Delhi Court December 1986 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.
Bharat Forge and Press India (P) Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1986
Reported in: (1987)(11)ECC203
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay dated 24-5-1982. The appellants hold Central Excise licence. They bring duty paid steel pipes from M/s Indian Tube Co.Ltd., Jamshedpur or from open market and also from import. The appellants cut these pieces into required sizes and turn them into pipe fittings, such as elbows, bends, reducers etc. by heating process, hammering and pressing in their workshop. These pipe fittings are classified under Item 68 w.e.f. 1-3-1975 by the Central Excise Authorities, and the appellants have been paying duty accordingly. The appellants contend that no new product came into existence and the process resorted to by the appellant would not amount to manufacture.The appellants, therefore, submitted the revised classification list stating that the products were classifiable only under TI 26AA(iv). The Assistant Collector after hearing the party held that the pipe fittings were correctly classifiable under TI 68 and that...
Kerala State Electricity Board Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-1986
Reported in: (1987)(13)LC500Tri(Delhi)
1. This was originally filed as a revision application against the order passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs and, on statutory transfer to the Tribunal, is now an appeal before us.2. The appellants imported certain goods under a B/E No. 367 dated 28.11.1979 and requested the benefit of 'Project Import' and consequent concessional assessment in respect of the goods. The grounds on which the appellants sought concessional assessment (under Tariff H. 84.66 CTA) are as follows: (i) M/s Canadian General Electric Company, Toronto, Canada, who are the manufacturers and suppliers of the Generator for the Idukki Hydro-Electric Project are now supplying some additional winding materials free of charge to bring up the winding to proper international standards as specified in the original contract for the supply, erection and commissioning of the 3 Generators. It was found that the stator bar armour to ground resistance are high and the additional works have to be done for long se...
Vishal Syntex Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1986
Reported in: (1987)(11)ECC98
1. These appeals were filed by M/s. Modi Yarn Mills. It has now been brought to our notice by the appellants that there has been a change in the name. It appears that M/s. Modi Yarn Mills, 'C' Unit ( which is the unit concerned in this appeal) was transferred to M/s. Modi Syntex (P) Ltd. from 31.8.83 and subsequently the name of Modi Syntex (P) Ltd. has been changed to Vishal Syntex Ltd. Bringing to our notice these facts an application was filed for change of cause title and the same was allowed after hearing both sides. Hence the appellant at present is M/s. Vishal Syntex Ltd. 2. The appellants were manufacturers, amongst other things, of a fancy yarn by name Fenaplast Yarn. They were paying duty thereon under T.L 18-E GET. Subsequently on 6.12.78 they filed classification list mentioning that the proper classification for fenaplast yarn would be T.J. 68-CET. This classification was approved on 5.2.79, approval being communicated on 13.2.79. The appellants claim that on 3.4.79 anoth...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Metro Playing Card Company
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1986
Reported in: (1989)(40)ELT110TriDel
1. The revision show cause notice of the Central Government seeks to disallow deduction of cost of transportation from the sale price of the respondents' goods on the ground that assessable value of the goods at the factory gate was ascertainable.2. The respondents maintain that there was no sale of their goods at the factory gate and that they delivered the goods at the dealers' premises. They add that this has been their stand throughout in the proceedings and to substantiate it they invite our attention to their letter dated 13-6-1977 (with which the price list was forwarded to the Assistant Collector) and to their submissions, oral as well as in the written affidavit, before the Appellate Collector. They argue that deduction of cost of transportation, whether actual or overaged, has been allowed by the Supreme Court in their judgment on Section 4 [1983 ELT 18% (S.C.) - Bombay Tyre International].3. The learned representative of the department is unable to produce the relevant pric...
Wealth-tax Officer Vs. A.K. Johar
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD675(Delhi)
1. These appeals by the revenue involve common point. These are, therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by a consolidated order.2. The parties have been heard and their rival contentions carefully considered. The assessment years involved are 1975-76 to 1978-79. The common issue is whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 8,81,666 can be said to be includible as an asset into the net wealth of the assessee for the years under appeal. This issue has arisen out of a very interesting set of facts, which are as under.3. One Mr. J.E.D. Fonseca was lessee of the premises, 1, Man Singh Road, New Delhi and was running a hotel in the name and style of Fonseca (P.) Ltd. This lease expired in 1968. During the subsistence of the lease, the land and building in which the hotel was run had become an evacuee property after the partition of India. The title to the said estate, therefore, vested in the Director of Estates, Ministry of Works & Housing, ...
Janta Traders Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-1986
Reported in: (1987)(13)LC685Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Janta Traders, 59/67, Mirza Street, Bombay-400 003, have filed an appeal being aggrieved from Order No. 418/1982, dated 23rd September, 1982 passed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi.2 Briefly the facts of the case are that M/s. Janta Traders had imported five consignments of YKK Brand Zip Fasteners from Hongkong in 121 cases. M/s. Azad Shipping Agency, CHA No. 11/234, presented Bills of Entry IGM No. 1629 and Item Nos. 107 to 111 for clearance of the aforesaid consignments. The appellant had presented invoice Nos.1928/81 to 1932/81, all dated 11-10-1981 issued by Japan Trading Company, Hongkong, the shippers of the consignments. The invoices show the description of the goods as "YKK Brand Plastic Zippers, Size No. 5" and country of origin as Hongkong. The invoices showed that the price charged varied according to the size of the material and there was in all 24 different sizes. The invoices further showed that shippers had shown separate unit price for each...
The Dharmapuri District Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-1986
Reported in: (1987)(11)LC429Tri(Delhi)
1. By a letter dated 26.7.1978 the appellants, M/s. Dharmapuri District Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., preferred a supplementary claim for additional rebate amounting to Rs. 10.14,660.96 P. in addition to the rebate already claimed for the sugar year 1976-77 for the block period December, 1976 to September, 1977. This additional rebate was claimed with reference to the production of the sugar during the period 1st October, 1976 to 30th November, 1976. The claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector under letter dated 7.7.1981 pointing out that there had been no production of sugar at all during the preceding base period mentioned in notification No. 257/76-CE dated 30.9.1976 and hence the eligibility for the additional rebate claim was not made out. This order was upheld by the Appellate Collector under his order dated 21.12.1981. He also held that if there was no production of sugar during the corresponding period of the preceding five years as mentioned in the notification there w...
Standard Woollen Mills Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-1986
Reported in: (1987)(11)ECC135
1. On 15.7.1980, a sample was drawn from lot No. 25 of the woollen yarn being spun by the appellants M/s. Standard Woollen Mills. On test it was found that the contents were 61.1% of wool fibres, 20.1% man-made Cellulosic fibres and 18.8% nylon fibres. This was against the declared description of the said yarn by the Appellants as consisting of 70% wool, 15% viscose and 15% nylon and therefore falling under tariff item No. 18 - B(i ) CET. Since the chemical examiner's report disclosed that the yarn was properly classifiable under item 18-B(ii) CET, a show cause notice dated 5.4.1981 was issued charging the appellants with failure to file proper classification list and of having cleared the said yarn without payment of proper duty under TI 18-B(ii) CET. Duty calculated at the proper rate on 2931.300 Kgs of the said woollen yarn was also demanded thereunder. The appellants sent a reply dated 20.2.1981 challenging the result of chemical analysis and claiming that the yarn spun by them sa...
Tata Finlay Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-1986
Reported in: (1987)(11)LC535Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants, M/s Tata Finlay Ltd. are owners of 49 Tea Estates, some in north India and some in south India. Their claim for refund of duty in terms of notification No. 198/76-CE dated 16.6.76 was rejected by the Assistant Collector under order dated 27.8.81 on the ground that the claim related to the year 1977-78 but that the refund Bill dated 16.6.81 was received in the office of the Assistant Collector on 21.8.81 and was thus time barred. In appeal against the said order was dismissed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta under order dated 26.9.81 agreeing with the Assistant Collector that the refund claim, presented beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the relevant rule, calculated from the dates of payment of duty, was thus barred by time. The revision petition preferred by the appellants against the said order is the present deemed appeal before us.2. We have heard Dr. Shanker Ghosh, Advocate assisted by Shri H.K.Datta, Advocate for the appella...
Ashwani Kumar Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD643(Delhi)
1. These are two appeals by the purchasers of property being land and building forming part of plot No. 56, Block No. 10, Golf Links, New Delhi, which has been ordered to be acquired under Section 269F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned departmental representative and have perused the material placed before us.3. Shri Amar Kumar Kapoor and Shri Ram Kapoor, sons of Gurandatta Kapoor were the owners of the aforesaid property which was sold by them to the present appellants Iqbal Chand Khurana and Ashwani Khurana, who are father and son respectively, by a sale deed dated 21-8-1984. Prior to the execution of the sale deed, an agreement to sell had been executed by the aforesaid vendors in favour of the vendees on 7-2-1984.The property in question is situate on leasehold land measuring 1250 sq. yards. The lessor is the Government of India. A lease deed dated 16-8-1962 was executed on behalf of the President of Ind...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »