority (in short 'DDA') has filed S.L.P.(C) Nos. 29055- 29056 29055- 29056 of 2008, Ministry of Urban Development & Poverty Alleviation has filed S.L.P.(C) No. 30075 of 2008 and Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports has filed S.L.P.(C) Nos. 4408-4409 of 2009 as well as S.L.P.(C) Nos. 6029- 6030 of 2009 and Organizing Committee, Commonwealth Games has filed S.L.P.(C) Nos. 31123-31124 of 2008. Vinod Kumar Jain, petitioner i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009CriLJ4405; 2009(10)SCALE302
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 917 of 1999 on 28.9.2001.2. The appellant Mohd. Yasin had filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking directions to handover the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation into the death of his elder brother Yunus alias Anees who died on 4.8.1999 in police custody of the police station Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. The appellant further prayed for a direction to the station house officer of the police station Okhla Industrial Area to register a case under Section 302 IPC against the delinquent officer(s).3. The High Court in the impugned order after perusing the report of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the report of the Board of Doctors who conducted postmortem examination of the deceased and came to the conclusion that the death of the appellant's brother was caused due to cardiac arrhythmias and the petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2009SC2745; JT2009(10)SC352; 2010(1)SLJ262(SC):2009AIRSCW5467:2009(5)LHSC2897
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.2. These appeals are directed against the judgments and orders of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.3. Basic controversy involved in all these appeals is of similar nature. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to recapitulate the facts incorporated in Civil Appeal No. 4903 of 2009 arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 23708 of 2005 filed against the impugned judgment delivered by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Civil Writ Petition No. 3729 of 2004 on dated 28.7.2005.4. The respondents herein has joined the services of the appellant as Laboratory Attendant in work-charge capacity on 16.5.1963 and continued to perform his duties on work-charge basis on different posts until he was regularized as Head Mistry w.e.f. 14.10.1981. The respondent was a member of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme (for short `EPF Scheme'). During the period he remained a work-charge employee, the respondent had attained the ag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009AIRSCW5490; 2010(1)AWC531(SC); 2009(240)ELT481(SC); JT2009(12)SC513; (2009)IVLLJ653SC; 2009(10)SCALE314
ORDER1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 24th January, 2003 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 53564 of 2002. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein.3. The appellant is running a petrol pump (public retail outlet) for dispensing petrol/diesel. He filed the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 53564 of 2002 in the High Court of Allahabad challenging an order dated 17th October, 2002 issued by the Deputy Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Regional Office, Kanpur directing the appellant to make contribution under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') from August, 1993 to May, 2000 and interest on the aforesaid amount failing which recovery shall be issued under Sections 45-C and 45-G of the Act.4. The short question in this case is whether the appellant is covered by the Act. Section 1(4) of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2006ACJ2665; AIR2010SC40; 2009(4)AWC3206(SC); JT2009(14)SC41; 2009(6)KarLJ469; (2009)156PLR752; 2009(10)SCALE345:2009AIRSCW5492:2009(5)LHSC3118
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Appellant is a young girl. She met with an accident on or about 20.9.1999 while she was aged only 9 years. In the said accident she suffered the following injuries, as stated in the application filed on her behalf before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal:1. There is swelling deformity & fracture of middle 3rd of Lt. thigh (femur shaft).2. Abrasion over left frontal region.3. Abrasion over Rt. Lateral aspect.3. She was treated by two doctors. According to one of them, namely, Dr. Mukund, who examined himself as PW3, she suffered 10% to 15% of disability whereas according to the other doctor, Dr. Shivanand, she suffered 20% to 25% of physical disability in her left lower limb.An amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- was claimed by her by way of compensation in the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as `the Act'). The Tribunal, however...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2009(10)SC1; (2010)5MLJ1377(SC); 2009(10)SCALE164; (2009)8SCC106
Aftab Alam, J.1. The present is a fall out from a criminal trial arising from a hit and run accident on a cold winter morning in Delhi in which a car travelling at reckless speed crashed through a police check post and crushed to death six people, including three policemen. Facing the trial, as the main accused, was a young person called Sanjeev Nanda coming from a very wealthy business family. According to the prosecution, the accident was caused by Sanjeev Nanda who, in an inebriated state, was driving a black BMW car at very high speed. The trial, commonly called as the BMW case, was meandering endlessly even after eight years of the accident and in the year 2007, it was not proceeding very satisfactorily at all from the point of view of the prosecution. The status of the main accused coupled with the flip flop of the prosecution witnesses evoked considerable media attention and public interest. To the people who watch TV and read newspapers it was yet another case that was destined...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2009(10)SC199; (2009)8MLJ701(SC); 2009(10)SCALE360; (2009)8SCC646; 2009AIRSCW6262
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.INTRODUCTION2. Whether the High Court and/or this Court has the power to transfer a suit pending in a Civil Court situated in one State to a Debt Recovery Tribunal situated in another is the question involved herein.BACKGROUND FACTS3. We may notice the facts of the matter from Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 24715 of 2008. It arises out of a judgment and order dated 15th September, 2008 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Transfer Application No. 186 of 2008 whereby and whereunder the suit filed by the appellant and pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana was transferred to the Debt Recovery Tribunal-III at Mumbai.4. Some of the parties to the lis before us are the banks or financial institutions within the purview of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (1993 Act). The others are debtors of such banks or financial institutions. The parties hereto entere...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2010]186TAXMAN181(SC)
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. Having heard the learned Addl. Solicitor General Mr. Mohan Parasaranand Mr. Pal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, we are of the opinion that keeping in view the documents in question having been seized as far back as 28-1-2008, the appellants could not and in fact did not object to return thereof. The learned Addl. Solicitor General states that the seized documents have been deposited in the High Court which are lying in the custody of Dy. Registrar (Judicial). We may also notice that the High Court in its order directed:13. For the reasons stated in paras 7 to 10, the survey operation under Section 133A in the petitioner's premises, impounding of books of account/documents on 28-5-2008 and retention of the same till date being made illegally without following the procedure as laid down in Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, the petitioner is entitled to get back the impounded books of account/documents.In CIT v. Kamal & Co. : (200...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009(10)SCALE268; 2009(5)LHSC349
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Challenge in this appeal, which arises out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.6278 of 2007 is to a judgment and order dated 22nd August 2007 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh whereby and whereunder a revision application, filed by the appellant herein, arising out of a judgment and order dated 07th April 2007 passed by the Ist Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam dismissing an application filed by the appellant for sending the disputed pronote and the cheque for examination of a handwriting expert, was dismissed.3. According to the appellant, an agreement to sell was entered into in terms whereof one Bangi Venkanna and Y. Satyanarayana, brother-in-law of the 1st respondent agreed to purchase the appellant's share of the suit land for a total consideration of Rs. 12,00,000/- (Rupees twelve lacs) and out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees four lacs) was paid by way of advance. According to him, as the ...
Tag this Judgment!