Delhi Court February 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.
Hymen Electronics (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)(71)ELT536TriDel
1.1 The appellants herein imported inter alia 5 pcs. WOW Flutter Instrument as described in the invoice at a unit rate of 36000 Yens.The goods were described in the bill of entry as above and further amplified as "Coup part of Audio Cassette Recorder". The department has taken the goods as described above to be Electrical Measuring Instruments since it measures WOW Flutter in recording/playback equipment such as recorders for sound and video tapes, disc and film.The appellants, on the other hand, contend that the imported goods are WOW Flutter Calibrators and thereby they are covered under Notification No. 77/89 and also covered by the licence available in their hands inasmuch as they fall under Appendix I Part B 12 (239) of AM 1990-93.1.2 The controversy, therefore, both in respect of ITC aspect and in respect of assessment depends upon whether the imported goods are WOW Calibrator or WOW Flutter meter. Appellants' contention is that a calibrator is also a meter because calibrator ap...
Phoenix Overseas (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)(71)ELT625TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the Order of the Collector of Customs, Delhi dated 3-7-1992. The brief facts of the case have already been recapitulated in the Tribunal's Stay Order No. S-210/92-D, dated 26-11-1992 are as follows : The facts of the case in brief are that they had set up a manufacturing unit inside Noida Export Processing Zone for manufacture and export of footwears vide letter of Approval No. 8/12/85-NEPZ dated 6-1-1986 issued by the Ministry of Commerce. They imported goods declared as components for footwears as raw materials under Bills of Entry dated 21-11-1986, 20-12-1986 and 31-1-1987. The bills of entry were registered at NEPZ. In column 6 of these bills of entry, they had declared the description of imported goods as 'com-ponerrts for Footwear'. The description of the goods on the documents accompanying the Bill of Entry, such as Invoice, Airway Bill/Bill of Landing, Packing list etc. was mentioned as 'Components for footwear'. These consignments were brought ins...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Modi Rubber Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)(54)LC125Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an Appeal against the Order passed by the Collector (Appeals), Central Excise, Ghaziabad. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of tyres, tubes and flaps. They filed two refund claims for Rs. 62,53,022.92/- and 5,64,235.79/- for the period 1.3.1984 to 14.3.1986 and November, 1984 to February, 1986 respectively, on the grounds that as per Notfn.No. 95/83 dt. 1.3.1983 and 201/79 dt. 4.6.1979 credit taken on inputs was not required to be reversed when the final products were cleared at 'Nil' rate of duty. The Asstt. Collector rejected the refund claim vide his Order dt. 18.12.1989. Being aggrieved with the Order passed by the Asstt. Collector the Respondents filed an Appeal before the Collector (Appeals) who relying upon the Tribunal's Order in the case of Vikrant Tyres v. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore held that as per Notfn. Nos. 95/83 dt. 1.3.1985 and 201/79 dt. 4.6.1979 reversal of credit of duty on inputs used...
Steel City Beverages (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT80TriDel
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 22-MP/85 dated 26-6-1985 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Patna.2. The appellants are the manufacturers of 'Aerated Water' falling under Tariff Item 1-D of Central Excise Tariff and their products are commonly known as "Double Seven", "Nova" and "Tingler" etc. in the market. The products are sold by them through their distributing agents appointed by them. From an intelligence gathered on the ex-factory wholesale price approved by the proper Central Excise Officer and the rates at which these goods are sold to their distributing agencies, it appears that there existed wide gap between the assessable value and the wholesale price at which the products are sold to the wholesale dealers. Further from the enquiry conducted at the wholesale dealers at M/s. Taro Taja of Hindpiri, 2nd Street, Ranchi and that M/s. Karanpura Beverages Agency, Main Road, Ramgarh, it appears that initially they raised a bill...
Utility Engineers (i) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT350TriDel
1. M/s. Utility Engineers (I) Ltd., Panchsheel Park, New Delhi, have filed the present appeal against the Order-in-Original No. 21/90, dated 3-1-1990, passed by the Principal Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi.2. The appellants were engaged in the designing, manufacturing, supplying, installing, erecting, testing and commissioning of central air-condition-ing and refrigeration plants, under works contracts. The assessee had two manufacturing plants, one at Dundehara (Haryana), and the other at Dharuhera (Haryana), where they were engaged in the manufacture of refrigerating and air-conditioning appliances and machinery and parts thereof, falling under item No. 29A of the erstwhile First Schedule to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (the old Tariff). Some items manufactured were falling under item No. 68 of the old Tariff. The goods manufactured by them along with the goods manufactured by other manufacturers, and the goods procured from the market, were used by them in the e...
Amar Poly Fabs (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT367TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector (Appeals), Chandigarh, dated 19-7-1993.2. Ld. Counsel stated that appellants were engaged in manufacture of Detergent Intermediate Product and Wheel Detergent Powder.3. Ld. Counsel further stated that in this case undisputably both inputs and outputs had been declared and are covered by Modvat Scheme and proper account was duly maintained.4. The Appellants received the inputs in the account of Detergent Intermediate and cleared the same during January, 1992 as such after obtaining the necessary permission under Rule 57F(1)(2). They had nil balance in the prescribed account of Detergent Intermediate so they debited the duty from the account of Wheel Detergent Powder. The Asstt.Collector did not consider it correct and hence confirmed the demand.5. It was their contention that duty paid inputs were common both for Wheel Detergent Powder and Detergent Intermediate Product. Hence by their action, the revenue is not effected in any ma...
Swaraj Mazda Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1995)LC386Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants who are engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicles falling under Chapter 87 of the CETA, 1985 filed an application for permission to remove PU foam to M/s. Punjab Scooters Ltd. for manufacture of motor vehicle seats on job work basis under Rule 57F(2) which was granted by the Department on 19-8-1987 in terms of Trade Notice No. 47/86 dated 10-7-1986. Modvat credit availed by them in respect of PU Foam during the period from September to November 1987 has been disallowed for the reasons that the foam was neither received by the appellants in their premises nor did they follow the procedure prescribed under Trade Notice 47/86 and the motor vehicle seats which came into the appellants' premises were exempt from duty under Notification 67/86. Hence, this appeal.2. We have heard Shri K.R. Mehta, learned Consultant and Shri K.N.Gupta, learned SDR.3. It is seen that the appellants have received seats from Punjab Scooters Ltd., under the cover of Central Excise gate passes...
Vikas Chemicals Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)50ITD233(Delhi)
1. The assessee, a limited company has filed this appeal and has raised a few issues. Each of these issues have been taken in seriatim and have been disposed of in that order.2. The first issue is related to the addition of Rs. 99,69,146 representing profit that has accrued on sale of 630 MT of isabutanol.The brief facts of this issue are stated below. M/s India Crafts (hereinafter referred to as IC) had Imported 630 MT of isabutanol from Netherlands against the REP licences that had been provided to it for the various exports made by it. The goods were sent through a ship named 'Rainbow' on 6-6-1987 and the documents were sent through the supplier's bankers, Bank of Credit & Commerce Hongkong Ltd. On 9-6-1987, the assessee entered into an agreement with IC for purchase of 630 MT of Isabutanol on High Sea sale basis, as an actual user. This agreement provided for (a) the assessee shall make full payment of document consisting of CIF value, L/C, bank's interest, commission and othe...
Sitaram Arvind Kumar (Huf) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)49ITD489(Delhi)
1. The assessee-HUF has filed this appeal, aggrieved by the order of CIT(A)-IX, New Delhi dated 25-10-1991, The main grievance of the appellant-HUF is that, the income that has been received by it from the lease of the flat in Nirmal Towers should not have been assessed under the head 'Income from house property', because, the said flat is not registered in its name, for being treated as owner of the flat. The claim of the appellant is that, all along the income so earned was being assessed as income from other sources, following the Delhi High Court decision in Sushil Ansal v. CIT[ 1986] 160 ITR 308. The change made by the assessing authorities, is based on the amendment to Section 27(iii) of the Act, which speaks of flats being given by companies that build it under their house building schemes. The plea of the appellant is that, the company that had built the said building and allotted the flat on lease basic has no such scheme and therefore, the said section has no applicability t...
Mcdermott International Inc. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)49ITD590(Delhi)
1. The assessee, is a non-resident, carrying on contracts works for various concerns in connection with Bombay High Off-shore Oil Rigs, has filed these appeals. For the assessment year 1984-85, the appeals are against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT) passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and against the order of CIT(A) arising out of the reversionary proceedings. The appeals for the assessment years 1985-86 & 1986-87 are arising from the order of CIT(A). The appeals involve the common issue that relate to the non-applicability of the notification issued dated 31-3-1993 to its activities. The alternative claim is that, Section 44BB of the Act which overrides the provisions of Section 28 to 41 of the Act, does not permit adding of the taxes paid on its behalf as its receipts for arriving at its taxable income. The second related alternative claim is that, the grossing up of the tax to the receipts should be done once only, the probable Surtax liabilit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »