Delhi Court April 1983 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1983 Page 11 of about 102 results (0.017 seconds)Raipur Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)LC1004DTri(Delhi)
1. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the Supdt. of Central Excise, Ahmeda-bad issued a Show Cause Notice dated 2.1.1973 and a subsequent corrigendum dated 2.12.1974 under Rule 10-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the rules) asking the appellants to show cause why duty amounting to Rs. 1,43,105.00 should not be recovered from them on the "yarn not elsewhere specified" (Item 18-E of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule CET for short) used in the manufacture of cotton fabrics. In reply, the appellants raised several contentions and contested to Show-Cause Notice. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ahmeda-bad, in his adjudication order dated 3.12.1974 rejected the contentions and confirmed the demand notice. The appeal against his order was rejected by the Appellate Collector by his order dated 24.1.1976. It is against this order that the appellants filed a Revision Application to the Central Government which stands transferred to thi...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Lal Wahi Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1983)5ITD533(Delhi)
1. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 1-5-1981 of the AAC.2. 1977-78 is the assessment year concerned. Financial year is the previous year. The assessee is an individual. The assessment was completed by the ITO as per order dated 5-11-1979 determining total income at Rs. 64,410, as rounded off, as against declared income of.Rs. 42,110.3. During the previous year under consideration, the assessee sold for Rs. 70,000 a plot of land, namely, plot No. 91, Block 5, Greater Kailash, New Delhi. Cost of acquisition of the said plot was Rs. 6,600.In addition, there had been some cost of improvement also. The ITO took such cost of improvement at Rs. 3,470 for purpose of computation under Section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The ITO, however, did not accept the assessee's contention to the effect that an expenditure of Rs. 2,869 had been incurred in connection with the transfer of the said plot. Under the circumstance, the ITO worked out gross c...
Tag this Judgment!