Delhi Court February 1991 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.
Northern India Leather Cloth Mfg. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: (1994)(70)ELT380TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed against the order of the Collector (Appeals), New Delhi dated 10-4-1989.2. Initially a question arose whether the jurisdiction to hear and decide the matter lies with this Bench.3. Both the sides submitted that this matter does not involve any question regarding classification, valuation or rate of duty. As such the matter lies within the jurisdiction of this Bench.4. The Bench found that this submission was correct and accordingly held that the jurisdiction to hear the matter was with this Bench.5. The learned counsel submitted that they were engaged in the manufacture of Textile Fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastic material. They use release paper in the process of lamination in the Textile Fabrics for which they have availed modvat credit, after filing a declaration which has been approved by the Assistant Collector.6. Subsequently the Assistant Collector disallowed this credit on the ground that it is not an input. The release p...
Surya Prabha Sales Corporation Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC262Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an application for hearing of the matter relating to import of certain goods at Calcutta Port.2. The learned counsel stated that they had filed the appeal at Delhi in terms of a public Notice No. 1/87 and requested that it may be listed for hearing before this Bench.3. The learned DR objected stating that the appellant is not an importer but only a letter of authority holder and secondly the matter involved theft and requires knowledge of local conditions.4. The learned counsel stated that only point of law relating to legality of import and validity of licence etc., are involved and the matter does not require any knowledge of local conditions and there is no doubt regarding facts in ascertaining a knowledge of local conditions are necessary was involved.5. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We observe that the public notice 1/87 gives this facility to all appellants and does not distinguish between importers and letter of authority holders.Further prima...
S.A.i.L. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: (1991)(33)ECC316
1. This is an appeal against the order of Collector of Central Excise, Bolpur, dated 20-10-1989.2. The learned counsel stated that the appellants receive lime stone from mines. A part of this 'lime stone' is crushed in a machine in order to make 'lime fine' required for production of 'sinter'.3. A question has arisen whether this amounts to a process of manufacture and 'lime fine' was an excisable product.4. It was their contention that crushing of lime stones into lime fine did not amount to manufacture and lime fine was not an excisable product. Hence, no duty was leviable.5. The impugned order proceeds on the assumption that the Chapter Note 2 of Chapter 25 equates the processes mentioned therein with the 'manufacture' and consequently the process of converting of any of the products covered under Heading 25.01 to 25.05 constitutes "manufacture". However, Section 2(f) as it stood prior to 28-2-1986 defined the expression "manufacture" in an inclusive manner and included any process...
Mahabir Singh Vs. the Delhi Administration (State)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1991
Reported in: I(1991)ACC442
V.B. Bansal, J.1. Mahabir Singh who was a driver of Mini Bus No. DLP 5690 on 6th December, 1979 was convicted for the offences under Sections 279/304IPC vide judgment dated 8th June, 1987 and was sentenced to R.I. for two years with a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default to undergo S.I. for four months vide order dated 12th June, 1987 by a M.M. Delhi.2. The allegations against the petitioner has been that on 6th December, 1979 at about 9.00 P.M. while driving the bus in a rash and negligent manner caused the death of a pedestrian named Bhagwan Dass. He filed an appeal in the Sessions Court which was dismissed by an Additional Sessions Judge Delhi vide judgment dated 14th January, 1991.3. Being not satisfied with the finding of the Courts below Mahabir Singh has filed this revision.4. The case of the prosecution has been that on 6th December, 1979, D.D. No. 26-A was recorded at Police Station Kingsway Camp at 9.45 P.M. to the effect that one pedestrian met with an accident with a mini bus ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Doon Fertilizers and Minerals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC578Tri(Delhi)
1. Since a common issue is involved in both these appeals, a common order is being passed.2. For the sake of convenience we shall take the facts in respect of 1st appeal No. E/3679/89-C. These are as follows :- 2.1 M/s. Doon Fertilizers & Minerals, Dehradun were given a show cause notice asking them to show cause as to why Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 4,001.66 p. should not be demanded from them under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 inasmuch as they cleared 13,812 Kgs. of lime stone powder valued at Rs. 1,60,086.20 P falling under Tariff Heading No. 2505.00 without payment of duty during the period 1-3-1986 to 24-3-1986. On adjudication, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Saharanpur confirmed the said amount of duty. Similarly, in the other appeal, an amount of duty of Rs. 7,219.90p was confirmed against the other respondents herein namely M/s. Crystal Corporation.2.2 One of the issues that came up before the Assistant Collector of Central Exc...
Rubber Reclaim Co. of India Pvt. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: (1991)(32)ECC352
1. By the impugned order, the Collector (Appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original dated 31-1-1985 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Rohtak, classifying the reclaimed rubber manufactured by the appellant under Item No. 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (CET', for short) and confirming the demand for duty amounting to Rs. 3,42,683.64 for the period from 25-5-1984 to 4-7-1984. The orders passed by both the lower authorities were based on this Tribunal's decision in Bharat Rubber Regenerating Co. Ltd. v.Collector of Central Excise, Patna -1984 (18) ELT 85 (Tri.), whereby it was held that reclaimed rubber sheets were classifiable under Item 68, CET.2. We have heard Shri V. Sridharan, Advocate, for the appellant and Shri L. N. Murthy, JDR, for the respondent-Collector.3. Though arguments were advanced by both sides in support of their respective stands, it is not necessary to set them out and deal with them in great detail because the matte...
Surgichem Proprietors Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: (1991)(54)ELT424TriDel
1. This is a bunch of appeals consisting of 5 appeals filed by M/s.Surgichem and one by CCE, Rajkot (Appeal No. E/2078/89-C) in respect of the same basic issue namely the correct classification and rate of duty in respect of the product "Adhesive plaster BPC/USP." Hence all these were heard together for the sake of convenience.2. In case of all the appeals filed by M/s. Surgichem the Assistant Collector had granted refund for various periods stating, inter alia, that the amount was being sanctioned in view of the learned Collector (Appeals) order, dated 30-8-1983 classifying the product under T.I. 68.The Assistant Collector had also observed in the relevant orders-in-original that the view of the Collector (Appeals) has since been 'confirmed' by the Tribunal's order No. 77/86, dated 27-11-1986.In other words in all these cases the amount in question was sanctioned as 'consequential' refund due to M/s. Surgichem in terms of the aforesaid orders.3. The department had filed appeals again...
Real Drinks (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC491Tri(Delhi)
1. Since common issues are involved in both the appeals a common order is being passed. 2.1 The appellants herein are manufacturers of Aerated waters, namely soda and sweetened drinks falling under Tariff Item No. 1-D. They filed a classification list No. 8/83, dated 1-3-1983 in respect of financial year 1983-84 and another classification list No. 5/84, dated nil in respect of the financial year 1984-85. In both these classification lists the appellants claimed the exemption under Notification No. 148/82-CE dated 22-4-1982 (as amended) and while claiming the exemption the appellants declared their clearance values at Rs. 12,95,395.21 p during the financial year 1982-83, and at Rs. 11,15,631.54p during the financial year 1983-84. 2.2 During the course of verification of the appellants' sales invoices by the departmental officers, it was noticed by them that the total turnover of soda and sweetened drinks were Rs. 24,99,557.05 p during the financial year 1982-83, excluding sales tax, Ce...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: (1991)94CTR(Del)203; 44(1991)DLT5; [1991]192ITR310(Delhi)
Arun Kumar, J. (1) This is an appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 269H of the Income Tax Act against the order of the Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred as the Tribunal) dated 30th April 1990. Under the provisions of Section 269H an appeal lies to the High Court against the order of the Tribunal passed under Section 269G of the Act on a question of law alone. This means that a finality is sought to be attached to the decisions of the Tribunal so far as they relate to questions of fact. (2) The facts giving rise to the present appeal are : Property bearing No. 1, Prithvi Raj Road, New Delhi comprising lease hold land measuring 3824 sq. yds. having three built up portions : (A)residential house block; (b) servants' quaters; and (c) garrage block,was agreed to be sold for a total consideration of rupees one crore by one Mrs. Bittoni N.C. Thorvaldsen in favor of the respondent M/s Duncans Agro Industries Ltd. vide agreement to sell dated 31st August, 1985. The sale consideratio...
Collector of Customs Vs. Perfect Machine Tools Co. Pvt.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: (1992)(37)ECC51
1. The Revenue has issued a review show-cause notice, dated 12-7-1982 in exercise of its powers under Section 131(3) of the Customs Act for setting aside the order of the Appellate Collector and same stands transferred to the Tribunal.2. The issue was with reference to the fact that the importer - M/s.Perfect Machine Tools Co. (P) Ltd., imported a consignment of 'Kilingelnberg Involute' and 'Helix Tester', Model PFS-600, complete with accessories/attachments vide bill entry No. 1726/171, dated 30-12-1978. The main equipment and electronic measuring and recording unit was assessed to duty at 25% ad valorem in terms of Notification No. 49/78. The Electronic Pitch Test Attachment with slide and Base which was an optional accessory, was assessed to duty at the standard rate and the exemption Notification No. 49/78 was denied. The importer's claim for lower rate of assessment was rejected by the Assistant Collector. On appeal, the Appellate Collector allowed the appeal, ordering that the E...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »