Delhi Court August 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.
O.N.G.C. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT420TriDel
1. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise Division III Kalyan by orders dated 1.2.84 and 28.8.84, passed after following usual procedure, held that Lean Gas manufactured by the appellant Gas Commission was classifiable under TI.11AA(2) of Central Excise Tariff and that the Commission should file classification and price list forthwith and comply with the central excise procedure. The Assistant Collector demanded duty amounting to Rs. 45,43,78,730.14 vide order dated 1.2.84 and for breach of certain rules mentioned in the order dated 28.8.84 he also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5.000/-. In appeal the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay by separate orders dated 18.9.86 set aside the penalty but otherwise dismissed the appeal. Hence the present appeals to the Tribunal.2. At the hearing of the appeals on 3.7.87 Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, Advocate represented the appellants and Shri Sundar Rajan, JDR the respondent. Shri Sundar Rajan conceded that according to Revenue if Lean Gas was ...
Fish-net Making Plant Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)(13)LC1133Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed against the order of the Collector (Appeals) Central Excise, Madras.2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants subjected duty paid nylon yarn falling under T.I. 18 CET to the twisting process in the twisting machines and obtained nylon twine as end-product. The lower authorities have held the same to be assessable under Tariff Item No.68 CET holding twine to be falling out of purview of Tariff Item No.18-II(i)(a). The appellants however claimed that twine continued to be covered by the term 'yarn' and mere twisting of the spun yarn as in their case does not take it out of purview of the scope of Tariff entry 18 CET covering yarn.3. Learned advocate for the appellants pleaded that mere twisting of the yarn could not be taken to be process of manufacture as on twisting the end-product although described as 'twine', it continued to have the characteristics of yarn for the purpose of classification under Central Excise Tariff. He cited the judgment of th...
G.N. Gandhi Vs. Tax Recovery Officer-iv and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)66CTR(Del)201; [1987]168ITR625(Delhi)
Ranganathan, J.1. The petitioner challenges the validity of an auction sale of property No. A-206, defense Colony, New Delhi, which took place on February 27, 1987, at the instance of the Income-tax Department (represented by respondents Nos. 1 and 2). The sale was conducted under the provisions of Schedule II to Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the recovery of arrears of income-tax due from a firm known as Karamchand Pyarelal and its partners (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessed'). 2. The sale of the property by public auction was initially advertised to be held at 11.30 a.m. on February 19, 1987. Bidders were required to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000 by way of refundable deposit. The successful bidder had to pay 25% of the sale price of the spot and the balance within 15 days. Clause 5 of the rules and conditions of the sale ran thus : 'The property is leasehold under the president of India. The unearned increase shall be borne by the purchaser in a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jay Engineering Works Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)66CTR(Del)265; [1988]174ITR133(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. There are three questions which are sought to be referred to this court. Question No. 3 is clearly a question of fact. The Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the expenditure was incurred in connection with the existing business of the assessed regarding electric fans and sewing machines. We are unable to see any question of law arising there from. 2. We think, however, that the first two questions mentioned in the application are questions of law. We, thereforee, direct the Tribunal to state a case and refer the following questions for the decision of this court :- 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the amount of Rs. 25,000 paid to M/s. Industrial Development Services Pvt. Ltd. is a revenue expenditure deductible in the computation of the assessed's total income for the assessment year 1975-76 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding th...
Bajaj Tempo Ltd. and ors. Vs. Collector of Central Excise and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-24-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC299
1. The appellants, M/s. Bajaj Tempo Ltd. claim that their matador platform truck F-305 is a motor vehicle with body. This platform truck is shown below :- According to the learned counsel for M/s. Bajaj Tempo, the platform, which is built over the chassis behind the cab, is a body. There are different kinds of bodies: some are covered bodies, some are partly covered, only with sides running round the platform, and some entirely open with only the platform over the chassis. All the three types can take and contain loads securely. The Collector (Appeals) relied on the definition in the Bombay Motor Vehicles Rules, 1959 which provided : Every goods vehicle including a trailer shall be equipped with a strong platform or body so constructed as to be capable of carrying the load for which it is used without danger to other road users and such that the load can be securely packed within or fastened to the body or platform.2. Careful reading of this would give one the meaning that a platform ...
Satnam Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-24-1987
Reported in: 33(1987)DLT248
M.K. Chawla, J.(1) Times out of number the Supreme Court has emphasized that where the liberty of an individual is curtailed under the law of preventive detention, the representation, if any, made by the detenu must be attended to, dealt with and considered with watchful care and reasonable promptitude, lest the safeguards provided in Article 22(5) of the Constitution and other statutes be stultified and rendered meaningless. (2) Learned counsel for the parties agree that where a declaration under Section 9(1) of the Cofeposa Act in respect of a particular detenu has been issued, he has the right to make a representation under Section 11(1) against his continued detention. The dispute in this writ petitions as to which of the authority has the right or the jurisdiction to dispose of the said representation. (3) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that such a representation has to be dealt with and disposed of by an officer superior to the authority who issued th...
Brakes India Limited and ors. Vs. Collector of Central Excise and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC157
1. The dispute in the present appeals turns, in the main, on the classification, under the First Schedule (hereinafter referred to as "the CEP") to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), of air brake hose assemblies manufactured by Sundaram Clayton Ltd. and Hydraulic brake hose assemblies manufactured by Brakes India Ltd. This central issue is common to all these appeals.Another common feature is that the disputes pertain to the period after the changes brought about, with effect from 1-3-1979, by the Finance Bill, 1979, in Item No. 34A, CET. Prior to 1-3-1979, the Item read : "Parts and accessories, not elsewhere specified, of motor vehicles and tractors, including trailers." (There were two "Explanations" to the item which, not being relevant for the present disputes, have not been reproduced) With the changes brought about with effect from 1-3-1979, Item No. 34 A read : "Parts and accessories of motor vehicles' and tractors, including trailer...
Sait Nagjee Purshottam and Co. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: (1987)(14)ECC47
1. The captioned appeal was originally filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government against the order-in-appeal mentioned above. On the setting up of this Tribunal, the revision application was transferred to it in terms of Section 131.B of the Customs Act, 1962, to be disposed of as if it were an appeal filed before the Tribunal.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that M/s. Sait Nagjee Purshotam & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (the appellants) imported at Bombay a consignment of umbrella nylon cloth per s.s. State of Nagaland. The goods were so described in the invoice and the bill of entry (Cash No.1084, dated 8-5-1979). It appears that a sample of the goods was drawn by the customs authorities for test. On the basis of the declared description, however, the goods were assessed to duty under Heading No.51.01/03 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Import Schedule), at 100% plus 20% (auxiliary duty), and additional duty ...
Hindustan Cables Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: (1989)(42)ELT60TriDel
1. This appeal dated 2-5-1983 is filed by M/s. Hindustan Cables Ltd. against the Order No. 97(27A)81-Collr-7/83 dated 2-2-1983.2. The learned Counsel for M/s. Hindustan Cables, Mr. R.N. Roy Choudhry was asked how M/s. Hindustan Cables stood in this matter since the proceedings were framed against M/s. Metal Smelting Co. for failure to pay duty, to obtain a licence etc. He said that they have appealed because the Collector held them to be the manufacturers and so, liable to pay the Central Excise duty on the antimonial lead ingot, and the Central Excise are pressing them for payment.3. We would like to record here that no action can be taken under the impugned order dated 2-2-1983 of the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta for recovering any duty from M/s. Hindustan Cables Ltd. This company was not charged with any malfeasance, nor were any notices issued to them. The people charged were only M/s. Metal Smelting. As no notice were issued to M/s. Hindustan Cables, they were not a part...
Plyboard India Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1987
Reported in: (1989)(41)ELT659TriDel
1. M/s. Plyboard India, Calcutta had filed revision applications to the Central Government being aggrieved from order in appeal No. 203/ASM/79 dated 3.11.79 passed by Appellate Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Calcutta. The said revision applications stand transferred to the Tribunal in terms of the provisions of Section 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 to be disposed of as appeals. Since the issue involved is identical, both the appeals are disposed of by a consolidated order and facts of one of the appeals are stated below.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant submitted price lists for approval of the assessable values in respect of N.D. Blocks of 15/16,18/19 and 24/25 mm thickness on 8.6.78 effective from 1.6.78.The assessee was allowed to clear the goods provisionally on the value declared by them on the ground that they did not submit any sale bills etc. in support of the assessable value claimed for approval. The appellant had submitted sal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »