Delhi Court June 1985 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1985 Page 3 of about 28 results (0.027 seconds)Ara Metal Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT536TriDel
1. This order disposes of the appeal which relates to Order-in-Original dt. 14-4-1980, Order Nos. S8/1143/79-B and S8/1144/79-B and the appeal in respect of that order filed before the Appellant Collector of Customs.2. The question for decision in this appeal, originally a revision application to the Government of India, is refund of the duty on zinc ash imported before---81. In this connection, Shri J.P. Devadhar, Advocate representing the appellants draws our attention to a decision of the Tribunal in S.K.C. Dyestuff and Chemical Industries, Madras v.Collector of Customs, Madras [1988 (18) E.L.T. 633 (Tribunal) and submits that this decision is applicable to the present appeal. Shri Rakesh Bhatia representing the respondent agrees that the ratio in para 2 of the decision for classification of zinc ash under T.I. 68 of CET for imports prior to ... 81 would be applicable and CV duty would have to be worked out on that basis and not under T.I. 26B of CET.3. In view of the foregoing, th...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. C.M. Pant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)14ITD239(Delhi)
1. The short point for our decision in the present appeal filed by the revenue in relation to the assessment year 1980-81 for which the previous year ended on 31-3-1980 is the assessment of Rs. 1,260 received by the assessee as political pension. At the assessment stage, the assessee claimed it to be exempt, however, the ITO assessed it with the narration, 'pension as disclosed'. At the first appellate stage, the learned AAC held it to be exempt under Section 10(17B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The amount has been received by the assessee in terms of pension to a political sufferer, since the assessee during the British regime, as a freedom fighter, is said to have been a part and parcel of the freedom movement and on attaining independence, the Government lauded the services of freedom fighters and the respective State Governments as also the Central Government sanctioned monetary assistance to political sufferers who have undergone various sentences/imprisonment under...
Tag this Judgment!Ramjilal Kundan Lal Vs. Collector of Customs and Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1986)(26)ELT737TriDel
1. In this Third Member reference, it would be expedient to briefly notice the fact which gave rise-to proceedings against the appellants, culminating in the Adjudication Order against them recorded by the Collector of Customs & Central Excise, New Delhi on 19-5-1983. These are, accordingly reproduced in so far as necessary for proper appreciation of the Third Member reference.2. The appellants are a partnership firm consisting of father; Shri Prem Narain Gupta, and his two sons: Virendra Kumar Gupta and Rakesh Kumar Gupta, whose business premises is Shop No. 699, Bara Tooti, Sadar Bazar, Delhi. On a surprise visit by the Gold (Control) Officers of the Central Excise Collectorate, New Delhi, on 3-9-1982, at 11 AM, and after a check of the stock, a quantity of 1645.200 Cms (203 pieces) of gold ornaments, of 23 1/2 carat purity and 22 carat purity, valued at Rs. 2,68,167/-, was found in excess of the recorded balance. Since ho statutory records were found to have been maintained in ...
Tag this Judgment!Surendra Tubes and Steel (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1987)(31)ELT320TriDel
1. Today's hearing was fixed on 12-3-1985 in presence of appellants representative Shri Mohan Singh Pal, Chief Executive.None is present for the appellant today. The appeal is dismissed in default of appellants appearance under Rule 20 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982....
Tag this Judgment!Mettur Chemicals and Industrial Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(21)ELT898TriDel
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a revision application before the Central Government which, under Section 35-P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal filed before it.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that M/s. Mettur Chemicals & Industrial Corporation Ltd. (the appellants) addressed a letter on 11-7-1977 to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Salem stating that they proposed to use cell liquor from their Plant I at Mettur Dam for purification of brine in their Plant II at Veerakkalpudur in order that more rayon grade caustic soda might be available for sale. It was further stated that this cell liquor contained approximately 100-140 gms. per litre of sodium hydroxide and 170-200 gms. per litre of undecomposed sodium chloride and was produced in the intermediate stage in the manufacture of commercial grade caustic soda. The cell liquor was not a saleable c...
Tag this Judgment!Saraswati Stores Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1891Tri(Delhi)
1. This is a matter, which was filed as a Revision Application before the Government of India by the appellants, against Order-in-Appeal No.C. 3/1255/1980, dated 21-11-1980, passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras. This has since been transferred to the Tribunal and is being treated as an Appeal before us.2. Shri V. Veeraraghavan, Advocate, has appeared on behalf of the appellants and Shri S.C. Rohatgi, JDR, on behalf of the respondents.3. The appellants claim that they are a small-scale industry for production of cassettes/pre-recorded cassettes, duly registered with the Government of Tamil Nadu, Madras. They had applied for an Import Licence for the required machinery for initial setting up of their new industrial unit. They also requested for Project Import endorsement for assessment of duty under Heading No. 84.66 of Section XVI of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Their request for the Import Licence was processed on the basis of the recommendation of the Industrial Deve...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Lathia Industrial Supplies Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(22)ELT837TriDel
1. Briefly stated the facts of the case, as are apparent on record, are that M/s. Lathia Industrial Supplies Co. Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter called the respondents) manufacture Rubber ebonite rolls, Rubber Blankets for CCS.P. Unit. Evaset Rubber Sleeve, Expander Rubber Sleeve, Rubber lining and Industrial moulded rubber articles, all of them falling under T.I. 68 GET. Besides manufacturing these goods, the respondents also undertake the job work of recoating of rubber rolls, rubber lining of chemical vessels and grinding and polishing of rolls. They had paid duty on the job work alleged lo have been done by them during the period 9-4-81 to 15-5-1981 and 5th March" 1980 to 5th August 1980 as, per Notification No. 119/75-CE. Later on they filed two refund claims for Rs. 71,469.52 and Rs. 12,915.12 on the grounds that they wrongly paid duty on recoating of rolls and re-rubber lining of tanks and vessels. According to them, recoating or re-rubber lining is a process of re-conditioning of used ...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Rama Krishna Steel Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1796Tri(Delhi)
1. Shri Verma has put in an application dated 14th March, 1985 signed by Shri N. Devaraju, Deputy Collector (Tech) praying for condonation of delay in filing appeal beyond three months. The delay in filing the appeal is of 9 days and this is admitted by both the parties.2. In the application the reasons for delay are stated to be that the Memo of appeal addressed to the Registrar of the Appellate Tribunal was despatched by the Despatch Section' to the Senior Departmental Representative, Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal and that delay was in the office of SDR who presented the appeal to the Registrar after expiry of three months. The application avers that the appeal was despatched in time on 17-8-1984 well within the time limit.The application goes on to say that the Special Bench B of the Tribunal had acknowledged receipt of this letter in their letter dated 18-9-1984 and it also passed orders on Stay application and had even granted early hearing. All this would s...
Tag this Judgment!