Delhi Court December 1989 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.
Roto Inks (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-26-1989
Reported in: (1990)(26)ECC220
1. This appeal is directed against the order of Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay issued on 28-2-1989 by which he had rejected the appellant's appeal against the order dated 6-1-1989 passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Air Cargo, Bombay. The appellants herein filed a BUI of Entry on 3-12-1988 for the clearance of a consignment described in the Bill of Entry and the related invoice as technical documentation valued at Rs. 90,755/- GIF for which assessment was claimed under Heading 4901.99 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 which covers printed books, brochures, leaflets and similar printed matter, whether or not in single sheets, under which there is Nil rate of duty.The Custom House on examination of the goods found that the goods were in the nature of documents in loose pages without numbers but put up in loose leaf binders, and it was also found that they were described as technical documents. Therefore, the Custom House proposed to classify the goods under Heading 4911.99 wh...
inspecting Assistant Commissioner Vs. Indrama Investment (P.) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-26-1989
Reported in: [1990]33ITD88(Delhi)
ORDERPer K. S. Viswanathan, Vice President - In this Departmental appeal, the objections is taken against the cancellation of the order under section 104. The assessed is treated as an Investment Company. The Company had dividend income of Rs. 12,12,540 which, incidentally, is its only source of income. In the accounts, they had provided for Rs. 2,30,000 provisions for taxation and Rs. 8,03,889 towards interest, which left a net profit of Rs. 1,53,329. No dividend was declared out of this profit. For the assessment purposes, a return was filed showing a profit of Rs. 1,38,240 and the assessment was completed on a gross total income of Rs. 4,08,651 and, after deduction under section 80M, the taxable income was Rs. 1,78,715. This was further reduced on appeal and the final taxable income was Rs. 1,53,716.2. The ITO initiated proceedings under section 104 for not distributing dividends. The assessed submitted that the company was incorporated in 1979 with a paid up capital of Rs. 50,000 o...
Indian Gas Cylinders Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-1989
Reported in: [1990]32ITD749(Delhi)
ORDERPer A. Kalyanasundharam, A.M. - The appeal is filed by the assessed, a registered firm, aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A) dt. 25-11-1986. In this appeal, the grievance of the assessed is on the disallowance of claim of deduction in respect of penalty of Rs. 14,20,201 levied under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act and on the levy of interest under section 217 of the I. T. Act.2. The assessed provided in its accounts for the previous year ended on 31-3-1982, the demand of penalty under section 10A, amounting to Rs. 14,20,201 raised by the Assessing Officer, Excise & Taxation Office, Faridabad by his orders for the various years 1974-75 to 1977-78 and 1979-80, passed on 15-3-1982. The assessed had claimed that, it carries on two activities, one was manufacturing of gas cylinders and the other was job-work of manufacture of gas cylinders for the three petroleum companies, viz., Indian Oil Corporation, Baharat Petroleum Corporation and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation. Both t...
Mazagon Dock Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1989
Reported in: (1990)(26)ECC227
1. These appeals involve a common issue and are hence being disposed of by a single order.2. Appeal No. 3417/87 has been preferred against the order of the Additional Collector of Customs, dated 31-3-1987, confiscating 19,509 empty cement bags short accounted and not re-exported within the stipulated time under Section 111(d), 1110 and 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 3 of the Import Export Trade (Control) Act, 1947 and imposing a fine of Rs. 5 lakhs in lieu of confiscation.3. Appeal No. 2381/88-C has been filed against the order dated 17-5-1988 of the Additional Collector of Customs, imposing a duty of Rs. 80,27,787.33 on the 19,509 empty cement bags. The appellants, M/s. Mazagon Docks Limited, Mangalore, a sub-division of MDL, Bombay, holders of Customs Bonded Warehouse licence and manufacture in a Bonded Warehouse licence (issued for purchasing of raw materials and exporting them out of India after manufacture in bond) imported 8 consignments of cement during the p...
Jaya Shree Textiles Vs. Collector of Central Excise and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC402Tri(Delhi)
1. The issue for decision in this appeal is the classification of Permaline Hose Pipe - whether under Heading 59.07/sub-heading 5907.00 or under Heading 40.09 sub-heading 4009.92 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.2. The appellants, a composite textile mill owned by M/s Indian Rayon and Industries Limited, commenced manufacture of a new product called Permaline Fire Hose (Synthetic) of different sizes in 1987. They filed the classification lists in respect of these products claiming classification under Heading 59.07 chargeable to duty at the rate of 12% ad valorem. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise issued a show cause notice dated 9-11-1987 seeking to classify such hose pipes under Chapter 40 and more par ticularly under sub-heading 4009.92, chargeable to duty at the rate of 30% ad valorem. The show cause notice was issued on the basis of the allegation that rubber compound being 76.1% by weight of the total content and the products being hose pipes, were ...
Pradyumna Steel Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC483Tri(Delhi)
1. The Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta has filed the above captioned application for rectification of mistakes in Order No.436/87-B1, dated 23rd June, 1987. Shri K.D. Tayal, learned SDR has appeared on behalf of the Collector. He has reiterated the contentions made in the application for rectification of mistake. Shri Tayal pleaded that while disposing of the appeal the Bench did not take into consideration the judgment cited by the respondent-applicant in the case of J.K Steel Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 1978 ELT J 355.The learned SDR also mentioned to paras 3, 4 and 5 of the application for rectification of mistake and pleaded that the Bench did not take into consideration the rate of duty as prevalent on the date of clearances. He has pleaded that there is a patent error in the order and that the order passed by the Tribunal should be recalled because the Bench should have taken into consideration the judgment of J.K.Steel Ltd. (supra). He has pleaded for the acceptanc...
income-tax Officer Vs. C. L. VermA.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1989
Reported in: [1990]33ITD6(Delhi)
ORDERPer Agarwal, JM - These are appeals by the Revenue arising out of order dated 3-10-1986 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (A) setting aside the assessment orders passed on the assessed by the ITO for assessment years 1971-72 & 1972-73 and directing that fresh assessment orders will be passed in conformity with the final orders of the Settlement Commission.2. We have heard the learned Departmental Representative and the learned counsel for the assessed.3. Assessments under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were framed against the assessed on total incomes of Rs. 1,48,360 and Rs. 1,19,336 respectively. The assessed preferred appeals to the CIT (A) and also moved a petition before the Settlement Commission under section 245C. The said petition pertaining, inter alia, to the years under consideration has been admitted by the Settlement Commission vide orders dated 2-6-1986.4. The CIT (A) vide his order dated 3-10-1986 has set aside the assessment orders framed by the ITO ...
Jai Prakash Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2380; 40(1990)DLT218; 1990(18)DRJ212
Charanjit Talwar, J.1. These two appeals have been filed by the appellants, who are brothers, challenging the validity of the judgment passed on 24th January, 1987 by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi convicting them for an offence under S. 302 read with S. 34 of the Penal Code. Jai Parkash who is the appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 3 of 1987 has also been convicted under S. 27 of the Arms Act. The other appellant Sardari Lal (Cr. Appeal 24 of 1987) and Jai Parkash by a separate order of the same date were sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence of murdering one Pappu. Jai Parkash was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years under S. 27 of the Arms Act. The sentences were, however, directed to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case was that at about 8.15 p.m. on 21st November, 1984, PW. 3, Ishwar Lal had gone to attend the engagement ceremony of his cousin (daughter of his uncle Babu Lal). This ceremony was to be performed in House No. C-326, J...
Ayub Khan Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi467
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) Appellant has been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act by a judgment dated November, 30, 1988, of an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 (one lakh) or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years by a separate order of the same date. The appellant has filed this appeal in challenging his conviction and sentence. (2) The prosecution version, in brief, is that on July 10, 1987, the police party while patrolling the area had received a secret information on the basis of which a raiding party was organized after joining one public witness Bhagwan Dass and at about 9.30 A.M. the appellant was apprehended from the Central Park on pointing out by the secret informer and a bag was recovered from the appellant which was found to contain charas wrapped in a polythene pa...
Karnataka Containers (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1989
Reported in: (1991)LC754Tri(Delhi)
1. The dispute relates to the maintainability of the order of review No. 22/81 dated 16th June 1981 under Section 35A of the Act passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs.2. The appellants manufacture metal containers for its use by using their own material and also on job work basis with the materials supplied by others. After the approval of relevant price lists the appellants paid duty. However, the Asstt. Collector issued a show cause notice proposing to recover duty alleged to be short levied on the metal containers. The appellants submitted a reply. On a consideration of the reply the Asstt. Collector held that there was no case for recovery of any duty alleged to have been short paid. The Central Board of Excise & Customs issued a show cause notice on 8th May 1978 proposing to review the order under Section 35A. After considering the reply submitted by the appellants the Board passed the impugned order reviewing the order of the Asstt. Collector in its order dated...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »