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.
German Remedies Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1986
Reported in: (1987)(11)ECC150
1. German Remedies Limited, Bombay has filed two appeals being aggrieved from order in appeal No. A-53-54/B1-6-7/83 dated 28-1-1983 passed by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. Since both the appeals emerge from the same order, the same are being disposed of by a consolidated order.2. The facts of both the appeals are similar. The appellants cleared their products falling under Tariff Item 14E at maximum retail price and supplied at tender rate to the Government Department thereby paid less duty than the actual amount of duty payable by them during the period from March 1979 to September 1979. Therefore, the concerned Range Superintendent issued a show cause cum demand notice for the differential duty of Rs. 24,009.89 to the appellant. In reply to the show cause notice the appellant had stated that the goods in question had been cleared at their M.R.P. less 20% being their option under Notification No. 161/66-CE dated 8-10-1966 as amended from time to time; and it was thei...
Dukart and Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1986
Reported in: (1987)(12)LC507Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta. The appellants are manufacturers of paints and varnishes and it was alleged that during the period 1.4.81 to 19.10.81, they had wrongly availed of the benefit of exemption notification 20/72 dated 4.2.72 in respect of varnishes manufactured by them. The varnish stated to have escaped payment of duty was being captively consumed by them and was being utilised for manufacture of other paints and enamels in respect of which they had claimed the benefit of the exemption notification 80/80. Under this notification subject to the satisfaction of various conditions of the notification, specified goods cleared upto value of 7.3 lakhs were exempted from payment of duty. Notification No.20/72 is conditional notification and the benefit of exemption under this notification is available in respect of varnish etc subject to the satisfaction of the following condition : "Provided that no such exemption shall be all...
Pacific Exports Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1986
Reported in: (1987)(11)LC273Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Pacific Exports, Bombay has filed an appeal being aggrieved from order in appeal No. S/49-218/82-R dated nil despatched on 31.12.1982 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant had imported liquid paraffin and had claimed it to be a medicinal product falling under item 68 of Central Excise Tariff and in terms of Notification No.55/75-C.E. no C.V. Duty was payable on the same. The appellant had filed a refund application before the Assistant Collector of Customs.The same was rejected on the ground that the import documents did not indicate that the goods were of pharmaceutical standards and as such the benefit of notification could not be extended to the subject goods.Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order the appellant had filed an appeal before the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. The learned Collector had rejected he appeal on the ground that the importer did not mention on the Bill of Entry that the...
J.K. Synthetics Ltd. and Another Vs. Income-tax Officer, Central Circl ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1986
Reported in: [1987]168ITR467(Delhi)
G.C. Jain, J.1. M/s. J. K. Synthetics Ltd. (for short 'the company') is a public limited company duly incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. It was engaged in the manufacture and sale of synthetic yarn, cement, etc. During the relevant period, i.e., accounting year ending December 31, 1974 (assessment year 1975-76), Sh. Sita Ram Singhania was its president. Sh. Rama Shankar Bajpai was its secretary and general manager (Taxation). For the said year, a notice under section 210 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), requiring to pay a sum of Rs. 1,43,47,719 as advance tax was served on the company on May 30, 1974. This notice was issued on the basis of the previous assessments. Under section 212 of the Act, it was open to the company, instead of making the payment of advance tax demanded under section 210, likely to be less than the income on which advance tax had been demanded under section 210. The company, in exercise of this right, filed an estima...
State Vs. Shankar @ Raju
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1986
Reported in: 1988CriLJ780; 1987(12)DRJ240
Malik Sharief-Ud-Din, J.(1) The learned Additional Sessions Judge. New Delhi has convicted Devi Chai an accused under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to the payment of fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default of payment to further imprisonment for six months. He has also been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to the payment of fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and in default of fine to further imprisonment for six months for an offence under Section 394 Indian Penal Code. (2) Shankar, another accused, has been sentenced to death under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and to a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default of fine to further imprisonment for the months. Shankar has also been sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence under Section 394 Indian Penal Code read with Section 397 and 398 Indian Penal Code and also to a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and in default of fine further imprisonment for six months. (3) The learned Additional Sess...
J. K. Synthetics Limited and anr Vs. Income Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1986
Reported in: (1987)62CTR(Del)19
G. C. Jain, J. - M/s. J. K. Synthetics Limited (for short the company) is a public limited company duly corporated under the Indian Companies Act. It was engaged in the manufacture and sale of synthetic yarn, cement, etc. During the relevant period, i.e., accounting year ending 31-12-1974 (asst. yr. 1975-76). Shri Sita Ram Singhania was its President. Shri Rama Shankar Bajpai was its Secretary and General Manager (Taxation). For the said year a notice under s. 210 of IT Act (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) requiring to pay a sum of Rs. 1,43,47,719 as advance tax was served on the company on 30-5-1974. This notice was issued on the basis of the previous assessments. Under s. 212 of the Act it was open to the company, instead of making the payment of advance tax demanded under s. 210, to submit an estimate of current income if this current income was likely to be less than the income on which advance tax had been demanded under s. 210. The company in exercise of this right filed a...
Shree Jagdish Oil Industries (P) Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-1986
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT499TriDel
1. The question for decision in this appeal is classification for the purpose of Central Excise duty on Sal olein and Sal stearine whether the products fall under Tariff item 12 as claimed by the appellants or under Tariff Item 68 as assessed by the Revenue.2. At the hearing of the appeal on 9-12-86, it was noticed that the impugned order bearing Order-in-Appeal No. B-376-377/AHD-21-22/83 dated 3-3-1983 had disposed of two appeals against two orders-in-original.According to the practice followed in the Tribunal, the appellants should have, therefore, filed two appeals and not one as has been done.On this being pointed out, Shri C.S. Lodha, Advocate representing the appellants stated that the appellants would in about a week's time, file one supplementary appeal to comply with this practice. He submitted that the present appeal No. 1283/83-C may be treated as being against the order-in-Appeal relatable to order-in-original No.V-68/3/5/D/CX/-3 dated 28th May, 84 passed by the Assistant ...
Bengal Paper Mill Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-1986
Reported in: (1989)(44)ELT371TriDel
1. The Bengal Paper Mill Co. Ltd., PO Ballavpur, Raniganj, Distt.Burdwan, West Bengal, has filed a Revision Application to the Additional Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi being aggrieved from order in appeal No.62/WB/82, dated 12-2-1982 passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Calcutta. After coming into existence of the Tribunal the said-Revision Application stands transferred to the Tribunal in terms of the provisions of Section 35P of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 to be disposed of as an appeal. There is another appeal which is registered with the Registry vide appeal No. ED/T/303/83-C. Since same issue is involved, both the appeals are disposed of by a consolidated order.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant submitted classification list on 11-3-1981 claiming classification both of (i) White Map Litho Offset Printing (52 GSM); and (ii) Alkali Resistant White Map Litho Printing (5...
Alim Shamji Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD636(Delhi)
1. This second appeal is directed against the order dated 16-11-1984 passed by the AAC, 'O' Range, New Delhi dismissing the assessee's appeal in respect of addition of Rs. 6 lakhs made in the assessment framed on 19-10-1982 under Section 16(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act') in respect of the assessment year 1978-79, for which the valuation date was 31-3-1978. The question is whether the assessee was rightly denied exemption under Section 5(1)(xxiii) of the Act, in relation to Rs. 6 lakhs, which was remitted in favour of U.P. Twiga Fibreglass Ltd. ('the company') for allotment of shares.2. The appellant, an Indian by origin, was admittedly a British citizen and admittedly Rs. 6 lakhs was remitted from abroad for allotment of shares of the company. It is also undisputed that shares were allotted after the valuation date after approval from the Reserve Bank of India.3. To understand the assessee's claim and the basis of the lower authorities decision, the related provision shoul...
impex Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-1986
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC441
1. These appeals belonging to the same appellants raise similar issues and are disposed of by this common order.2. The question for decision in Appeal No. 148/83-C is whether goods entering the territorial waters of India at the time when they were exempt from Customs duty (and not additional duty) become chargeable to customs duty if at the time of their removal from warehouse the exemption from customs duty be withdrawn and the question for decision in the other two appeals is whether goods in respect of which Bills of Entry were presented after issue of Notification 205-Cus/80 dated 16-10-80 by which exemption from customs duty granted under Notification 66 Cus dated 15-3-79 as amended and which was to have remained in force till 31-3-81 was withdrawn and the period curtailed to 16-10-80, would be governed for purposes of customs duty by the earlier Notification 66-Cus dated 16-3-79 or She superseding notification 205/Cus/80 dated 16-10-80.3. With respect to Appeal No. 148/83-C a c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »