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.
Pigments and Chemical Products Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-1989
Reported in: (1990)(30)LC347Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal arises out of the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, dated 15-1-1986 upholding the order of the Assistant Collector, denying approval of revised Form-I submitted by the appellants.2. The appellants, manufacturers of Zinc Oxide falling under T.1.14-1 (i) (ii) of the Central Excise Tariff, submitted Form-I dated 9-7-1980 on 20-7-1983 effective from 19-6-1980 to 31-3-1983, claiming the benefit under Exemption Notification 74/78-C.E., dated 1-3-1978 as amended from time to time. Notification 74/78 grants the benefit of reduction on duty by 2% ad valorem on points cleared upto the value of Rs. 1 crore in a financial year by a small scale unit, provided the total clearance during the preceding financial year had exceeded Rs. 15 lakhs.3. The Assistant Collector rejected the revised Form-I on the ground that, for the relevant period the Form-I was submitted without claiming exemption and it was approved by the proper authority and the assessee had not agitated ...
Surinder Kumar and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-1989
Reported in: 42(1990)DLT1
Malik Sharief-ud-Din, J.(1) The appellants herein together with one Suresh Kumar alias Bunti and Mukesh Kumar were found guilty of the offence under sections 302/34 Indian Penal Code . and were sentenced so undergo imprisonment for life. Surinder Kumar and Mukesh were also found guilty under section 27 of the Indian Arms Act and were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The sentences were passed by an order dated 30th of March 1987 the date on which their order of conviction was recorded. The date of incident is 25th of June 1984 at 11.20 P.M. The deceased is one Kaptan Singh who was the brother of Balraj Singh, prosecution witness. (2) Stating briefly, the prosecution case is that Balraj Singh Public Witness Along with his brother Kaptan Singh deceased and on Dinesh and Prem were taking fruit juice near Shanti building on Mandoli road. While they were there Suresh one of the accused who is supposed to be known to Balraj and resides near old Sawheny factory...
i.C.i. (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1989
Reported in: (1990)(26)ECC98
1. The issue for decision in this appeal is the entitlement or otherwise of the appellants' products to the benefit of concessional rate of Central Excise duty as per Notification 241/82, dated 1-11-1982.The appellants carry on business in the manufacture and sale, inter alia of paints and varnishes. They also manufacture certain intermediate products like synthetic or artificial resins which are solely used for captive consumption in the manufacture of paints and varnishes. The products in dispute in this appeal are Polymethyl Methacrylate Resins, namely - The appellants described the above mentioned goods as Polymethyl Methacrylate Resins following under Item 15A of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff and claimed the benefit of partial exemption from duty in terms of Notification 241/82, dated 1-11-1982.3. The Asst. Collector held that "all the above goods were chemically tested and chemical test report indicates that the samples are Polymethyl Methacrylate copolymer synthetic...
Baker Mercer (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1989
Reported in: (1990)(26)ECC215
1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 29-3-1984 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay by which he had upheld the order dated 28-10-1980 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division I, Pune. The appellants manufacture dial gauges and pneumatic gauges on which they initially paid duty under Item 68 of Central Excise Tariff as all other goods not elsewhere specified, but subsequently they claimed duty exemption thereon under Notification 55/75, dated 1-3-1975 on the ground that the goods are covered by the entry 'drawing and mathematical instruments' included in the notification. The Assistant Collector in his order dated 28-10-1980 held that the goods are not drawing or mathematical instruments, but were measuring or checking instruments and were hence ineligible for the exemption. The Assistant Collector's order was upheld by the Collector (Appeals) in the impugned order.2. When the appeal was called, there was none for the appellants ...
Ranjit Singh JaIn Jewellers and Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1989
Reported in: (1990)(27)LC389Tri(Delhi)
1. Facts in brief as alleged in the show cause notice dated 29.6.1981 commencing the proceedings in this case are as follows: 1.1 The shops of the first appellant, licensed gold dealer were searched by Income Tax authorities of Delhi on 16.6.1980. From shop No. 1734, 3 pcs. of primary gold weighing 59.700 gms. valued at Rs. 7760/- were recovered and seized by the Income Tax authorities as these were not accounted for. 1.2 From the other shop No. 307, Dariba Kalan, Delhi, gold ornaments weighing 923 500 gms. valued at Rs. 52,482/- were recovered and seized as unaccounted for by the Income Tax authorities. The matter was referred by the income Tax authorities to the Collector of Central Excise for enquiry and necessary action under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. 1.3 The first appellant was summoned by the Supdt. Gold Control (Preventive) New Delhi. Shri Suresh Chand Jain, Partner of the first appellant appeared before the said Supdt. and tendered his statement on 19.2.1981. Be, inter ali...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Major Shamsher Singh (No. 1)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1989
Reported in: [1990]184ITR456(Delhi)
Kirpal, J.1. By this application under section 256(2), the petitioner is seeking reference of the following four question to this court : '(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct, in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 66,182 is not taxable as the assessed's business income from dealings in land (b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in holding that the sum of Rs. 66,782 is not chargeable to tax as capital gain without recording any finding whether the transferred asset is an agricultural land outside the purview of capital gain within the meaning of clause (iii) of sub-section (14) of section 2 (c) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,02,717 as the assessed's income from undisclosed sources (d) Whether the Tribunal is legally justified in accepting the figures of production of chillies different...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Major Shamsher Singh (No. 2)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1989
Reported in: [1990]184ITR547(Delhi)
1. For the reasons stated in our order in Income-tax Case No. 32 of 1981 (CIT v. Major Shamsher Singh (No. 1) : [1990]184ITR456(Delhi) ), we direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following questions of law to this court : '(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 48,390 is not taxable as the assessed's business income from dealings in land (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in holding that the sum of Rs. 48,390 is not chargeable to tax as capital gains ?' ...
Arjun Tulsidas Jagwani Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1989
Reported in: 41(1990)DLT159
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought quotient of the detention order dated March 27, 1989, passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act. 1974 (for short 'COFEPOSA Act') and a declaration dated April 17, 1989, issued under Section 9(1) of the Cofeposa Act by respondent No. 3. (2) It is not necessary to refer to the facts of the case or to various grounds pleaded in the writ petition as this petition is liable to succeed on a very short point. (3) In para 18 of the petition it has been pleaded that the detenu made a representation dated September 3, 1989 through the Superintendent, Dum Dum Central Jail, Calcutta, und the same has'not been dealt with by the authorities with due promptitude. In the corresponding para in the counter- affidavit, it has been pleaded that representation was dated Se...
T.i. Diamond Chains Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-12-1989
Reported in: (1990)(27)LC95Tri(Delhi)
1. In these three appeals, the appellants have sought for setting aside the orders-in-appeal passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Madras. Since common question arise in all these appeals, they are disposed off by this common order.2. The facts of the case are that in Appeal No. 328/84, the appellants had debonded 36 cases of cold rolled steel strips in coils, ex. s.s.ILIOS vide Bill of Entry No. D-113 dated 2.6.1981. The Customs Appraising Department has assessed the duty as applicable under Section 73(12) of the Customs Tariff i.e. 30% + 10% + Rs. 325/- per Mt. tonne under CET 26AA. Later the Department has served a Demand notice for the payment of short-levy amount of Rs. 11,057/- stating that the goods are liable to duty @ 40% plus 10%=C.V. @ Rs. 330/- per Mt tonne +10% as the dimension conforms to Rod vide Section 73.06/07 of the Customs Tariff.3. In Appeal No. 329/84, the appellants had debonded 17 cases of cold rolled steel strips in coils in ex. s.s. 'ILIOS' vide Bill o...
Swarup Fibre Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-12-1989
Reported in: (1990)(29)ECC69
1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 1ll, 112-CE/MRT/87 (issued on 30-10-1987) passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.2. By this order, the Collector (Appeals) dealt with two appeals filed by M/s. Swarup Fibre Industries Ltd., Hastinapur, against the Assistant Collector's orders dated 13-1-1987 and 30-1-1987. By the first order, the Assistant Collector classified vulcanised fibre sheets and body sheets, manufactured by the appellants, under heading No. 39.20 (sub-heading 3920.22) of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Schedule') rejecting the manufacturers' claim for classification of the goods under heading 39.13 (sub-heading 3913.30) of the Schedule. By the second order, the Assistant Collector directed the manufacturers to pay an amount of Rs. 27,75,341.66 as central excise duty on the goods cleared during the period prior to the introduction of the new Tariff Schedule on 1-3-1986. The appell...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »