Delhi Court March 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.
Somaiya Sugar Works Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: (1984)(17)ELT478TriDel
1. The appellants are aggrieved of the demand for payment of differential central excise duty amounting to Rs. 5,90,492.50. The facts of this case in brief are as follows. Prior to 16-8-78, public distribution system for sugar was in force. This system was fed by levy sugar cleared from sugar factories under the Sugar Control Order issued under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Exemption Notification No.317/77-C.E., dated 16-11-77 fixed concessional rate of duty for such levy sugar, "being sugar required by the Central Government to be sold under Clause (f) of Sub-section 2 of (section 3) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955". The system briefly worked as follows.Government of India issued release orders for a certain quantity of levy sugar to be released from each sugar factory, for being sold to the State Governments or their nominees. Thereafter, the State and the District authorities concerned issued allotments for selling the said levy quota to various allottees in the distr...
Siddeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. and Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: (1984)(18)ELT297TriDel
1. The 2 captioned appeals arise out of and are directed against a common Order-in-Appeal dated 28-4-1982 passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs disposing of the appeals filed before the Board by the 2 appellants. Since the issues involved in both the appeals are similar, this common order disposes of both the appeals.2 The facts of the case which are relevant and necessary for appreciating the dispute before us, briefly stated, are that M/s.Siddeshwari Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Siddeshwari Mills) was charged by the Central Excise authorities for contravention of the provisions of Rules 9(1), 174, 173-B 173-C, 173-F, read with Rules 173-G(1), 173-G (2), 173-G(4), and 173-G(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) inasmuch as they were alleged to have manufactured and removed a quantity of 6 09 848 47 sq. metres of calendered cotton fabrics falling under Item No. 19-I(b) of the 1st Schedule to the Central Excises a...
Bombay Paints and Allied Products Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: (1984)(17)ELT473TriDel
1. The captioned appeals were initially filed before the Central Government as revision applications and have been transferred to this Tribunal in terms of Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962, for disposal as if they were appeals filed before it. The issue involved being the same, all these appeals are disposed off by this common order.2. The appellants imported three consignments of "Titanium Dioxide (Rutile Grade) RCRa". The Customs authorities assessed the goods to duty under Heading No. 32.04/12(1) of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Import Tariff) at 97.5% ad valorem, auxiliary duty of customs at 20% ad valorem and to countervailing duty of customs at Rs. 60 per quintal. After clearance of the goods on payment of the duty so assessed, the appellants approached the Assistant Collector for re-assessment of the goods under Heading No. 28.01/58 (12) at 60% ad valorem, and 15% auxiliary duty of customs (no re-assessment of counterva...
Klick Slotted Angles Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC350Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Klick Slotted Angles Ltd. have filed their revision application dated 28-2-1976 which is against the Order-in-appeal dated 17-11-1975 passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, and the same on its transfer to the Tribunal, is being treated as an appeal.2. Shri J.D. Jain and P.D. Jain, appearing on behalf of the appellants, stated that the Government of India, in their Order No. 481/78, dated 20-5-1978, had set aside the order of the goods in question, viz.Dexion Open Steel Planks, under Item 47 of the Central Excise Tariff, and remanded the matter to the proper officer for. determining the classification of the goods in question in accordance with law. The demand for Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 37,604.62 P. was however, not set aside simultaneously since that question was a subject matter of separate proceedings viz., Assistant Collector's order dated 19-11-1974 and Order-in-Appeal dated 17-11-1975. Shri Kunhikrishnan, representing the department, ad...
R.i.S. Engineering Co. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC490Tri(Delhi)
1. The question for decision in this appeal, originally filed a revision application to Government of India is classification for the purpose of excise of Ammonia Printing and Developing machine manufactured by the appellants-whether they are classifiable as office machines and apparatus under tariff item 33D of the CET and whether they are assessable under any of the items of the schedule to Notification No. 51/70-CE dated 1-3-1970.2. Item 33D in CET was added for the first time w.e.f. 1-3-1970 whereby office machines and apparatus became excisable to excise duty on prescribed rate of ad valor am. By Notification No. 51/70, the Central Government exempted office machines and apparatus falling under item 33D, other than those specified in the sehedule annexed thereto from whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon. The schedule contains in all 30 specific items of which are item No. 13 is' reproducing machine' and item 28'photo copying machine'. It appears that officers of Central E...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. Colletor of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: (1984)(17)ELT480TriDel
1. M/s. B.H.E.L., Madras has filed this revision application dated 30-1-1981 which has been transferred to the Tribunal and is considered as an appeal. The short question involved relates to assessment of item namely Disc & Nozzle which were assessed by the lower authorities under Heading 84.6 i(i) of the Customs Tariff. The claim of the appellants for assessment under heading 84.61(2) as parts of safety valve was rejected, primarily for the reason that the catalogue produced by the appellant did not show this item as parts of safety valves. The appellants have claimed that the goods in question are partsof safety valves and they produced a technical write-up as well as catalogues in support of their claims. Shri R. Subramanian appearing on behalf of the appellants further added that the goods in question have been imported along with Safety valve and have been given special shape and quality as component parts thereof. The nozzle is a machined item made of special alloy steel and...
Shyam S. Rastogi Vs. Nona Sona Exports P. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: [1986]59CompCas832(Delhi)
D.R. Khanna,J. 1. The company , Nona Sona Exports Pvt. Ltd., is now in liquidation from April 27, 1982. This was as a result of a winding-up petition moved by a creditor , namely, the Madras Handloom Weavers Co- operative Society Ltd. (C.P. No. 49 of 1981), on the ground that the company had not discharged its substantial liability for the goods purchased. In fact, the company did not care to appear and the winding-up order was made in its absence. It later applied for setting aside the same, but without success. 2. At present prosecution against the directors is pending at the instance of the official liquidator as they failed to file the statement of affairs. At one stage, even a warrant had to be issued for production of a director. 3. In the meanwhile, the landlord of premises bearing No.S-81, Panch Sheel Park, New Delhi, which has been in the possession of the company as a tenant applied for its restoration on the ground that large arrears of rent were due and continued to mount a...
Hyderabad Vacuum Metallizers (P) Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-1984
Reported in: (1985)(19)ELT247TriDel
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government which, under Section 13 IB of the Customs Act, 1962, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal filed before it.2 The short point arising for consideration is whether plain polyester films imported by the appellants were entitled to the concessional rate of duty in terms of Customs Notification No. 229/76, dated 28 1976 In accordance with this notification metallised or plain plastic films when imported for the manufacture of electronic capacitors is exempted from the basic duty of customs in excess of 60 per cent ad valorem and from the whole of the additional duty of customs. The exemption is subject to the condition that the importer executes a bond to pay the differential duty in 0respect of the quantity of the metallised or plain plastic films which is not roved to have been used in the manufacture of electronic capacitors.3 In the pre...
Punjab National Bank Ltd. and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-1984
Reported in: [1986]59CompCas35(Delhi)
Rohatgi, J. 1. The short question in this appeal is whether the declaration of interim dividend by the directors of company is a 'liability'. The question arose on a writ petition filed by the appellants, the Punjab National Bank Ltd.(the company), and its three shareholders, against the respondent the Union of India, under art. 226 of the Constitution. It will be recalling that by the Banking Companies (Acquisition and transfer Of Undertakings) Act, 5 of 1970 (the Act), the banking of business of the company, known as the Punjab National Bank, was taken over by the Central Government with effect from July 19,1969. The Central Government paid to the company compensation of Rs. 1,020 lakhs. 2. What the Act Did was this. It took over the 'existing banks'. It created the 'corresponding new banks' of which profit will henceforth go to the Central Government. The banking business was nationalised with a view to serve the people better and to meet the needs of a developing economy, as the pr...
The Punjab National Bank Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Delhi315; ILR1984Delhi1
Avadh Bhari Rohtagi, J. (1) The short question in this appeal is whether the declaration of interim dividend by the directors of a company is a 'liability'. This question arose on a writ petition filed by the appellants, the Punjab National Bank Ltd. (the company) and its three share-holders against the respondent the Union of India, under Art. 226 of the Constitution. It will be recalled that by the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 5 of 1970 (the Act) the banking business of the company, known as the Punjab National Bank, was taken over by the Central Government with effect from July 19, 1969. The Central Government paid to the company compensation of Rs. 1020 lakhs.(2) What the Act did was this. It took over the 'existing banks'. It created the 'corresponding new banks' of which profits will henceforth go to the Central Government. The banking business was nationalised with a view to serve the people better and to meet the needs of a developing economy...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »