Delhi Court November 1994 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.
Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Upper India Smelting and Refinery
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT101TriDel
1. The Revenue being aggrieved of the Order-in-Appeal No.160/CE/DLH/86, dated 6-5-1986, passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi, in the case of Upper India Smelting & Refinery Works, Yamuna Nagar (the respondent), have filed the present appeal.2. The respondents were engaged in the manufacture of zinc oxide, falling during the relevant time, under Item No. 65 of the 1st Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tariff'). Item No. 65 of the Tariff covered rubber processing chemicals - (1) Accelerators; (2) Anti-oxidants. They were availing of exemption under Notification No. 77/73-C.E., dated 1-3-1973 which provided exemption to inorganic accelerators falling under Item No. 65 of the Tariff, from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon.'Inorganic accelerators' were explained to mean accelerators which were inorganic compounds, such as zinc oxide and magnesium oxide. With effect from 19-1-1980 vide amending No...
Shree Ram Woollen Mills Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: (1995)LC95Tri(Delhi)
1. All these appeals involve a common question of interpretation of ITC Policy 1985-88 based on similar facts and hence a common order is being issued.2. The appellants imported woollen/synthetic rags described in the respective bills of entry as completely pre-mutilated woollen rags or completely pre-mutilated synthetic rags and claimed import under OGL as listed against SI. No. 418 List 8 Part-I of Appendix 6 of the Import Policy April 85 -March 88. The goods were examined and found to be synthetic rags cut into 2 and 4 pieces only and not completely pre-mutilated in accordance with para 37(1)(b) in the case of Shree Ram Woollen Mills. The goods on examination were found to be synthetic trousers cut into two different manners i.e. some trousers are cut vertically through the middle and near the stitch of upper portion so as to result in 2 complete long pieces. The remaining trousers are cut both vertically in the middle near the stitch of the upper portion and across the knee which ...
Farm House Biscuits Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT566TriDel
1. Shri Pankaj Aggarwal, Shri I.M. Kapoor, Shri Rajiv Kumar, M/s.Bakeman's Home Products and M/s. Farm House Biscuits Co. Ltd. have filed the above captioned appeals being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs, Customs House, Bombay. The above captioned five appellants have simultaneously filed five stay applications. Since all the above captioned matters emerge from a common order and as such, the above-captioned stay applications are being disposed of by this common order. Shri N.R. Khaitan, the learned Advocate with Shri Sanjay Khaitan, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellants.Shri N.R. Khaitan, the learned Advocate pleaded that the appellants had imported one set each of Biscuit Cream Sandwiching Machine, M/s.Bakeman's Home Products had imported the machine under Bill of Entry No. 003932, dated 9-2-1990 and M/s. Farm House Biscuits Co. Ltd. under Bill of Entry No. 003986, dated 11-4-1990. He pleaded that these machines were imported from USA ...
Ashok Kumar Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: (1995)(57)LC401Tri(Delhi)
1. The brief facts of this appeal are that on 14.3.1989 four packages addressed to the appellant declared to be containing personal effects arrived at Delhi Customs Air Cargo Unit on 14.3.1989 by Thai Airways from Hongkong booked under Air Way Bill dt. 9.3.1989. Enquiries with the immigration authorities showed that the appellant arrived at New Delhi from Hongkong on 13.3.1989. On 14.3.1989, the appellant, after obtaining delivery order from Thai Airways filed a baggage declaration form for the clearance of the goods as unaccompanied baggage. The appellant, however, did not appear for the subsequent examination of the goods. Meanwhile, on 20.3.1989, the appellant requested Thai Airways for a duplicate delivery order on the ground that the original was lost and on the same day appellant also sought and obtained permission to file Bill of Entry under Section 46 of Customs Act, 1962 saying that he does not know about the contents and value of the consignment covered by the Air Way Bill r...
Forbes Gokak Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT801TriDel
1. M/s. Forbes Gokak Ltd. have filed this appeal against the order of Collector of Central Excise. The ld. Collector in his order had held :- "I hold that the subject Glass Moulds alongwith the Plastic Gasket are together classified under sub-heading 7015.90 of Central Excise Tariff with duty leviable at the rates applicable from time to time. There being no justification to invoke the proviso to sub-section 11A(1) of the Act, the show cause notice F. No. V(90)15-255/Adj /92, dated 26-11-1992 demanding of duty Rs. 1,54,90,1377- is ordered to be withdrawn. There shall be no orders on penalty in the facts of this case." 2. Briefly stated that facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of Glass Moulds assembly consisting of (1) Glass Moulds (2) Gaskets; that on 25th October, the appellant entered into collaboration with an Italian Firm for manufacture of Hard Resin Lenses. The foreign collaborators of the appellants were required to pass on to the appellant their guarded...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Komal Metals Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: (1995)(77)ELT588TriDel
1. These appeals by Revenue arise out of Order-in-Appeal No.36-37/CE/CHD/91, dated 16-1-1991 passed by Collector (Appeals) which set aside the Order of Asstt. Collector who disallowed Modvat credit on semifinished motor vehicle parts on the ground processes like machining, trimming, welding, painting etc. do not amount to manufacture and as such no duty credit on such inputs was admissible.2. In the grounds of appeal, the Collector has mentioned that the respondents received semi-finished goods for subjecting them to the processes of machining, trimming, welding, painting and therefore no new product having a distinct identity emerged and hence Collector (Appeals) order was not correct.3. Learned Advocate for the appellants drew attention to the Collector (Appeals) Order in which he has indicated how these processes amount to manufacture and submitted that credit was rightly admissible to them particularly when the final goods were cleared on payment of duty.4. Learned DR reiterated t...
U.P. Ceramics and Potteries Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: (1995)52ITD334(Delhi)
1. We are disposing of these two appeals of the assessee relating to assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90, by this consolidated order.Appellant is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of potteries and ceramics items. A search and seizure operation under Section 132 was carried out at assessee's premises on 19-7-1989. During search operations, a statement being Annexure A-24 to the Panchnama dated 14-8-1989 was found and seized. This statement incorporates working of incentive bonus payable by the assessee to its distributors on the basis of increase effected by them in sales over the target fixed for the year. The Assessing Officer compared this statement with the sales register of the assessee and found discrepancies. For assessment year 1988-89, the said discrepancy was as under :--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------S. No. Party's Name Sales on basic Basic value of Difference--------------------------------------------...
Kamal Thakur Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)801; 1995CriLJ980; 1995(2)Crimes121; 56(1994)DLT431
ORDER1. Is Head Constable of Delhi Police an officer superior in rank to a Constable The learned counsel for the appellant says he is not. In support he relies upon a passing remark, if, with respect, I may say so, in Nand Lal v. State of Rajasthan (1987) 3 Crimes 629 to the effect that a Head Constable is also a Constable. 2. The question has arisen in the following circumstances. 3. The petitioner is facing trial under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the Act) for allegedly being in possession of 5 Kg. and 500 grams of charas. The recovery was made and investigation was completed by a Head Constable of the Delhi Police. The petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings on the ground that a Head Constable being not superior in rank to constable he could neither conduct the search or make any seizure nor, for that matter, investigate the case. 4. Though the arguments from both the sides provide to be a mere formality renderi...
Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. Vs. Gartex International and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)869; I(1995)BC520; 56(1994)DLT630; 1995(32)DRJ253
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This is a suit for recovery of Rs.1,39,270.00. The case of the plaintiff is that defendants 2 & 3 as partners of defendant No. 1 had opened a current account with the plaintiff bank on September 23, 1977 and from time to time deposits and withdrawals were made in the said account No.268 and on request of the defendants, on October 11, 1977, the defendants were permitted to have over-withdrawals in the said account and the defendants were to pay interest at the rate fixed by the Reserve Bank of India in respect of the said over-withdrawals from time to time. (2) It is also averred that the defendants had undertaken to bring the said account to credit at least once a year and it is only on July 16, 1980 that account was brought to credit when come credit balance was shown in the account. It is also mentioned that last entry appearing in the account is dated December 22, 1981 when a sum of Rs.53,500.00 was credited in the account of the defendants. It is further averred ...
Mangal Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)819; 1995(1)Crimes290; 56(1994)DLT454; 1994(31)DRJ442
Jaspal Singh, J. (1) Mangal Singh is an unhappy man. His grievance is that he has wrongly been convicted and sentenced under sections 397 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Is his anguish justified? Let us see. (2) The prosecution story is quite brief. Shorn of unnecessary details, it runs as under. On January 23, 1988 at about 11.25 P.M. three persons holding knives in their hands caught hold of Zuber Rizvi and robbed him of his wrist-watch. Though the Police Station was quite near to the place of occurrence, report was lodged only on the next day and that too in the afternoon. It was only after about a month that the appellant and two others were arrested. The wrist watch, however, was never recovered. (3) The learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant principally on three grounds. First, he had refused to participate in the test identification parade. Second, he had been identified in court by the complainant Zuber Rizvi, and lastly, the appellant as well...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »