Delhi Court March 1985 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1985 Page 7 of about 96 results (0.035 seconds)Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. (Wvg) Co. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(20)ELT364TriDel
1. Originally preferred as a revision application before the Central Government, on transfer to this Tribunal the same is being treated as an appeal.2. Shri Menon, the learned consultant while arguing the case for the appellants, submitted that by recovering duty on the wrapping paper manufactured by the appellants in their own factory for captive consumption, duty was being recovered twice over in respect of such wrapping paper. He submitted that after the appellants had manufactured the wrapping paper and paid duty due thereon, they had discharged their liability towards excise duty on such paper. The Department was, however, insisting that duty on such wrapping paper should be collected for the second time when such wrapping paper was removed from the factory premises for being used as wrapping material for other varieties of paper. This had resulted in double payment of duty on the same goods and this action of the department was bad in equity as well as law. Shri Menon submitted ...
Tag this Judgment!Kamal Engineering Corporation Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(20)ELT366TriDel
1. The question for decision in this appeal originally a Revision Application to the Govt. of India is whether demand of duty under item 29A(2) of CET from the appellants in respect of assembly of 22 coolers at the consumers premises is legal and justified. The proceedings against the appellants M/s. Kamal Engineering Corporation-said to be business name and style of a young Engineering Graduate (who says he was not conversant with Central Excise Rules and Regulations) hereinafter called appellant, are the outcome of visit dated 5-6-74 by Preventive officers of Central Excise Bareilly to appellants premises.The Excise authorities found six coolers-two complete and four partly assembled and valued at Rs. 4,105/ at the appellant's shop. On further investigation, the authorities also found that the appellant had sold component parts of coolers through different sales vouchers to different consumers. It was found that the appellant had assembled these component parts into coolers at the c...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Arun Mehra
Court: Delhi
Reported in: (1985)49CTR(Del)119; [1986]157ITR308(Delhi)
D.K. KAPUR J.1. There are four appeals under section 269H of the Income-tax Act, 1961, before us relating to the sale of a plot situated at M-l, Road No. 5, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi, measuring 195 sq. yards. The agreement to sell was dated December 21, 1981, and the consideration was Rs. 5,50,000. The sale deed was executed on February 5, 1982, and the possession delivered shortly after. 2. The Competent Authority under section 269C of the Act held a preliminary enquiry regarding the valuation of the property. An approved valuer, Shri P. D. Sharma, furnished a valuation report whereby be estimated the value of the plot at Rs. 5,46,000 on February 5, 1982. The Competent Authority also obtained a valuation report from the Valuation Officer, Shri Manohar Lal. By a report dated July 30, 1982, Shri Lal worked out the fair market value at Rs. 5,85,000 on the basis that the land was worth Rs. 3,000 per square yard. A subsequent report by the same Valuation Officer dated September 6, 1982...
Tag this Judgment!Heavy Engineering Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)LC1132Tri(Delhi)
1. In these two cases, which were Revision Applications filed before the Govt. of India, now appeals before the Tribunal, the subject concerns classification of the same foods and we are, therefore, dealing with both the cases in a single order. The goods imported we Auto Dump Car which were, assessed by the department of Customs under item 75(4) ICT. It is urged before us that the goods are, in fact, assessable under item 72 (c) read with item 72 (3) ICT and not under item 75 (4) ICT.2 Shri ITC. Mandal, Dy. Manager (Design) has argued before us that the Auto Dump Car imported by the appellants is a Steel Plant Equipment. It is used exclusively in a Steel Plant and, therefore, cannot be classified as a common carriage. According to him, item 75(4) ICT covers carriages having a general use. In any case the import is not in the form of a carriage but components. After assembly these would be turned out in the shape of carriages. It is stated that Auto Dump Car is a heavy duty bogie, dri...
Tag this Judgment!Bengal Papar Mill Co. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(20)ELT372TriDel
1. These two appeals Were to be heard on 26-2-1985 but M/s. Bengal Paper Mill, the appellants did not appear. There is a letter from them dated 19-2-1985 saying that the paper mill, as well as the head office were still under closure and that there was complete dislocation of work. They requested adjournment for 3 months. We reject the request for adjournment. The case is to be heard and we call upon the department to present its case. Shri S.N. Khanna rises to argue in defence of the department's action.2. The appeal by M/s. Bengal Paper Mill Ex. 400, dated 30-3-1981 directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 288 to 289 WB/1980, dated 15-9-1980 passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta. This order of the Appellate Collector was against the Asstt.Collector of Central Excise, Asansol's Order No. 86-Paper/Paper Board/ASN/79 and No. 87-Paper/Paper Board/ ASN/79, both dated 22-9-1979. The orders of the Asstt. Collector arose from 2 show cause notice dated 16-1-1978 and 16-1-...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Sales (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)LC1052Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants sought the clearance of one "Used Bevel Gear Generator" valued at Rs. 7,16,742/-.under B/E No. 481/67, dated 19.5.1983. They sought clearance against Open General Licence under Appendix 2 of the Policy Bonk for A.M. 84.2. The Customs, however, were of the view that the machine was not a Bevel Gear Generator but was a 'Straight Bevel Gear Planer'. Besides they believed that the machine was manufactured on August 10, 1956, whereas it was declared by the importers that it was manufactured in the year 1973.3. Machines not more than ten years old enjoy the facility of importation of O.G.I. and Automatic Straight Bevel Gear generators can avail the benefit of Notification No. 40/78 in the matter of customs duty. Therefore, it was alleged that there was misdeclaration as to the age and description of the machine now imported.4. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants threatening confiscation of the imported goods. The appellants denied the allegations and made the ...
Tag this Judgment!Vishwamitra Karyalaya Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1761Tri(Delhi)
1. The question for decision in this appeal against Order-in-review No.22/84, dated 3-11-1983 passed by Collector of Customs, Calcutta, is whether (i) Automatic Casting Machine ; (ii) Boring Machine ; (iii) Matrix Drying Units and (iv) Milling Machine deserve benefit of concessional assessment under Notification No. 114-Cus., dated 19-6-80 as amended and whether the penalty of Rs. 5,000/- imposed on the appellants is legal and justified.2. Facts material for decision of this appeal are that the appellants who are publishers of Hindi daily newspaper named 'Dainik Vishwamitra' published from Calcutta entered into a contract No. 88-06/80021, dated 2-3-1977 with Messrs Techmash Export, Moscow for supply of one 3-Unit Volga Rotary Press completed with standard accessories for meeting with the increased demand of publication. The appellants also obtained Import Trade Control Licence No. P/CG/2072090/T, dated 9-12-77 under the Trade Plan with USSR for 1977 specifying the goods as "3-Unit Vol...
Tag this Judgment!English Electric Co. of India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC2591Tri(Delhi)
1. In this matter, which was a Revision Application before the Government of India and, now, appeal before the Tribunal, the appellants have imported special switchboard pilot wire relay which have been assessed by the Customs under item 85.18/27(1). The appellants have claimed refund of duty on the ground that the subject goods are assessable under item 85.18/27(3). The Assistant Collector rejected the claim on the grounds that "the electrical ratings of the relays are 1, 2 or 5 amps, transformers and pilots 250 V." The Appellant Collector has upheld the order of the Assistant Collector on the same grounds adding that "the appellants themselves admit that it is not possible to manufacture relays to be coupled directly on to the 11 KV lining".2. Shri A. Mukundarajan who appeared before us on behalf of the appellants has argued that the item in question was imported for West Bengal State Electricity Board, to be used in a system of above 400 Vs.It is pointed out that the functioning of...
Tag this Judgment!Madhusudan Vegetable Products Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1564Tri(Delhi)
1. Because Notification No. 209/76-C.E., dated 1-7-1976 was rescinded from 28-1-1978 the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Ahmedabad, NG Division ordered that the concession was no longer available to the vegetable product even though indigenous cotton seed oil was used in its manufacture and it was cleared between 1-1-1978 and 27-1-1978. The Assistant Collector therefore, rejected M/s. Madhusudan Vegetable Products Co.'s claim for Rs. 11,301.62 by his Order No. V.13/30-109/MP/78/ 17021, dated 27-7-1979. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay agreed with the Assistant Collector and rejected the factory's appeal by his Order No. 800/AMD-6/81, dated 28-7-1981, though he said the subject of the Vegetable Products Control Order discussed by the Asstt. Collector would not affect the ultimate findings.2. Mr. N.I. Mehta argued before us that the two lower courts were wrong. The vegetable product on which they claimed the rebate was fully entitled to the concession. There was no...
Tag this Judgment!Air Mechanical Engineers Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1986)(24)ELT444TriDel
1. In this matter the allegation is that M/s. Air Mechanical Engineers of Baroda, Appellants in this case, had recovered higher price for "4 water coolers without condensing units" cleared by them. The department's case is that although both the water coolers cleared by M/s. Air Mechanical Engineers were without compressors and condensers, they contained cooling coils, water tanks, trays etc., and that the duty was chargeable on the parts such as cooling coil and cabinets under Tariff item No. 29-A (iii).2. In the Order in Original which has been upheld by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, the Superintendent of Central Excise has imposed a penalty of Rs. 100 on the appellants under Rules 9 and 173-Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944, and demanded duty amounting to Rs. 13.840/- on 4 cooling coils and 4 cabinets alleged to have been removed without payment of duty.3. Appearing on behalf of the Appellants, Shri Willingdon Christian, Advocate, has stated that as per Tariff It...
Tag this Judgment!