Delhi Court August 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.
M.R.F. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: (1990)(50)ELT482TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 55/85(C) dated 7-5-1985 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Madras.2. We have heard Shri R.K. Lukose, Advocate with Shri S. Ignatius, Corporate Manager of the company, for the appellants and Shri M.S.Arora, DR, for the respondent-Collector.3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Masticated Rubber using, inter alia, inputs which have discharged duty liability under Item 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff Schedule. This masticated rubber was, during the relevant period i.e., September 1982 to December 1982, exempted from duty by virtue of a notification issued under Central Excise Rule 8(1). According to Notification No. 201/79 finished excisable goods were exempt from so much of the excise duty leviable thereon as was equivalent to the duty already paid on inputs falling under Item No. 68, GET, used in their manufacture, subject to the prescribed procedure being followed. The masticated rubber...
Babu Lal Grand Sons Family Trust Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD52(Delhi)
1. The assessee has filed this appeal against the order dated 6-3-1985 of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax, Agra for the assessment year 1982-83. By means of that order the learned Commissioner, acting under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, held that the assessment order was erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interests of revenue. He accordingly, set it aside and directed the Income-tax Officer to proceed with the assessment de novo from the stage of filing the return and to complete the same after proper enquiry/investigation and after giving the assessee-trust an opportunity to represent its case.2. The assessee is M/s. Babu Lal Grand Sons Family Trust 4/440 Gali Pati Ram, Kachehri Ghat, Agra (U.P.) (Private family trust created for the benefit of grand sons). It derives income from the purchase and sale of salt on wholesale basis.The assessment was completed by the I.T.O. for the A.Y. 1982-83 in question on 10-3-1983 under Section 143(3) after giving a n...
Kishan Gupta Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD448(Delhi)
1. These are four second appeals by the assessee against the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for assessment years 1976-77,77-78,78-79 & 79-80.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the assessee and the learned Departmental Representative and have perused the material placed before us.3. The assessee is a businessman who was running a sweet shop in the name of Bengal Sweet House at Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. On 1-11-1978, i.e., immediately after Diwali, the heyday for Halwais, the Income-tax Department raided assessee's shop and residential house. The following material things were recovered: - 4. During the course of the search the assessee was examined by the authorised officer and in his statement, a copy of which has been placed by the assessee's counsel at pages 17 to 19 of the 2nd paper book, the assessee told She authorised officer that at his house about Rs. sixty thousand would be available, out of which about Rs. 38,700 is the cash balance of his shop. In procee...
Smt. Prem Lata Dhawan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD202(Delhi)
Question of invalidity of action under section 148 was not arising out of Tribunal order because facts as stated in Tribunal order not disputed, therefore, misc. petition was misconceived.1. This is one of those attempts of the learned counsel for the assessee to bring back his point after he lost in appeal before the Tribunal on 3-6-1987, then lost in misc. petition No. 212/Del/87 on 1-1-1988 and even after draft statement of the case was made on 27-7-1988 and statement of the case was finalised subsequently on 28-9-1988. In the present mist, petition the learned counsel for the assessee has mentioned a large number of facts, most of which do not arise either from the order of the Income-tax Officer originally made Under Section 144, subsequently reopened Under Section 146 and again made after it was reopened from the order of the AAC or the Tribunal.The attempt in this misc. application is really to bring back the dead to life. When it was pointed out to him in course of hearing as ...
Vinod Kumar JaIn Vs. State Through Central Bureau Investigation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-1989
Reported in: ILR1990Delhi138; 1989RLR400
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) This application under Section 482 of Code, of Criminal Procedure has been filed on behalf of Raj Kumar Jain for permission to go abroad for a period of six months from time to time with a condition that one visit shall not be for more than 30 days. I have heard Mr. D. C. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Lal for the respondent-CBI. (2) It will be seen that the petitioner Raj Kumar Jain along with others is facing criminal charges under Section 120-B read with Sections 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code, In a case which was registered against him and others in the year 1979, namely, State v. V. K. Jain and others. After the registration of the case a number of years were spent in the investigation because the allegations of conspiracy and cheating involved crores of rupees. During the course of investigation, it was found that co-accused Vinod Kumar Jam suffered heavy losses and to cover up those losses he conspired with B. S. Aujia and his son ...
CochIn Silicate and Glass Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC352Tri(Delhi)
1. The present appeal is against the inclusion of the additional value of Rs. 52,495.50 on account of central excise duty realised from the customers but not paid to the department. The appellant was enjoying benefit of Notification No. 71/78-C.E., dated 1-3-1978. In the appeal Memo, the appellant has agitated that Notification No. 71/78 grants exemption from excise duty on the first clearance upto an aggregate value not exceeding Rs. 5.00 lakhs. Value for this purpose has to be determined in accordance with the Section 4 of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944. Under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Act, value does not include the amount of excise duty, sales-tax and other taxes payable on such goods.2. A notice of hearing dated 11-7-1989 was sent, the appellants vide their letter dated 30-6-1989 had intimated that the matter may be decided on merits. Earlier a notice dated 30-5-1989 was sent by registered post fixing the hearing on 6-7-1989. Since the appellants have not come for pers...
Collector of Customs and C. Ex. Vs. Northern Plastics Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)ECC45
1. This appeal is against the impugned order of the Collector by which he allowed the Respondents clearance of an imported consignment of 59 rolls of what was described the Respondents as "Cinematographic Colour Films (unexposed) positive". The Respondents filed a Bill of Entry containing the said description of the goods and claimed clearance of the same under OGL, Appendix 6, List 8, Part 1, Item 186(I) of AM 85-88 Policy. The Respondents also claimed concessional rate of customs duty under Notification No. 52/86 read with Notification No. 157/88-Cus.They also claimed the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 50/88-C.E.in respect of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD).2. When the goods were examined, they were found to be colour films - Jumbo Rolls. It was, therefore, considered by the Customs that the goods were deliberately misdeclared as "Cinematographic colour film" as, if assessed as such and not as Jumbo Rolls, the Respondents would have paid duty of Rs. 16,19,842 instead of Rs. ...
Kanta and ors. Vs. Jaswant Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: II(1989)ACC555; 1990ACJ327; ILR1989Delhi322
Malik, J.(1) (ORAL).-ADMITTED.(2) By a speaking order dated 7th of July 1989, this court for the reasons given in that order, issued notice to the other side restricted to the question of payment of interest. Arguments were advanced today in this regard. The Tribunal awarded a sum of.Rs. 1,20,0001- as compensation, to the appellants. This was done after accepting the evidence of the appellant regarding the income of the deceased. The Tribunal held that the income of the deceased was Rs. 742.60 per month and the dependency was held to be at Rs. 500.00 per month. The deceased was about 30 years of age at the time of the death and keeping that fact in view a multiplier of 20 was applied and the awarded figure was arrived at Rs. 1,20,0001-. The Tribunal d:d not allow interest on the facts and circumstances of this case. Mr. Goyal, learned counsel for the appellants, has today invited my attention to Chameli Wanti and others v. Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors. 1985 A.C.J. 645, a judgmen...
Santanu Ray Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1989
Reported in: [1989]65CompCas196(Delhi)
S.S. Chadha, J.1. The petitioners in this petition under articles 226 of the Constitution of India are directors of M/s Duncans Agro Industries Ltd (for called 'Duncans') and have raised, in addition to the grounds of challenge as are in C W P No 1039 of 1987-Duncans Agro Industries Ltd v Union of India, a further ground that there is no provision in the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), or the Central Excises Rules, 1944 (hereinafter called 'the Rules'), by which individual directors of a limited company can be made personally liable or responsible for the payment of excise duty or be subjected to penalties. For the reasons recorded in C W P 1039 of 1987, we repel the common contentions raised. 2. The impugned show-cause notices have been issued in exercise of the powers conferred by section 11A of the Act. Under section 11A, where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded by reasons o...
Partap Rajasthan Copper Foils and Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-11-1989
Reported in: (1990)(26)ECC26
1. This appeal is against Order-in-Appeal No. 67-CE/JPR/88 dated 14-6-1988 passed by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.By order dated 19-5-1987, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur, classified the following goods, manufactured by the appellants, under the headings/sub-headings of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (the Schedule is referred to hereinafter as the New Tariff) - (1) paper based unclad industrial laminates (2) paper based copper clad industrial laminates (3) glass fabric based unclad industrial laminates and (4) glass fabric based clad industrial laminates as shown against each:-(1) Paper based unclad industrial laminates 3920.31(2) Paper based copper clad industrial laminates 3920.31(3) Glass fabrics based unclad industrial laminates. 7014.00(4) Glass fabric based clad industrial laminates 7014.00 He ordered levy of duty and revision of the classification already ordered accordingly. He also confirmed the demand for duty raise...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »