Delhi Court May 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.
Budge Budge Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT609TriDel
1. The main question for decision in this appeal is whether the appellants manufacturer precipitated activated coated chalk (activated calcium carbonate) is eligible to benefit of exemption under Notification No. 23/55-C.E., dated 29.4.55.2. The present proceedings against the appellants are outcome of visit by the Central Excise Officers to the appellant's factory on 30.9.82 and detention of 325.580 M.T. of Calcium Carbonate of all varieties found in stock with them. After due investigation, a show cause notice dated 3/4-4-83 was served on the appellants alleging that had:- (a) manufactured the excisable goods viz. precipitated Calcium Carbonate (Coated) known by them as ACC 03 falling under T.I.68 of Central Excise Tariff without obtaining a Central Excise Licence in form L 4 from 21.6.78 onwards as required under Section 6 of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with Rule 174 of Central Excise Rules, 1944. (b) removed the excisable goods without determining the Central Excise du...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)(15)ECC129
1. Brief facts of the case as given in the impugned order are as follows :- The respondent's mills filed a claim for refund of Rs. 7,291.77p on the ground that they had paid interest on warehoused goods-polyester manmade fibre yarn-kept in the warehouse for a period beyond three months, though the goods being 'non-consumable stores' interest was payable only if they were kept for more than a year in terms of Section 61(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.The impugned order has allowed the refund to the respondents' mills on the following reasoning :- "In the absence of the specific definition of the term 'non-consumable' one has to take recourse to the definition of 'consumable' in the Import Export Policy. In that Policy 'consumables' have been defined as those which participate in the manufacturing process and as such 'non-consumables' should be the converse i.e. those which are required in the manufacturing process but forming part of the end product. While it is true that the fibre at the...
Machine Tools (India) Limited Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT239TriDel
1. This was originally filed as a revision application and on statutory transfer is now an appeal before us.2. The appellants imported, under a Bill of Entry No. I-404 dated 8.5.1979, various goods among which was a Speedhone Machine along with Air Line Gauge. The Air Line Gauge was classified under Heading 90.28 (4). After clearing the goods, the appellants made a claim for refund requesting re-classification of the gauge under Heading 84.45/48.3. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim. The Appellate Collector rejected the appeal as the catalogue described the airline gauge as "Air gauging equipment" which can be fitted as an optional feature. As it was an optional feature the Appellate Collector held that it was correctly under Heading 90.28(4) read with 90.16(1). Hence the present appeal.4. Shri B.N. Sharma, the learned Consultant for the appellants argued that Heading 84.45/48 covered accessories. He emphasised that the airline gauge was imported along with Honing Machine unde...
iraqi Airways Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: (1987)23ITD115(Delhi)
1. These are 12 appeals by the assessee M/s. Iraqi Airways against three sets of orders passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), one relating to the assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72, 1972-73 and 1973-74, second relating to 1974-75, 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1979-80 and third relating to 1980-81 and 1981-82. The issues involved in all these appeals are common and, therefore, all the appeals have been heard together and common arguments have been addressed to us by both the parties.2. We may produce the grounds taken which are common for all the years :- 1. That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law in holding that the assessee which was a Sovereign State was a 'person' within the meaning of Section 2(31) of the Act hence liable to taxation under the Act." 2. "That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law in holding that the proceedings initiated Under Section 139(2)/148 of the Act were valid in spite of the fact that no notice under these se...
income-tax Officer Vs. Gimret and Co.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD407(Delhi)
1. In this appeal by the revenue the issue involved is whether the assessee could be granted registration though one of the three partners is not to share in the losses of the firm.2. The learned Senior Departmental Representative Mr. O.S. Bajpai submitted that in this appeal there are 3 grounds. The first two being on the granting of registration and the last being entertaining fresh material without affording opportunity to the ITO. He fairly submitted that though Rule 46A had been overlooked by the CIT (Appeals) it is not so serious enough as the main issue of the granting of registration to the firm.2.1 Referring to the partnership deed, he submitted that there were three partners, namely, Dr. S. Batra, Shri D.N. Batra and Shri R.K.Dhingra in the firm. They share the profits in the ratio of 60%, 20 % and 20% respectively but the losses are to be shared between Dr. S.Batra and Shri R.K. Dhingra at 80% and 20% respectively. According to Mr. Bajpai Section 6 is emphatic about the fac...
Dalip Singh Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Delhi169; 1989(43)ELT415(Del); [1988]70STC264(Delhi)
H.C. Goel, J.1. The facts giving rise to this petition under section 130(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act'), briefly stated are that on December 14, 1980, the CIA police staff of Amritsar intercepted one Ramesh Kumar near the house of Dalip Singh, the petitioner, and recovered from his pant pockets 2.075 kg. of silver. The police party then searched the house of the petitioner and recovered 25 pieces of gold weighing 1.600 kg. including one piece of gold biscuit of foreign origin weighing 10 tolas valued at Rs. 2,16,400, 21 pieces of silver weighing 18.990 kgs. approximately and 150 wrist watches of foreign make valued at Rs. 36,740 from the almirah of the drawing room of the petitioner. The seized goods were handed over to the Customs Department by the police on December 20, 1980. The Customs Officers recorded the statements of the petitioner, his father, Mangal Singh, and his sister-in-law, Smt. Jaswant Kaur, under section 108 of the Act. Smt. Jaswant Kaur stated that ...
Dalip Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: 1987(14)ECC161
H.C. Goel, J.1. The facts giving rise to this petition under Section 130(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act') briefly stated are that on December 14, 1980 CIA Police staff of Amritsar interpreted one Ramesh Kumar near the house of Dalip Singh, petitioner, and recovered from his pant pockets 2.075 kg. of silver. The police party then searched the house of the petitioner and recovered 25 pieces of gold weighing 1.600 kg. including one piece of gold biscuit of foreign origin weighing 10 tolas valued at Rs. 2,16,400/-, 21 pieces of silver weighing 18.990 kgs. approximately and 150 wrist watches of foreign make valued at Rs. 36,740/- from the almirah of the drawing room of the petitioner. The seized goods were handed over to Customs by the police on December 20, 1980. The Customs Officers recorded the statements of the petitioner, his father Mangal Singh and his sister-in-law Smt. Jaswant Kaur under Section 108 of the Act. Smt. Jaswant Kaur stated that the seized gold, silver a...
Jagdip and anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: 1987(2)Crimes472; 32(1987)DLT146
M.K. Chawla, J.(1) On the basis of Report of the S.H.O. Police Station Adarsh Nagar, Sh. S. B. S. Tyagi, Spl. Executive Magistrate, vide its order dated 29-10-1986 issued notices u/s. 107/151 Cr. P. C. to the petitioners Jagdip and Mohinder Kumar to show cause by 7-11-1986 as to why they be not ordered to execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5000.00 with one/two sureties in the like amount for keeping peace for a period of one year. The petitioners by way of filing the Cr. M(M) 1654/86 have Rrayed for the quashing of the said notices. While admitting the petition, on 6th November, 1986, further proceedings in the court below, were stayed. (2) Subsequently, on another report of the S. H. O. of the said Police Station, the petitioners were again required to show cause by 26th December, 1986 as to why they be not ordered to execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5000.00 with three sureties by the order of Shri Tyagi, Special Executive Magistrate dated 16th December, 1986. The peti...
Premji Electronics Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-14-1987
Reported in: (1988)(16)LC534Tri(Delhi)
1. The appeal involves confiscation of 80 pcs. of video cassette tapes and 2 pcs. of car cassette players of value Rs. 16800/-giving the appellants an option to redeem them on payment of fine of Rs. 5000/-. A penalty of Rs. 2000/- has also been sustained, in the impugned order, on the appellant.2. Shri S.D. Khera, learned consultant has stated that the goods are not notified on the date of seizure. Video Cassette tapes have been notified subsequently under Chapter IVA in July, 1984. Accordingly, learned advocate submits that the onus is on the department to prove that the goods are smuggled. On the other hand, the appellants have produced a bill dated 9.11.1983 from Videotronics Daryaganj which clearly indicates that bona fide purchase of the tapes. The said later firm has confirmed the sale to the appellants.3. Learned SDR on the other hand has reiterated the findings of the lower authorities particularly in view of the statement of Shri A.K.Gupta, partner who did not have any bills/...
Gobind Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-14-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)LC711Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants M/s. Gobind Sugar Mills Ltd. received the order-in-original of the Assistant Collector on 15-12-1977 and preferred an appeal against the same to the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi. The Appellate Collector rejected the appeal on the ground that it had been received after the expiry of 3 months from the date of receipt of the order-in-original. It is against the said judgment that the appellants had preferred the present appeal.2. We have heard Shri 3. Banerjee, Advocate for the appellants and Shri K.C. Sachar for the Department.3. The order of the Appellate Collector does not disclose on what date the appeal had been received in his office. The appellants have filed before us the photocopy of the postal acknowledgement received by them for delivery of the envelope (containing the appeal) in the office of the Appellate Collector. It is seen therefrom that the envelope had been received in the said office on 16-3-1978. As earlier mentioned, the order-i...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »