Delhi Court November 1984 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.
Collector of Customs Vs. Technological Centre
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: (1989)(44)ELT116TriDel
1. A consignment of MITUTOYA Brand Three Co-ordinate Measuring Machine was imported by M/s. Technological Consultants Centre, Faridabad.Similarly, a Three Co-ordinate Measuring Machine 10 TA 1203, along with Control Panel TEK 31, was imported by M/s. Escorts Ltd., Faridabad.Both the consignments were assessed to standard rate of duty without extending the benefit of Notification No. 49/78 dated 1-3-1978, on the grounds that the imported machines were not designed for all operations indicated under Serial No. 9 of Notification 49/78 dated 1-3-1978. On preferring of Appeals by both the Importers against these orders of assessment by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay, the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, admitted both the appeals and ordered consequential refund in both cases, extending the benefit of Customs Notification No. 49/78 dated 1-3-1978.2. The cases have come up in appeal before us as a result of a Show Cause Notice issued to the Respondents under Section 131(3)...
Modi Vanaspati Mfg. Co. Vs. Collector of Customs and Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: (1985)(22)ELT615TriDel
1. These are two revison applications (hereinafter called appeals) filed before the Central Government which under Section 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, J944, stand transferred to this Tribunal to be disposed of as if they were appeals presented before the Tribunal.2. These appeals related to the valuation to be adopted for levy of Central Excise duty on vegetable product which was eligible for partial exemption from duty in terms of Notification No. 23/75-C.E., dated 1-3-1975 (and earlier, for a short period, in terms of Notification No.230/72, dated 15-12-72, as amended by Notification No. 111/73, dated 28-4-1973). Under that Notification vegetable product in the manufacture of which indigenous cotton seed oil was used was exempt from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as was equivalent to the amount calculated at the rate specified in the Table annexed to the Notification. Column 3 of the Table set out different rates per tonne depending on the proportion of ...
Collectors of Customs Vs. J.K. Batteries and ors.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: (1985)(20)ELT89TriDel
1. The facts leading to Appeal No. 1520/81-C, briefly stated, are that M/s. J.K. Batteries, Bhopal, imported a consignment of 100 metric tonnes of "Moanda Manganese Ore", valued at Rs. 2,26,877/- for the manufacture of dry cell batteries and claimed its assessment to customs duty at 40%+5% ad valorem under heading No. 26.01(1) of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (C.T.A. 1975, for short) as a metallic ore. On test, the goods were found to be battery grade manganese ore containing 84.7% of manganese dioxide (MnO2). The Assistant Collector did not accept the importers' claim. He invoked Chapter note 2 to Chapter 26 of the C.T.A. 1975 and classified the goods under Heading No. 25.01/32(3) and charged duty at 60%+15% ad valorem. The said order was challenged before the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, who, by his impugned order No. S/49-51/79R dated 3-5-1980, allowed the appeal and ordered the assessment of the goods to duty at 40%+5% ad valorem under heading No. 2...
Castrol Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC636Tri(Delhi)
1.Aggrieved by the rejection of their appeal by the Appellate Collector by Order-in-Appeal No. 1138/Calcutta/81 dated 11-8-1981, the appellants have filed a Revision Application before the Government of India which, on transfer to.the Tribunal, is being treated as an appeal.2. The appellants carry on the business of processing blended and compounded lubricating oil in their factory at Calcutta. The appellants have cleared lubricating oil during 10-10-1975, 21-10-1975 and 31-10-1975 after payment of duty under the Central Excise Tariff Item 11 -B. The appellants were not aware that no excise duty was leviable on the said blended or compounded lubricating oil which was processed out of duty paid blended or compounded lubricating oil. The appellants also rely on the trade notices issued by the Calcutta Collectorate dated 29-4-1974 and 29-4-1976. The appellants submitted their claim for refund of Rs. 7,953.59p. on 30-5-1977. The Assistant Collector of the Central Excise, Calcutta, by his ...
indo Asian Switchgears (P.) Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: (1985)12ITD65(Delhi)
1. The assessee is a private limited company manufacturing electric switchgears. It did substantial business in the export of this commodity. Under the export trade policy of the Government of India, outlined for the year 1977-78, such exports made by the assessee resulted in some import entitlements, i.e., the assessee acquired the right to import certain commodities, which it required for its manufacturing business. It could either import such commodities or it could also, under the import entitlements, transfer the entitlements to other parties, who could in turn import the goods in question for the purposes of manufacture.2. During the relevant previous year (year ended 31-3-1978), the assessee sold the import entitlements it had received for Rs. 1,35,020.The assessee claimed that this sum of Rs. 1,35,020 was a capital receipt and not taxable. The IAC did not accept this plea. In his view, the entitlements had been received on account of business activities and, hence, closely int...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-i Vs. Minerals and Metals Trading Co ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: [1986]157ITR371(Delhi)
D.K. Kapur, J. 1. A number of income-tax references relating to the same assessed have been heard by us together. These are I.T.R. Nos. 57 and 58 of 1976, I.T.R. No. 127 of 1976 and I.T.R. Nos. 27 and 28 of 1977. The assessment years covered by these references are 1965-66 to 1968-69, i.e., four assessment years. Inasmuch as many of the questions are common, these cases can be conveniently dealt with together. 2. For the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67, there is a common statement of case which refers the following question for our opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case the surpluses of Rs. 99,836 and Rs. 13,79,105 resulting from the book adjustments between the assessed and the State Trading Corporation are liable to be assessed in the hands of the assessed for the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67, respectively 2. Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the amounts of provision made by the STC for bad and doubtful debts and sal...
G.P. Singhi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: [1986]158ITR782(Delhi)
D.K. Kapur J.1. For the assessment year 1960-61, the following question has been referred to us at the instance of the assessed : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in disallowing the claim of bad debt of a sum of Rs. 37,440 in respect of the assessment year 1960-61 ?' 2. The relevant facts as set out in the statement of the case may conveniently be summarised first. The assessed was a partner in a firm known as M/s. Mahadeo Ganga Prasad in which he had a 55 per cent. share. The said firm advanced a sum of Rs. 37,500 to M/s. Jai Hind Foundry Works Ltd. The debit balance owed by the company at the end of the year relevant to assessment year 1952-53 was Rs. 84,190-14-0. This balance was carried forward till the financial year 1956-57. There was a further debit of Rs. 2,250 in the assessment year 1958-59. In the next year, a sum of Rs. 49,000 was credited on account of sale of the foundry and machinery to M/s. National Engineering Works, Gw...
A.N. Sarvaria Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Delhi I and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: (1985)49CTR(Del)254; ILR1985Delhi805; [1986]158ITR803(Delhi)
Charanjit Talwar, J. 1. The petitioner, Shri A. N. Sarvaria (since expired), had challenged the legality of the order passed on December 30, 1974, by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, New Delhi, refusing to reduce or waive the penalty imposed on the petitioner by the Wealth-tax Officer on the ground that the returns of wealth for the assessment years 1965-66 to 1971-72 had not been filed voluntarily. 2. The wealth-tax returns for the years 1965-66 to 1970-71 were filed by the petitioner on December 29, 1970. According to the petitioner, he had not received any notice under section 14(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). However, return in respect of the assessment year 1971-72, it is the case of the petitioner, was filed by him on July 8, 1971, after receipt of a notice dated June 16, 1971, under section 14(2) of the Act. It is averred that soon after the filing of the returns, the petitioner paid wealth-tax on the basis of those returns as per the provisions of...
Harbhajan Singh and Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: 1985RLR183
D.R. Khanna, J.(1) These two revisions have been moved by Harbhajan Singh and Sita Ram Kapur against an order dated 26.10.1981 of Shri O.P. Gogne, M.M., New Delhi, whereby charge u/s 120-B read with sections 420 and 477-A Indian Penal Code . was directed to be framed against each of them. There are two other accused, namely, Jagdish Lal Chanana and Harish Chander Kapur. They have, however, not chosen to assail the said order under which the former has also been directed to be charge under those provisions of law and the latter u/s 420 Indian Penal Code . (2) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 9.7.1979 Tasawar Hussain, a clerk of the Stores (Accounts) Department, Central Cottage Industries Emporium sent his helper Ganga Ram to bring the sale statement book from Jagdish Lal Chanana. The latter, however, happened to be on leave, and as such Ganga Ram searched his cabin and found the sale statement book which he took to Mr. Hussain. It was then noticed that the book had all the...
Prem Chand Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)Crimes99; 27(1985)DLT256
D.R. Khanna, J.(1) On a reference being made by the Single Judge for consideration of the proprietory of grant of bail to an approver who has been now in detention for over two years, and whose statement has already been recorded by the Session Court, this matter has come before the Full Bench. The entire background has been given in the order of the Single Judge, reference to which is advisable for resolving the controversy involved. (2) It is, however, unfortunate that at the time of the hearing before the Full Bench, none appeared from the side of the State. This has been in spite of the notice having been served upon the Attorney General, since the constitutional validity of the provisions contained in Section 306(4)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been assailed. Appearance was made on behalf of the accused only, and they contested the release of the approver during the trial as had been done before the Single Judge. (3) The brief background is that three persons, Satinder...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »