Delhi Court July 1988 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.
Dies and Tools Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)ECC220
1. This appeal is against Order-in-Revision No. 19/82 dated 10-9-82 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta whereby the Collector in exercise of the powers under Section 35A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (as it stood at the material time), set aside the Assistant Collector's order dated 14-1-82 classifying "T.C.tipped and H.S.S. Serrated type blades for milling cutters" manufactured by the appellants under Item No. 51 A(iii) of the Schedule to the said Act (CET, for short) and ordered their classification under Item No. 51 A(lv), CET. "51 A. (iii) Tools designed to be fitted into hand tools, machine tools or tools falling under sub-Item (II), including dies for wire drawing, extrusion dies for metals and rock drilling bits; 3. The appellants' contention was, and is, that the blades manufactured by them are cutter blades for milling cutters and not for hand or machine saws. A milling cutter Is neither a hand saw nor a machine saw.A milling cutter cannot be opera...
Novo Impex Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)ECC94
1. This is an appeal against the order of Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants Imported goods described as "Culture Media" and claimed the benefit of exemption from the levy of couanter valuing duty (CVD) under Notification 55/75-C.E., dated 1-3-1975 under the item of bulk drugs, medicines and drug intermediate specified in the said Notification. The original authority while rejecting the refund claim of the appellant held as under: "Culture media covers various preparation in which bacteria, moulds, microbes, viruses and other micro organisms developes. Besides its medical uses, it is used in manufacturing of vinegar, lactic acid, butyl alcohol, etc. The developed micro organisms are used for medical purposes but culture media itself is neither a drug nor medicine nor drug intermediate. It is merely a base for growing the different micro organisms which are being used for medical purposes. As pointed out by party the goods are correc...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Mayur Printers
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC46Tri(Delhi)
1. In this matter, a show cause notice was issued by the department to the respondents, who are manufacturers of printed cartons which were brought under Central Excise control as a result of the Budget of 1982 alleging that they had cleared their goods during the period from 1-4-1982 to 31-10-1983 without approval of classification list and price list. The admitted facts of the case are that the respondents filed a classification list (No. 163 of 1982) as being effective from 1-4-1982 in respect of printed cartons claiming exemption under Notification No. 80/00, dated 19-6-1980, on 13th October, 1982. In other words, the classification list was filed for retrospective effect going back to more than six months. Now, on verification of this classification list, together with the statement of gross sales for the period from 1-4-1981 to 31-3-1983, as furnished by the respondents, the department observed that the value of the clearances of the products falling under Central Excise Tariff ...
Tata Mills (Uc) Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC442Tri(Delhi)
1. In this case we find that appellants were manufacturers of non-woven fabrics. They were issued two Show Cause Notices oft 28th November, 1981 asking them to show cause why the non-woven woollen fabrics and non-woven man-made fabrics manufactured by them should not be classified under Central Excise Tariff Item 68 and why duty should not be charged accordingly. Appellants submitted their reply in which they explained that their goods were correctly classifiable under Central Excise Tariff Items 21 (1)(a) and 22(1) (a) i.e. as non-woven woollen fabrics unprocessed grey and non-woven man-made fabrics unprocessed grey respectively. The Assistant Collector concerned held a personal hearing and thereafter issued an adjudication order classifying the goods neither under Central Excise Tariff Item 68 nor under Tariff Item 2l(1)(a) and 22(1)(a) but under 21 (1)(b) i.e. as "woollen fabrics, subjected to the process of milling, raising, blowing, tentering, dyeing or any other process or any t...
Jai Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT429
M.K. Chawla, J.(1) By order dated October 7, 1983, accused Jai Singh was charged to stand trial for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code . for having committed the murder of Smt. Badami Devi. on 7.5.1983, at about II.30 A.M. on the roof of house no. 2103/2D, Prem Nagar, Delhi. By the same order, he was further charged for the offence of possession of a knife, a dangerous weapon, punishable u/s. 27 of the Arms Act, which he used for committing the said murder. The accused pleaded not quality and claimed trial. (2) To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 20 witnesses, out of which three namely, PW4 Raj Rani, PW5 Manorama, and PW6 Sri Kishan are the eye-witnesses of the occurrence. PW-15 Mukti Nath and PW-17 S Davinder Dutt Sharma are the witnesses of the recovery of the weapon of offence (knife Ex. P-l)at the instance of the accused. PW-20, Dr. Meera Sundram was the first to examine Smt. Badami when she was brought to Dr. Ra...
Ashrafi Devi Vs. Ganga Sahai Kishan Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT390
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) This is tenant's petition under Article 227 of the Constitution against the order dated August Ii, 1986, of the Competent Authority constituted under the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act 1956 (for short 'the Act'). By this order the competent authority allowed an application of the respondent-landlord filed under S. 19(l)(a) of the Act seeking permission to file proceedings for eviction against the petitioner-tenant. The suit premises comprise one shop, measuring 10' x 6' in Bazar Sita Ram in the walled city of Delhi. (2) The permission was granted principally on the grounds that the tenant did not file ration card of her family to prove that her husband and she herself did not constitute joint family and further she did not give any account or record of her monthly income derived from the shop premises in question though she gave daily turn over of the business being carried on therein. The competent authority held that on that account the tenant was not ...
Chetna Polycoats (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-11-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)ECC225
1. This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No. 280/CE/JPR/87 dated 30.10.1987 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.2. The issue arising for determination is whether the electrical insulation tapes manufactured by the appellants are classifiable under Heading No. 85.46. sub-heading 8546.00, of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CET, 1985, for short) as claimed by the appellants or under Heading No. 39.19, sub-heading 3919.00, of the schedule as held by the lower authorities. "Self-adhesive plates, sheets, film, foil, tape, strip and other flat shapes, of plastics, whether or not in rolls." 4. We have heard Shri V. Sridharan, Advocate, for the appellants and Shri C.V. Durghayya, Departmental representative, for the respondent.5. The dispute arose in relation to classification list No. 774/86, effective from 24.4.1986, filed by the appellants. The goods were described herein as "Electrical Insulator made of plastic PVC insulation (commo...
Ratanchand Harjasrai Mouldings Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-11-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC358Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against order of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) New Delhi. The brief facts of the case are that appellants manufactured goods falling under Tariff Item 15A and the same were exempt under Notification No. 68/71, dated 29-5-1971. However, with effect from 1-3-1982, the effective rate of duty for the goods in terms of Notification No. 52/82, dated 28-2-1982 was fixed at 8% ad valorem.These were however later again exempted from payment of duty.2. The issue involved is the levy of duty on the goods at the rate of 8% between 1 3-1982 when Notification No. 52/82 become effective till the goods were again exempted from payment of duty. The lower authorities have held that the duty at the rate of 8% was chargeable during this period. The learned Consultant for the appellants, pleaded that after the introduction of the Finance Bill, 1982, the Item 15A was re-structured and only specified items were leviable to duty under Tariff Item 15A(2). He pleaded that the appel...
Fedders Lloyd Corporation Pvt. Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-11-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC341Tri(Delhi)
1. In this case the appellants had availed of proforma credit under Rule 56A of Central Excise Rules in respect of duty paid on raw materials and component parts used in the manufacture of refrigerators and air-conditioners falling under Tariff Item 29A of the Central Excise Tariff. Some refrigerators and air-conditioners were cleared without payment of Central Excise duty under Notification No.186/75-CE. and supplied to Santa Cruz Electronics Export Processing Zone (in short SEEPZ). The Department issued five show cause-cum-demand notices proposing to recover central excise duty on the ground that proforma credit of duty on the raw materials and component parts used in those finished products was not available to them and the same was taken irregularly. The appellants herein contended that the restriction contained in the first proviso to Rule 56A of Central Excise Rules would attract only if the notified goods falling under Tariff Item 29-A had been exempted as a class from the whol...
Northland Industries Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-11-1988
Reported in: (1988)(18)LC130Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-appeal No. 360-CE/DLH/87, dated 28-10-1987, passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that M/s. Northland Industries, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the appellants) are engaged in the manufacture of prepared and preserved foods. They filed a classification list (C.L No. 656/86) effective from 2-4-1986 in which the classification of "Canned fruits in syrups like fruit cocktail, peaches, guavas, red cherries, pineapple slices, pineapple titbits, mango slices, grapes, apples, figs, litchies etc., in 450 gms. and 850 gms. cans" (SI. No. 2 of the C.L) was claimed under sub-heading No.0801.10 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act (the Schedule is hereinafter referred to as the 'Central Excise Tariff') and of "Fruit Squashes and coridal of all fruits like orange, lemon, mango, pineapple, litchies etc., in 200,400 and 700 M/is bottles" under sub-heading No. 20...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »