Delhi Court December 1983 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Premier Tyres Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1983
Reported in: (1984)(16)ELT419TriDel
1. Appellants filed revision application to Government of India against order disposing of 10 appeals dated 29-11-1972 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras. The Govt. of India by their order dated 19-7-1976 set aside the order of the Appellate Collector and remanded the matter to the Appellate Collector of Customs with certain directions. The appellants then filed writ petition in the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam. The High Court by its order dated 7-8-1980 in O.P. No. 312/1977-D set aside the order of the Govt. of India and directed the Govt. of India to reconsider the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to the appellants. It is this revision aplication which stands transferred to the Tribunal to be disposed of as an appeal presented before it.2. In accordance with a decision of the Tribunal and practice obtaining in the Tribunal, therefore, the appellants have filed 9 more appeals so as to cover all the appeals disposed of by the Appellate Collec...
Kota Box Manufacturing Company Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT463TriDel
1. M/s. Kota Box Manufacturing Co. Kota (hereinafter called the 'applicant') filed a revision application to the Central Government, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi on 22-2-1978 and the same was transferred to this Tribunal under section 35P of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 and as such was treated as appeal.2. During the course of the proceedings Shri R.K. Jain, Consultant moved an application for amendment of the pleadings under rules 3 and 11 of the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982.3. As per his allegations, the C.E.G.A.T. (Procedure) Rules, 1982 have been brought into force w.e.f. 11-10-1982. Those rules lay down the manner in which the grounds of the appeal are to be set-forth. The case of the appellants from the very beginning rest upon the interpretation of notification No. 46/71 dated 24-4-1971, and tariff item 17(2) of the Central Excise Tariff. Though he has taken this as a ground before the Asstt...
Entremonde Polycoaters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1983
Reported in: (1984)(16)ELT389TriDel
1. This is a matter arising out of Show-Cause Notice F.No.198/19/188/78-CX. V. dated 23rd Jan., 1979 issued by the Additional Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, 'Deptt. of Revenue under Section 36(2) of the Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944 to M/s. Entremonde Polyecoaters Pvt. Ltd., asking M/s. Entremonde Polyecoaters to show-cause why the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay which had been over-ruled by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay by his Order-in-Appeal No. 111/78 dated 28-2-78 should not be restored. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Nasik had passed an order No. V/17(17) -455/76-DA 7213 dated 30th April, 1977 that the plastic coated paper manufactured by M/s. Entremonde Polyecoaters, Nasik should be reclassified under Tariff Item 17(2) and should pay duty at the appropriate rate. He also ordered the recovery of Central Excise duty at appropriate rates on the quantities of plastic coated paper removed by the a...
Namdang Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT467TriDel
1. This is a revision application (hereinafter called "appeal") filed before the Central Government which under Section 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, stands transferred to this Tribunal to be disposed of as if it were an appeal presented before the Tribunal.2. Appearing before us for the appellants, Shri Khaitan explained that the appeal related to a claim for refund of duty paid in excess by the appellants, who, in terms of Notification No. 198/76-C.E., dated 16-6-76, were entitled to partial exemption from duty on their excess production of tea. Shri Khaitan stated that their claim had been rejected on the ground of limitation. According to him there was no dispute regarding the facts, but only as regards the correct interpretation of the conditions of the aforesaid notification.3. A point had been raised in this case by the Central Excise authorities that the appellants, who were the owners of two different tea estates, should have claimed the benefit of the exempt...
Indian Sugar and General Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1983
Reported in: (1984)(16)ELT387TriDel
1. This is a revision application which on transfer is being treated as an appeal. The appellants imported one set of a Horizontal Boring, Drilling & Milling machine model BFP 160/1 complete with essential accessories and sp res for the value of Rs. 15,21,229/- CIF. The machine supplied by the surpplier was cleared by the Calcutta Customs charging Customs duty at 40% on the main machine and some of the accessories and spares assessed under Heading No. 84.45/48 while higher rates of Customs duty were charged on some of the accessories and spares under various Headings of the Customs Tariff. The appellants contended that the accessories and spares should have been assessed only under Tariff Heading 84.45/48 and filed the claim for refund for Rs. 49,125.68. The Asstt. Collector of Customs, Calcutta, rejected their claim vide his order No. S 107-370/78 ARS dated 17-10-78. The appeal was preferred to the Appellate Collector of Customs, Calcutta.The appeal was allowed partially vide ord...
Indian Oil Corporation Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1983
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT522TriDel
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government which, under Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it was an appeal filed before it.2. The issue herein is whether the product "ALKYLATED PHENOL" (BUTY-LATED HYDROXY TOLUENE - to be referred to hereafter as BHT) imported by the appellants (IOC, for short) and cleared under cover of Bill of Entry No. D 127/2-4-1975 was liable to be charged to additional (countervailing) duty of Customs with reference to Item 65 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule (CET) as a rubber processing chemical.3. The goods were, in the first instance, released by the Customs authorities without levy of countervailing duty. Later on, countervailing duty, with reference to the excise duty leviable under Item 65 CET, was demanded from IOC. The contention of the IOC has all along been that the product was not used as an antioxidant for rubber ...
Indian Oil Corporation (Assam Oil Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT456TriDel
1. This is an appeal dated 26-12-79 against Order-in-Appeal No.122/ASM-1979 dated 3rd September, 1979 passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, and sent with letter dated 8th January, 1980.2. The dispute is about the use of casing head condensate (CHC) by the Assam Oil Company, Digboi which led to a demand of duty for the period February, 1975 to May, 1977 as the Central Excise authorities said that the condensate was used as a motor spirit and, therefore, should pay Central Excise duty under item 6 of the Central Excise Tariff. The Appellate Collector held that considering all the characteristics of the condensate, its source and its behaviour, it satisfies the definition of motor spirit in all respects and, therefore, the assessment and demand of duty was correct.3. It is necessary to state briefly the manner in which the condensate is obtained. The crude oil which is lifted from the well goes into a separator which separates the crude oil from the associated ga...
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-iii Vs. Manjeet Engineeri ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1983
Reported in: ILR1984Delhi787; [1985]154ITR509(Delhi)
Goel, J. 1. These are ten reference in all, seven of these references relate to the assessed - M/s. Manjeet Engineering Industries, New Delhi - a partnership firm (hereinafter called as 'the assessed firm') in which Arjun Singh was one of the partners in the relevant assessment years 1965-66 to 1971-72, respectively. Three of the references relate to Arjun Singh, the assessed, as a partner of the firm. Two of them, namely, ITR No. 121 of 1974 and ITR No. 59 of 1975, relate to quantum cases for the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67, respectively. The third reference, ITR No. 66 of 1975, relates to the penalty matter for the assessment year 1964-65. 2. The question for consideration in the seven references relating to the firm is as to whether the building in question had become the property of the partnership firm and the firm was entitled to depreciation on the building. In two of the three cases relating to Arjun Singh, partner, for the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67, the que...
Pran Nath Dhawan Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1983
Reported in: 1984(17)ELT12(Del)
H.L. Anand, J.1. By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Cr. M(M) 495/83 and the connected petition Cr. M(M) 456/83, Pran Nath Dhawan and his wife, Mrs. Usha Dhawan, who are standing their trial on a complaint for an offence under section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, challenge a common order of the additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate holding that there was a prima facie case against both the petitioner for framing of a charge and the order of the Additional Sessions Judge dismissing their revision petitions and upholding the order of the trial court. 2. The petitions were filed in the following circumstances. It is alleged that on the basis of secret information a party of Customs (Preventive) officials conducted an search of the residential premises of the couple at D-140, East of Kailash, New Delhi, on August 22, 1978, allegedly leading to the recovery of 16 cameras of Japanese make, valued at Rs. 40,000/-, 180 dozen nail cutters of U.S. make, valu...
Harish Chandra and Others Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1983
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(Del)319; [1985]154ITR478(Delhi)
Chadha, J. 1. These eight references under s. 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), arise out of eight connection cases for the assessment year 1966-67, for the previous accounting year ending March 31, 1966. They pose the following questions of law for the opinion of this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that capital gains and was assessable in the hands of each assessed for the present year under section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in taking into account the compensation received by each of the assesseds pursuant to the order of the District Judge ?' 2. The eight references concern different co-shares of the property known as Kothi Anar Bagh, Subzi Mandi, Delhi, which was acquired by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Acquisition Act'). E...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »