Delhi Court July 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.
Cwt Vs. Brig. Kapil Mohan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-10-1987
Reported in: (2001)170CTR(Del)51
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.At the instance of revenue, following question has been referred for opinion of this court under section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench E (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in taking the view that the broiler chickens etc. cannot be treated as 'animals' for the purposes of grant of exemption under section 2(e)(iii) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 ?'2. Factual position in nutshell is as follows. assessed, an individual, filed his return of wealth and claimed that the value of broiler chickens, etc. cannot be included in the wealth of the assessed in view of section 2(e)(iii) of the Act. Assessing officer held that broiler chickens, etc. are not covered by the said exemption and an addition of Rs. 1,38,114 as movable property was made. Matter was carried in appeal before the Appella...
Mohan Steels Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC249
1. The only short question involved in this appeal for consideration is whether the provisions of the Limitation Act could be invoked before the authorities constituted under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, in the insant case.2. Factual backdrops: The appellants who are manufacturers of, among others, steel ingots were exempted from payment of duty on steel ingots manufactured with the aid of electric arc furnace in terms of Notification No. 237/75 dated 9-12-1975 as amended by notification no.235/77 dated 15-7-1977. This position continued till notification no.156/79 dated 9-4-1979 was issued by imposing duty on the above items.The appellants had on the night of 8/9-4-1979 a certain quantity of steel ingots. This was cleared by them between 9-4-1979 to 15-5-1979 on payment of duty amounting to Rs. 98,208.81. But it appears that the appellants subsequently felt that the recovery of duty on the said items was not correct as at the time of its manufacture steel ingots manufactur...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Nat Steel Equipment Private
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC290
1. Appeal No. 1311/83 was filed before the Tribunal by the Revenue against the orders of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, passed in Order-in-Appeal No. A-379-380/B1-S1-S2/83 dated 8-3-1983. For completion of record, a Supplementary Appeal has since been filed and the Application for condonation has not been opposed by the Respondents.3. The Respondents are manufacturers of 'Hospital and Pharmaceutical Appliances and Heavy Duty Industrial Canteen Equipment'. The following 14 items were classified by them under T.I.68 in their classification list No. 106 dated 27-3-1979 :- 4. The Asstt. Collector held the view that products 2 to 14 appeared to be classifiable under T.I.33C as they were covered under the Explanation given below the description of goods under T.I.33C. A notice was issued to the Respondents to show cause as to why the classification of the items should not be approved under T.1.33C, In their reply, the Respondents contended that earlier classification lists h...
Collector of Customs Vs. Sundram Clayton Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-1987
Reported in: (1989)(62)ELT262aTriDel
1. The notice issued by the Government of India F. No. 380.131.81.CUS II dated nil was meant to set aside the order of Appellant Collector Custom, Madras No. C-3.1147.81, dated 12-5-1981. The item in dispute is Coordinate Measuring Machine imported by M/s. Sundaram Clayton Limited, Madras under bill of entry No. D1323, dated 25-4-1980.2. The learned Counsel for the department said that there is nothing to prove that the imported measuring machine is a machine for anything but measuring work pieces. We have only the claim of importer that it fulfils the role of a universal machinery which can qualify for exemption under the custom notification of exemption No. 49/78.3. The learned Deputy Manager for M/s. Sundaram Clayton Limited, Mr. D.Vedantham referred to the printed catalogue and said that this was a complicated and highly sophisticated measuring machine controlled by computer. It can do various measuring jobs and fulfils the definition of universal measuring machine and therefore, ...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Indian Oxygen Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-1987
Reported in: (1989)(41)ELT610TriDel
1. There are seven appeals filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Guntur and six appeals filed by M/s. Indian Oxygen Ltd. against Orders-in-Appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras. Since these appeals are against the same order of Collector (Appeals), Madras they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Heard Shri V.M. Doiphode, S.D.R., for the department and Shri S.Ramasubramaniam and Shri Krishna Srinivasan, Advocates for M/s. Indian Oxygen Ltd., Visakhapatnam.3. M/s. Indian Oxygen Ltd., Visakhapatnam are the manufacturer of oxygen and D.A. Gases. They sell the said gases from their factory at Visakhapatnam and from their depot/service centres at Vijayawada, Rajamundry, Vadlapudi, Jeypore and Damanjodi. They sell their product to Government undertakings as per the rates determined by D.G.S. & D., New Delhi. In respect of other buyers they sell their product at various prices on slab basis. This slab basis is related...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-1987
Reported in: (1990)(46)ELT65TriDel
1. The impugned order had disposed of two appeals No. V-2(14B) 162/84 & V.2(14B) 462/84 filed by the respondents before him. Shri Shishir Kumar, learned S.D.R. representing the Appellant Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara informs us that to comply with the practice and procedure followed in the Tribunal one supplementary appeal was forwarded by post on 22-6-1987. Both the parties request that this supplementary appeal may also be disposed of with the main appeal No.E/2821/86-C. Enquiry was made from the Registry to trace this supplementary appeal but the attempt failed. Shri Shishir Kumar may, therefore, file another memo of appeal which be treated as a supplementary appeal to the main appeal and put up for hearing and disposal on 8-7-1987.2. The present order is held relatable to appeal No. V-2(14B) 162/84 before the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay.3. We have heard Shri Shishir Kumar, learned SDR for the appellant and Shri M.R. Paranjpe, Consultant for the Respondent and p...
Soldez Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)ECC184
1. The importers, M/s. Soldez Industries, imported a machine they described as hydraulic swaging machine for which they claimed assessment under Customs Tariff Heading 84.W/48. The machine was assessed by the Custom House under 84.59. According to the appellants, the machine is a swaging machine and is used in fitting the metal end to the hose by employing swaging process. The process has two parts to be fitted - (i) the metallic end fitting and (ii) the hose. According to the findings of the Assistant Collector, which the appellants also approve, "the function of the machine is that the rubber cover at the end of the braided hose is shaved to some extent and the metallic fitting to be mounted is slipped over the hose. A metallic sleeve slightly bigger in diameter is fixed over the hose and then this is put into the pressing dies of the machine. The press compresses and fits the metallic sleeve on to the hose. In the process, the diameter of the metallic sleeve 6ets reduced so as to f...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Gujrat State Fertilizer
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)LC630Tri(Delhi)
1. The applicant herein filed an appeal under Section 35B of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 before this Tribunal against the impugned order which was communicated to them on 21.1.1983. The appeal was received in this Tribunal on 17.5.1983. There was a delay of 27 days in filing the appeal. The applicant has commuted the delay as 22 days, taking the date of despatch of the appeal by post to be the date of filing the appeal. In this application for condonation of delay he has prayed for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal.2. In the application, it has been stated that the delay has been caused due to inter-departmental consultation and the administrative procedures involved before the final-decision was taken to file the appeal. It has also been stated that in spite of paucity of staff, earnest efforts have been made to finalise the issue and file appeal as early as possible, and at no stage any intentional or wilful delay has occurred. The papers had to pass through...
D and H Secheron Electrodes Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)LC575Tri(Delhi)
1. Being dis-satisfied with the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (Rs. One lakh only) upon the appellants under Rule 173(Q) of Central Excise Rules, 1944, the appellants have filed their captioned appeals.2. Factual Backdrops: The appellants are the manufacturers of Welding Electrodes falling under Tariff Item 50. On the basis of search and seizu're of a number of documents and the statemsnts recorded, a Show Cause Notice calling upon the appellants to show cause as to why a penalty be not imposed upon them under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and why duty amounting to Rs. 32,702.11 at the appropriate rate on the- electrodes surreptitiously manufactured and removed without payment of Central Excise duty during the year 1972 and 1973 be not demanded under Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 was issued to the appellants. In reply, while abjuring their guilt they took various pleas in their defence and requested for personal hearing.Consequently, personal hearing wa...
Longthovalley Woodcrafts Pvt. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-06-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC29
1. The appellants manufacture veneers and sawn timber. Sometime in 1983 the central excise department alleged that the appellants evaded central excise duty and that they cleared goods in excees of 30 lakhs rupees value from the factory without payment of duty. As a consequence it was alleged that there was evasion of excise duty during the year 1981-82 and that the appellants did not obtain the central excise licence for manufacture of goods. A further charge was that the appellants did not maintain the RG-1 register and did not file RT-12 returns for the goods cleared by them. It was also alleged that they did not file the declaration necessary under notification No. 105/80-CE even though their production crossed 80% of the exemption limit of Rs. 30 lakhs in value. After due procees including the issue of show cause notice, the Collector of Central Excise held that the appellants failed to pay central excise duty amounting to Rs. 1,39,222.24 and that there were other irregularities ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »