Delhi Court August 1990 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.
Collector of Customs (Appeals) Vs. Fit Tight Nuts and Bolts Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-1990
Reported in: (1990)LC502Tri(Delhi)
1. Collector of Customs, Bombay has filed an appeal being aggrieved by an order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. The notices of hearing listing the matters for hearing on 8-2-1990, 22-3-1990 and 6-6-1990 were sent. On 6-6-1990 a Misc. Order No.46/90-B2 was passed. The Bench had directed the appellants to file photo-copies of the catalogue and it was further directed that if the respondents have got the catalogue they were at liberty to file the same. No body has appeared on behalf of the respondents. Accordingly, we proceed to decide the matter on merits.2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the respondents had filed two Bills of Entries vide B/E No. 320/119 dated 16-5-1981 and B/E 435/130 dated 19-6-1981. In B/E 320 dated 27-5-1981 the description was given as second-hand machine manufactured by M/s. Hatbur Metalforming Equipment, Switzerland Automatic multi-station nut making machine type PKZ1 and PKZ1 1/2 and in the other B/E viz. 435, the description was ...
income-tax Officer Vs. Pan American World Airways
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-1990
Reported in: (1990)35ITD206(Delhi)
1. This batch of seven appeals by the Department can be disposed of by a common order.2. The assessee is one of the International Airways. By the 1971 Finance Act, a new tax, called Foreign Travel Tax, was levied on the possengers who go abroad. Section 45 of the Finance Act states that there shall be levied and paid to the Central Govt. in respect of each international journey by apassenger, a tax referred to as foreign travel tax, at the rate of 15% of the fare paid As far as the collection of this tax was concerned, Section 45(2) provided that the tax can be collected by the carrier undertaking the carriage of the passengers. It would appear that the assessee, as a carrier, became obliged to collect the tax on behalf of the Govt. of India. For this, the Govt. had agreed to pay to the international airways, a certain percentage as collection by way of commission. The. question in these appeals is, whether the assessee would be liable to be taxed in respect of such commission receiva...
Bansal Commodities Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-1990
Reported in: [1991]189ITR62(Delhi)
1. The challenge in this writ petition is to an order passed on March 1, 1990, by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi IX, as a result of which, a sum of Rs. 49,03,000 is not being paid to the petitioners. 2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the premises of one Shri R. K. Aggarwal were searched pursuant to an authorisation issued under section 132 of the Income-tax Act. Simultaneously a search was also conducted in the premises of his business concerns. At that time, it transpired that there were pay orders dated April 25, 1989, which were issued by one Shri Surrinder Kumar totaling Rs. 50,40,000. These pay orders were issued to Hindustan Copper Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax passed an order under the second proviso to section 132(1) effecting a deemed seizure of these pay orders. Intimation was also sent to the Manager, Punjab National Bank. Thereafter, orders under section 132(5) were passed by the department against R. K. Aggarwal and also Surrinder Kumar. At that tim...
Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: (1990)(50)ELT468TriDel
1. The appellants herein manufacture crude fatty acid & distilled fatty acid falling under T.I. 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff and in the course of such manufacture, they also manufacture "Low fatty free acid oil" (low FFA oil) as a by-product, which according to the Department, also falls under T.I. 68. Show Cause notices dated 13-2-1981 (for the period from 1-3-1975 to 13-2-1981) and 17-6-1981 (for the period from 14-2-1981 to 17-6-1981) were issued for demand of duty on the low FFA oil manufactured and cleared, without payment of duty, under Section 11A of the CESA. After adjudication, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise classified the product under T.I. 68 and demanded duty on the quantity of production not covered by the terms of Notification 118/75 dated 30-4-1975 (as not put to further use in the manufacture of rice bran oil). The Appellate Collector upheld the order of the Asst. Collector. He however did not entertain the claim of the appellants for exempt...
Jaya Bharat International Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: (1991)(52)ELT104TriDel
1. All the present four appeals are directed against common impugned order in appeal No. C.Cus. 362 to 365/86 dated 16-7-1986 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras upholding of four orders in original passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs (Export), Cochin.2. Brief facts of the case are that both the appellants are engaged in the business of export of goods. In May, 1985 both the appellants exported black pepper to U.S.A., details of which are as follows:A. No. Name of Appellant Shipping Bill Quantity Date of No. & Date examination &2609/86 - D M/s. Jaya 352/7-5-1985 15050 Kg 09-5-1985 Bharat2610/86 - D M/s. Jaya 569/9-5-1985 15050 Kg 09-5-1985 Bharat2611/86 - D M/s. Multi 357/7-5-1985 15050 Kg 09-5-1985 Trade (India)2612/86 - D M/s. Multi 351/7-5-1985 15050 Kg 10-5-1985 Trade (India) Subsequently both the appellants filed their separate applications with respect to their individual consignment for refund of duty on the ground that Notification No. 147/85 ...
Collector of Customs Vs. Hindustan Motors Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: (1990)LC656Tri(Delhi)
1. Collector of Customs, Calcutta has filed the above captioned appeals being aggrieved on order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Calcutta by order No. 1538-1540/89, dated 28-9-1989. The said appeals were presented in the Calcutta registry on the 8th day of May, 1990.The appeals so filed in the Calcutta registry were transferred to Delhi registry. Simultaneously, the stay applications and applications for condonation of delay were also filed. In column number 3 of the appeal memo in form No. CA-3, the date of communication has been mentioned as 27-11-1989. Shri Prabhat Kumar, learned JDR who has appeared on be-half of the applicants pleaded that the applicants are prevented by sufficient cause for late filing of the appeals. Therefore, the delay for filing of the appeals may be condoned. He pleaded that there is a delay of 69 days in the filing of the above captioned appeals and the applicants had been vigilant altogether in the filing of the appeal. In support of his arg...
Malhotra Tyres Service Co. Vs. Malhotra Tyres Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Delhi94; 1991(2)ARBLR30(Delhi); 42(1990)DLT618; 1991(20)DRJ1; 1990RLR458
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) The plaintiff has instituted this suit seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant and its agents and servants from carrying on or offering to carry on or advertising the business of automotive tyres and tubes, vulcanizing rubber and robber parts including tyre re treading material and parts 'and fittings for use in motor land vehicles under the description 'Malhotra Tyres Private Limited' or any description embodying the words 'Malhotra Tyres' or any other trade name identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trade name. The plaintiff has filed the present application seeking interim injunction till .the disposal of the suit to the similar effect. (2) The case set out by the plaintiff in brief is teat the plaintiff is a duly registered partnership firm and was established in the year 1956 and has beenengagedintbei.,businessof manufacturing automotive tyres and tubes, vulcanising rubber and rubber parts including tyre re treading material and parts...
Air India Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT17; [1991(62)FLR441]; 1991LabIC451
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) The challenge iff this writ petition is to the applicability of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 to Air India.(2) The petitioner Corporation was incorporated under the provisions of Air Corporation Act, 1953. Section 45 of the said Act, inter alia, enables the Corporation to frame regulations. According to section 45, as it originally stood, the regulations could be framed only with the previous consent of the Central Government. Subsequently, Section 45(2) was amended and it is no longer .necessary to obtain; previous consent of the Central Government except that it was still necessary to obtain the government's prior consent in relation to making of the regulations with regard to the terms and conditions of service of officers and other employees of the Corporation, other than the Mar raging Director and officers of any other categories referred to in section 44.(3) In pursuance of the powers under section 45(2)(b) service regulations were, fo...
Collector of Customs Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-24-1990
Reported in: (1993)(67)ELT178TriDel
1. Collector of Customs, Calcutta has filed the above captioned 8 appeals as well as stay application and these stay applications have come up for hearing before the Bench. Since the issue involved in all the above captioned stay applications is similar, the same are being disposed of by this common order.2. For the sake of brevity, relevant facts are given in appeal No.C/2037/90-B2 in the case of Collector of Customs, Calcutta v. SAIL. The respondents had imported Nimonic Shear Cutting Blades which were meant for use in shearing machines for cutting hot steel bloom in the blooming and billet mill in the steel plant. In the bill of entry filed by the respondents, the respondents had claimed assessment under heading 8208.00 read with Notification No. 154/86-Cus., dated 1st March, 1986 read with Heading 84.62. The Assistant Collector had rejected the refund claim and had denied the benefit of exemption notification and being not satisfied, an appeal was filed before the Collector (Appea...
Collector of Customs Vs. Tata Engineering and Locomotive
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-24-1990
Reported in: (1991)(51)ELT365TriDel
1. Collector of Customs, Calcutta has filed the above captioned 8 appeals as well as stay applications and these stay applications have come up for hearing before the Bench. Since the issue involved in all the above captioned stay applications is similar, the same are being disposed of by this common order.2. For the sake of brevity, relevant facts are given in appeal No.C/2037/90-B2 in the case of Collector of Customs, Calcutta v. SAIL. The respondents had imported Nimonic Shear Cutting Blades which were meant for use in shearing machines for cutting hot steel bloom in the blooming and billet mill in the steel plant. In the bill of entry filed by the respondents, the respondents had claimed assessment under Heading 8208.00 read with Notification No. 154/86-Cus., dated 1st March, 1986 read with Heading 84.62. The Assistant Collector had rejected the refund claim and had denied the benefit of exemption notification and being not satisfied, an appeal was filed before the Collector (Appe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »