Delhi Court March 1985 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.
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. P.K. Samal
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-1985
Reported in: (1985)13ITD781(Delhi)
1. The applicant-revenue by their present reference applications under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act') all presented on 30-1-1984, required the Tribunal to refer certain identical questions for the valuable opinion of the Hon'ble Orissa High Court, said to be referable questions of law and further said to be arising out of consolidated order dated 24-11-1983 of the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A' in WT Appeal Nos. 80 to 94 (Cuttack) of 1980 for the assessment years 1966-67 to 1974-75. 7. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the land adjoining the property under the name Wilson House was agricultural in nature and, therefore, was not included in the taxable wealth of the assessee 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether the Tribunal was justified in stating that the WTO did not carry any enquiry in treating the property as one in which no agricultural operation was ca...
Smt. Sindhu Ganesh Bali and ors. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1843Tri(Delhi)
1. These are 10 appeals arising out of Order-in-Original No. V(19) 15-13/Adj/74-532, dated 1-10-1976 of the Collector of Central Excise, Poona. Nine of the appellants were licensees manufacturing the goods in question which (without prejudice to our final decision) will be referred for convenience as "fabrics". The tenth appellant, namely, Messrs Bali Textiles, purchased the fabrics from the nine manufacturer appellants and sold them wholesale.2. At the relevant time, Item 19 of the Central Excise Tariff, relating to "cotton fabrics" was divided into a number of sub-items and sub-sub-items. The entries which are relevant in the present connection are reproduced below :-------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of goods Rate of duty Basic--------------------------------------------------------------------I.Cotton Fabrics (1) Coating, suiting, tussers, corduroy, gabar- 15% ad valorem dine, bed-ford, satin, denim, lappet, butta (1-A) Cotton fabrics o...
Shree Yamuna Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1793Tri(Delhi)
1. The facts, in a brief compass, in this Revision Petition to the Government of India, transferred to and heard by, the Tribunal as an Appeal pursuant to S. 35P of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (the Act, for short) are (a) the Appellant manufactures cotton yarn falling under Item No. 18A (1) of the First Schedule to the Act. The yarn so manufactured is utilised in the manufacture of fabrics. At times, the yarn is cleared, as such, on payment of duty; (b) yarn in the form of langled waste was cleared in the month of April, 1978 under Gate Passes Nos. 308, 309 and 326; (c) on 25-5-1978, a notice was issued requiring the Appellant to show cause to the Assistant Collector as to why duty in a sum of Rs. 2.569.63 should not be recovered under Rule 10(1)(a) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. As would appear from the particulars appended to the notice, the demand for payment of duty was in relation to waste cotton yarn in tangled form on the basis of duty leviable on the highest c...
Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: (1985)(21)ELT757TriDel
1. This appeal of M/s. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company Limited (hereafter referred to as the Appellants) is being heard by the present Larger Special Bench constituted under the orders of the President. The Bench had also received an application from M/s. Jay Engineering Works Limited the appellants in Appeal No. ED (SB) (T) 331/79-B (hereafter referred to as the Intervener), to be joined as an Intervener at the hearing of the appeal of M/s. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company Limited. The Bench agreed to the request of M/s. Jay Engineering Works Limited. We have accordingly heard the representatives of the aforesaid two parties. We have also heard Shri N. V. Raghavan Iyer for the respondent Collector (hereafter referred to as the Respondent).2. On behalf of the appellants, their learned Advocate, Shri T.M.Ansari, referred briefly to the facts of their case, which are not in dispute. The goods in this case were cigarettes, which were cleared between 1-3-1978 and 12-3-1978 The question is whethe...
Collector of Central Excise and Vs. NaraIn Dass Saraf
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1772Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an Application said to be under Rule 20 of the Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982, for restoration of a proceeding under Section 131 of the Customs Act, 1962, (hereinafter, the Act), as it read at the material time, transferred to be heard by the Tribunal as an Appeal, (No. 1311/82-NRB) pursuant to Section 131B (2) of the Act, and dismissed for the failure of the Appellant to comply with the directions of the Tribunal for discovery and production of certain documents at the instance of the Respondent (Order No. 12/84-NRB). (a) in consequence of an Order-in-Appeal No. 137/82 dated 15-3-1982 made by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, a notice under Section 131 of the Act, as it read at the material time, was issued requiring the Respondent to show cause as to why the Order-in-Appeal should not be revised. On transfer of the proceedings pursuant to the said notice, in terms of Section 131B (2), the matter came to the Tribunal to be heard as an Appeal. The Applica...
Mopeds India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: (1991)(56)ELT241TriDel
1. This appeal has been filed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, dated 14-6-1977. The Collector imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs under Rule 173Q on the appellants and also directed the payment of duty to be calculated in respect of the clearances of mopeds between 1-3-1974 to 23-10-1975 with shock absorbers and/or after metallic painting and/or after chrome painting.2. The appellants were clearing their products, (namely, mopeds) from their factory at Tirupathi. In addition to charging the values as declared in the Gate Passes, the appellants have also been recovering cost of rear shock absorbers fitted to the auto-cycles and towards labour charges for modification of frame for fitment of rear shock absorber. They have also collected labour charges for Deluxe Metallic painting and for special chrome painting of extra parts fitted to the auto cycles as per customers' orders. Besides the above, they were charging amounts towards packing and forward...
Babcock Venkateshwara Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: (1985)(20)ELT335TriDel
1. These five appeals were heard together by consent of all parties concerned since several common questions of fact and law arise for determination in all these appeals. Sri S.N. Nankhani, Advocate appeared on behalf of M/s Babcock Venkateshwara Hatcheries Private Limited and Sri J.R. Cama, Advocate of M/s Crawford Bayley & Co.appeared on behalf of M/s Rallis India Limited. Sri Mahesh Kumar, Senior Departmental Representative appeared for the respondent Collector.2. M/s Babcock Venkateshwara Hatcheries Pvt. Limited (hereinafter to be referred to as BVH Ltd. for convenience) had, under an agreement entered into with M/s Babcock International Corporation, USA, agreed to purchase and import one day old GP layer chicks as well as GP broiler chicks, prices for these varieties being fixed under an agreement. M/s BVH Limited had requested M/s Rallis India Ltd., who had Export House licences in their favour, to open letters of credit in favour of M/s Babcock International Corporation, to...
Gay Electronics Vs. Karnal Ccc Stores
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1985
Reported in: 1985RLR371
J.D. Jam, J.(1) The facts germane to the decision of this revision succinctly are that petitioner instituted a suit for recovery of Rs.11,360.00 on account of the balance prices of 'sound system for open air theatre' supplied to the defendant. Certain issues were framed on 27.1.82 but subsequently petitioner sought amendment of plaint. As a sequel thereto, two additional issues were framed by the Subordinate Judges on 13.9.84 which were treated as preliminary in nature. The suit was adjourned to 18.10.84 for evidence of the parties. However, a few days prior to same application dated 12.10.84 was made by the petitioner purporting to be under order Xii Rule 2 read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure (for short the 'the Code) praying that the defendant be directed to admit a couple of letters alleged to have been written by the defendant. The said application came up for hearing on 18.10.84 which, as stated above, was the. date for recording of evidence. The Sub Judge dismissed the...
Macneill and Magor Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1985
Reported in: (1985)(20)ELT356TriDel
1. The appellants are aggrieved by the rejection of their claim for re-assessment of synthetic industrial diamonds imported by them under heading 71.02(3) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The lower authorities have confirmed the assessment already made under heading 71.04 of the C.T.A. on the ground that the goods were of very small size-less than 500 microns (30 mesh) and, therefore, they answered the description of dust and powder of natural or synthetic precious or semi-precious stones. The lower authorities also observed that the goods have been used for manufacture of industrial abrasives, a use to which dust and powder of precious or semi-precious stones were put to. The appellants are in appeal against this order.2. For ready reference, we reproduce below the relevant headings of the Tariff: "71.02. Precious and semi-precious stones, unworked, cut or otherwise worked, but not mounted, set or strung (except ungraded stones temporarily strung for convenience of transport): (2) Di...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ishwar Dass Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-1985
Reported in: [1986]158ITR168(Delhi)
D.K. Kapur, J. 1. Five questions have been proposed in this reference application under section 256(2). We have examined the questions, heard the learned counsel and also examined the order of the Tribunal rejecting the petition under section 256(1) as well as the appellate order out of which the questions of law are stated to have arisen. 2. We are of the view that question No. 1 is a question of fact. As far as question No. 2 is concerned, the Tribunal has held it to be covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Varghese v. ITO : [1981]131ITR597(SC) . thereforee, it need not be referred. However, learned counsel urged that this could be covered by reference to section 52(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. We are unable to accept that this was the view of the Income-tax Officer at any stage. So, this question appears to be academic. 3. As far as questions Nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, they relate to alleged cash credit recorded in the assessed's book. The Tribunal was of the view that...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »