Delhi Court June 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.
Precious Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-30-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)ECC297
1. Since the issue involved is common, the above captioned 26 appeals are disposed of by a common consolidated order.2. The importers had imported consignments of electrical grade insulating paper and had claimed their assessment under Heading 48 of the Customs Tariff Act (CTA), 1975 read with Notification No. 37-Cus., dated 1st March, 1978 and had also claimed the levy of additional duty of Customs under Tariff Item 17(2) of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff (CET). A detailed chart as to the claim made by the importers and the assessment made by the Revenue authorities is attached vide Annexure 'A', explaining the stand taken by the Importers before the Department and the assessment made by the Department under different heading/tariff item. Since the facts of all the appeals are similar, for the sake of brevity the facts in the case of Precious Industries v.C.C.,. Bombay (Appeal No.3. M/s. Precious Industries, Bombay had imported electrical grade insulating material as under :-Ex....
icem Engineering Co. P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-30-1989
Reported in: (1990)(30)LC509Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants have filed the above two captioned appeals under Section 35B of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'), challenging the validity and correctness of the Orders-in-appeal No. HN 994/B III - 432/86, dated 3-4-1987 and No.HN-1003/B III - 435/86 (File No. V-2(68) 95/35, dated 3-4-1987 respectively, passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay. As the question of law and points for determination are the same, except for difference in period, both the appeals were heard together and they are being disposed of by this common order :- 2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to these appeals are that the appellants are structural engineers engaged in the process of fabrication of the structures. They take job work from customers and mainly of M/s. Garden Reach Ship Builders & Engineering Limited, who supply the raw materials to them. They carry on fabrication work of cutting and bending the raw materials supplied by their customers and the sa...
Collector of Customs Vs. Automotive International (i)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-30-1989
Reported in: (1991)(31)ECC81
1. This appeal arises out of and ii directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 2034/88-BCH dated 4-5-1988 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. M/s Automotive International (I), 465, S.V.P. Road, Bombay-400 004 respondents in this case, imported 50446 pcs. of SKF brand of bearing No. 6203 @ Singapore Dollar 0.60 (Rs. 3.00) per piece CIF from a Trader M/s SLS Bearings (S) PTE Ltd., Singapore. The goods were imported during January and February, 1984. According to the Department, price shown in the Invoice is not correct price. According to the price list of 1982-83, it should be at Rs. 10.82 per piece CIF as against invoice quoted price at the rate of Rs. 3.00 per piece. The matter was adjudicated by the Deputy Col-lector of Customs, Bombay who determined the value of the imported goods by taking 1983 Price List as basis by allowing 20% discount as admissible, according to the manufacturer, as this item i.e. bearing No. 6203 do not appear to find place in 1984 price lis...
Collector of Customs Vs. West Coast Indl. Gases Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-1989
Reported in: (1989)(25)LC225Tri(Delhi)
1. The respondents M/s. West Coast Industrial Gases Ltd. imported 253 empty cylinders valued at Rs. 2,14,843-45 under bill of entry No. 343 dated 21st December, 1981 and claimed assessment under heading 84.66 of Customs Tariff.2. The Assistant Collector rejected their claim on the ground that the plant has already started commercial production, the cylinders imported are neither for initial setting up of the plant, nor for the substantial expansion of the plant. On appeal the Collector allowed the same holding that the cylinders are imported for achieving the rated capacity. Against which the department has come in appeal.3. Shri Durgayya appearing for the department raised the following contentions.Since the plant has already commenced its commercial production the import of cylinders cannot be deemed to be imports for initial setting up of the plant. That the cylinders cannot be treated as plant within the meaning of Regulation 3(a) of the Regulations. According to him the cylinders...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Eskayef Limited
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)LC465Tri(Delhi)
1. Questions involved in this appeal filed by the Collector, Central Excise are as follows :- (1) Whether the products Bifuran Supplement Neftin-50 and Neftin-200 are patent or proprietary medicines as defined in Tariff Item 14E or under 68 of the C.E.T. as it then stood. (2) If the aforesaid products are classifiable under Tariff Item 68 whether they are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 6/84 dated 15-2-1984 as it amended Notification 234/82-C.E., dated 1-11-1982. The exemption given by the aforesaid notification is applicable to animal feed including livestock feed, animal feed suppliment and animal feed concentrates. In other words whether the products are animal feed supplement as claimed by the respondent-company.2. In order to appreciate the above questions, the exact composition of products manufactured by the respondent company are as follows :1. Bifuran Supplement Furazolidone B.P. (Vet) 3.63% w/w Nitrofurazone B.P. (Vet) 25% w/w 3. It is appropriate at this stage t...
Navinchandra Premji and Company Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)LC358Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 119/88 dated 30-8-1988 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, New Delhi.2. The appellant Company imported 5 consignments of disposable and sterile needles of "Misawa" make in the month of January, 1988 and sought for clearance through bills of entry as "Veni puncture control system needles (Haemodialysers and accessories/spares" as it is duty free under Notification No.208/81 dated 22-9-1981 as amended vide Serial NO. 8 (XXVI) and also under OGL vide appendix-6 list 2 Item No.16, as haema filteration instrument/homodylisers and Accessories/spares thereof of FTC Policy 1985-88. On examination by the Department, the goods imported by the Appellant Company were found to be of disposable needles, 10,000 pieces per carton/box and on the marking of these boxes were found to be as follows :-Description: Disposable needles sterilised by ethylene oxide gas, Non toxicName of Supplier: Misawa Medical Industry ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Jammu Bottling Co. P. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-1989
Reported in: (1993)(44)LC17Tri(Delhi)
1. We have heard Shri L.C. Chakraborty, DR, for the appellant-Collector and Shri Gopal Prasad, Consultant, for the respondents. After hearing both sides, we were not satisfied that a prima facie case had been made out warranting stay of operation of the impugned order. As such we dismissed the stay application.2. With the consent of both sides, the appeal was also taken up for hearing and, the appeal was also dismissed. The order of dismissal was pronounced in the open Court on 31.3.1989. We now proceed to state the reasons for our order.3. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of aerated waters. They were availing set-off of duty paid on the inputs (flavouring essence and concentrates) towards payment of duty on the finished product, namely, aerated waters. This was in terms of Central Excise Notification No.201/79. This notification was withdrawn on 1.3.1986 and, in its place, notification No. 325/86 dated 27.5.1986 was issued...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Leader Engineering Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-28-1989
Reported in: (1989)(44)ELT715TriDel
1. The question that arises for decision before us relates to the correct classification of Glandnut, Bonnet & Union which are parts of valves and cocks manufactured by the appellants. A classification list was filed classifying these under Tariff Item 68 and was approved.Later the department issued a show cause notice to the appellants asking them to show cause why the goods should not be reclassified under Tariff Item 52 CET. After due process the Assistant Collector passed orders classifying the goods under Tariff Item 52.2. The respondents succeeded in their appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). Hence these two appeals filed by Revenue.3. We heard both the appeals together as both involve the same question as to whether the goods are fasteners or not. Appeal No. 2213 pertains to the period ending 28-2-1986 involving rival entries 68 and 52 whereas appeal No. 2214 pertains to the period 1986 to 1987 involving classification under the new tariff.4. Shri V.M. D...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Choday Apparaw Steel Re-rolling
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-28-1989
Reported in: (1990)(25)ECC63
1. The appellants have filed the above three appeals arising from a common order in Appeal No. 234 to 236(G) (A. No. 419 to 421(G) No.25/85 to 27/85) dated 23-6-1986 passed in three appeals by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras and the appellants have sought for restoration of order-in-original No. 29/85 dated 27-9-1985 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Kakinada. The Collector of Central Excise, Guntur is the appellant.2. The respondents are a re-rolling mills. They manufacture M.S. round bars from among the re-rollable inputs available to them from the scrap market and raw material in the form of M.S. fabricated rejects received from M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Vizag; M.S. Billets from M/s. Steel Crete Pvt. Ltd., Vizag and M/s. A.P. Steels Ltd., Polancha; 'Miss Roll' from M/s. Andhra Steel Corporation, Vizag and inputs received by them from ship breaking units like M/s. Vizag Shipping & Metal Processors, Vizag and M/s. Ushodaya Shipping Pvt. Ltd., Vizag....
Kalyanpur Cements Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-28-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC136Tri(Delhi)
1. No. E/Misc./291/89-A. - This is an application for change of Cause Title consequent on the change of the name of the Company. Petition is allowed and Cause Title is directed to be amended accordingly.2. E/465/81-A. - This appeal is directed against the order of the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta dated 5-3-1981 confirming the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Gava dated 28-9-1979.3. The short question that arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether costs of packing is includible in the assessable value or not. The appellants herein are manufacturer of Grey Portland Cement and the period involved in the present appeal is 1-10-1975 to 8-1-1976. Shri Gopal Parshad, learned Advocate, at the out-set submitted that at the relevant time, Cement Control Order issued under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was in force and Ministry of Industries and Civil Supplies, Government of India issued a circular under Reference No. CC/CC/8/(l)75 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »