Delhi Court January 1987 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.
Modi Rayon and Silk Mills Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)LC1Tri(Delhi)
1. (Misc. Order No. 7 to 18/1987-A). - In these appeals a common question regarding a liability of duty on the element of selling expenses included in the sale price of the goods namely art silk fabrics falling under Item 22 of the Central Excise Tariff arises.Accordingly, a common order is being issued.2. The appellant contended before the lower authorities that the selling expenses comprising of the following :- "Salary & Wages, Advertisement expenses, Bank Charges, Business Promotion expenses, Travelling expenses, Commission to Selling Agents, Brokerage to Selling Agents, Incentive to Customers and Rebate to Customers".were not liable to duty in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of A.K. Roy and Anr. v. Voltas Ltd. 1977 ELT (3) 177 inasmuch as the said judgment stated that excise duty is leviable only on the manufacturing cost plus manufacturing profit.3. The lower authorities have not accepted the contention of the appellants.4. The appellants, keeping in view t...
Rama Jewellers Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1987
Reported in: (1990)(46)ELT330TriDel
1. Being dis-satisfied with the impugned order confirming the Order-in-Original passed by the Dy. Collector (Gold), Central Excise Collectorate, New Delhi imposing a personal penalty of Rs. 5000/- on Shri Devi Dass Malhotra (Partner of the appellant firm) the appellant firm has filed the present appeal.2. Factual backdrops. - On 2-4-1982, the authorities concerned visited the business premises of the appellant and on checking found a shortage of 574.650 grams (69 pieces) of gold ornaments in the presence of Shri Devi Dass Malhotra, partner of the appellant firm. The said Devi Dass Malhotra in his statement tendered on the spot, admitted the said shortage of the gold ornaments and stated that he was out of station and his younger brother could not control the staff properly and some staff member might have committed some mistake in delivering the gold ornaments to some customer. As a follow up action, show-cause-notice was issued to the appellant for contravention of Rule 13 of the Gol...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. S. Sushil Goela
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1987
Reported in: [1987]168ITR277(Delhi)
1. These are two batches of petitions by two co-owners of a property in Chandni Chowk, Delhi. The question relates to the valuation of this property. Two arguments were addressed before the Tribunal on behalf of the assessed who had preferred an appeal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner setting aside the assessment made by the Wealth Tax officer and directing him to obtain the opinion of a Valuation Officer in regard to the question of valuation. The first argument was that the property should be valued on rental basis and the second was that the value of the property should be valued on rental basis and the second was that value of the property shown by the assessed has been accepted in the case of co-sharer, Shri L. S. Goela, and that assessment has become final for the three years in question. The Tribunal does not appear to have clearly expressed an opinion on the first contention. It set aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and directed th...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Illa Dalmia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1987
Reported in: [1987]168ITR274(Delhi)
1. These applications relate to the assessment years 1976-77 to 1979-80. The question sought to referred is the same and reads as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax setting aside the assessment order passed by the Wealth-tax Officer as being erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue was justified ?' 2. Though the above question is a question of law, we direct reference of the above question only for the three assessment years 1976-77 to 1978-79. So far as the assessment year 1979-80 is concerned, the provisions of rule 1BB had come into force with effect from April 1, 1979, and were, thereforee, applicable for that year. In this view, there was no prejudice to the Revenue by the order of the Wealth-tax Officer. 3. In the result, Wealth-tax Case No. 70 of 1983 is dismissed and so far as Wealth-tax Cases Nos. 71 to 73 of 1983 are concerned, the Tribunal is directed to state a consolidated case for the three as...
Jay Engineering Works Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1987
Reported in: [1987]167ITR882(Delhi)
1. These are cross-applications by the assessed and the Commissioner of Income-tax. In the assessed's application, the first question seeks to challenge the applicability of section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This, in our opinion, is a finding of fact, as the Tribunal has found that the assessed has not disclosed fully and truly all the facts necessary for the assessment for the assessment year 1971-72 at the time of the original assessment. The second question raised by the assessed involves two points : (1) whether the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 was deductible in 1971-72; and (2) whether the Tribunal was correct in directing the allowance of this amount in 1972-73. So far the first aspect is concerned, the answer is obvious because the Tribunal has found that the cheque was issued after the end of the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1971-72. So far as the second aspect is concerned, the Department is also aggrieved by the directions given by the Tribunal to the Depa...
Rattan Chand Vs. Ujjagar Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1987
Reported in: 31(1987)DLT222
Sunanda Bhandare, J. (1) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of the Competent Authority under the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act whereby the application of the respondent under Section 19(i)(a) of the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act for seeking permission to institute eviction proceedings against the petitioner from property no. XV/1708-1709, Partap Street, Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, New Delhi was allowed. (2) Apart from the income which was available to the petitioner from his pension and the typing work which he did, three other factors which weighed with the Competent Authority to pass the impugned order were ; (1) that the earning children of the petitioner had not declared that they were separate from their father and, thereforee, their income had to be taken into account before determining the means available with the petitioner-tenant ; (2) the petitioner who was appointed as a guardian of minor Jia Rani who ...
Management of Mother's International School and Anr. Vs. Delhi School ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1987
Reported in: 1987(13)DRJ257; 1989LabIC162
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) The challenge in this writ petition is to the order of the Delhi School Tribunal which allowed the appeal of Smt. Uma Mehrotra, whose services had been terminated.(2) Briefly stated, the facts are that Mother's International School was established on 23rd April, 1956. On 1st July, 1960 the said School appointed Mrs. Uma Mehrotra as a Teacher. According to the petitioner Mrs. Mehrotra was qualified to teach Nursery classes only and she was recruited for that purpose. After the appointment of Mrs. Mehrotra, the School was taken over by Sri Aurobindo Society. According to the petitioner in the year 1967 this School was bifurcated into Mother's International School, which was recognised and Mother's Nursery Sch ool, which was un-recognised. The case of the petitioner is that Smt. Uma Mehrotra continued to work as a Teacher in Mother's Nursery Schl, which was a separate Institution from Mother's International School. In the year 1973 the Delhi School Education Act came i...
Bharat Barrel and Drum Vs. C. C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-19-1987
Reported in: (1989)(44)ELT366TriDel
1. Both appeals are by M/s. Bharat Barrel & Drum Manufacturing Co. (P) Ltd., who are the owners of M/s. Jalan Dyeing & Bleaching Mills. Since it was submitted for the appellants that arguments in both appeals would to a large extent be common, certain additional submissions to be made in appeal No. 332/81 only, both appeals were heard together.2. M/s. Jalan Dyeing & Bleaching Mills had been receiving textile fabrics from merchants and customers for processing. One such customer was Parkash Cotton Mills. With reference to certain sort numbers received for processing from Parkash Cotton Mills, which had been processed and cleared by the appellants under T.1. 19(l)(ii) CET, they were intimated that the proper classification was under T.I. 19(l)(i) CET and on that basis two show cause notices were issued demanding payment of differential duty.The contentions raised by the appellants were rejected by the concerned Assistant Collector under two orders, dated 22nd April, 1978 and...
Swastic Woollens and ors. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-19-1987
Reported in: (1988)(34)ELT83TriDel
1. All these appeals involve a common issue (as admitted by both sides before us) and are, therefore, disposed of by this common order.2. The appellants imported at Bombay Port consignments described as "woollen waste". The detailed particulars of the consignments are furnished in the impugned orders. On examination of the consignments on percentage basis, the customs authorities found that there was prima facie evidence to show that they contained long length of slivers/tops etc. A thorough examination of the consignments was, therefore, ordered to verify the actual description of the goods on an over all basis. A technical panel was constituted for the purpose consisting of the Deputy Chief Chemist. Bombay, as Chairman and an Assistant Collector of Customs and a Senior Scientific Officer of the Office of the Textile Committee as Members. Based on the panel's findings, show cause notices were issued to the importers to the effect that the goods appeared to be other than wool waste bu...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. the Somaiya Sugar Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-19-1987
Reported in: (1987)(11)LC78Tri(Delhi)
1. In respect of sugar produced by M/s. Somaiya Sugar Works during the period 1.12.1974 to 30.9.1975 they had claimed rebate in terms of notification No. 152/74-CE dated 10.11.1974. The same had been granted to them and credited to their P.L.A. Subsequently notice dated 11.10.1977 was issued to them directing them to show cause why out of the said rebate a sum of Rs. 30349.74P, should not be recovered from them as no rebate was payable since they had suppressed the fact that duty actually paid on the levy sugar was less than the amount of rebate claimed. On receipt of reply denying the allegations 'of suppression and further contending that the notice was barred by time, the Assistant Collector confirmed the demand raised in the notice and directed that a suitable debit may be made in the PLA. On appeal the Appellate Collector of Central Excise Madras under his order dated 15.12.1980 upheld the findings of the Assistant Collector that the assessee was not entitled to the rebate to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »