Delhi Court March 1994 Judgments

Collector of C. Excise Vs. Mehta Vegetable Products (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)LC41Tri(Delhi)

1. This is an appeal by the Revenue challenging the impugned orders passed by the authorities below whereby they allowed the refund claim of the respondents for the duty amounting to Rs. 9331.48.2. Brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the respondents M/s. Mehta Vegetable Products (P) Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of vegetable products at Chittorgarth. They preferred their claim for refund of Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs. 9331.48 paid on Acid Oil (Tariff Item 68) by them on the ground that they erroneously paid the duty on Acid Oil cleared under Gate Pass No. 5 dated 15-2-1982 and 6 dated 6-3-1983 as Acid Oil was exempt from Central Excise Duty under Notification No. 115/75-C.E., dated 30-4-1975. It was allowed by the Assistant Collector. On appeal by the Revenue, the Collector (Appeals) also unheld the Order of the Assistant Collector. Still dissatisfied, the Revenue has filed the present appeal.3. Appearing on behalf of the Revenue, Shri Somesh Arora, learn...

Collector of C. Ex. and Customs Vs. Kohinoor Dyg. and Ptg. Works

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)(71)ELT1043TriDel

1. When the matters were called Shri Jitendra Singh, ld. advocate represents for eight respondents as mentioned in the preamble. One of the respondents' case namely, Shalu Dyeing & Printing Mills (A. No.1674/93-B1) is to be decided on merits as for the request by the said respondent. There is no representation from the other respondents. In so far as the other respondents are concerned we observe that the notice for today's hearing had been sent by the registered post. None of the notice has been returned undelivered. In the circumstances, we presume that the remaining respondents have received the notice for hearing; hence, we proceed to hear the matters ex parte.2. All these appeals filed by the Revenue raise common questions and, therefore, all the matters are being taken up together for passing a common order. (i) Revenue issued show cause notices to various respondents demanding duty on 'printing frames' falling under Chapter Heading 84.42 falling within the period 28th Febru...

Verma Fertilizers Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)50ITD82(Delhi)

1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the DC (Appeals) upholding the action of the Income-tax Officer in making a disallowance of Rs. 40,200 by resort to the provisions of Section 40A(3).2. The appellant in this case is a firm treated as URF by the Income-tax Officer, but granted registration by the DC (Appeals) in his appellate order. The assessment year involved is 1985-86 and income is derived from purchase and sale of fertilizers.3. The Income-tax Officer in the course of the assessment proceedings noted certain payments having been made in cash above Rs. 2,500. On being asked to show cause as to why the aforesaid payments not be disallowed the assessee filed a written explanation stating therein that the payments had been made in cash in the evening after banking hours at the instance of the sellers. The further submission was that there was a scarcity of fertilizers and the assessee could not displease the distributors by refusing to pay in cash. In support of t...

Twenty First Century Steels Ltd. Vs. Collr. of C. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT602TriDel

1. Shri Vipin Nair, ld. advocate on a query from the Bench fairly concedes that even the revised EA-3 form is not according to the prescribed form inasmuch as Column 8(A) is missing. He also concedes that the certified copy of the order-in-original as required in terms of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules has also not been filed. He also concedes the further position that the seal of the company on the various documents filed on behalf of the company has not been affixed. We notice that the appellants have been given a number of opportunities to rectify the defects and yet the defects have not been rectified. We quote below the last order given by the Bench on 11-3-1994 :- "There is yet another unusual request by the learned counsel Shri Rajiv Dutta for adjournment, only to enable the appellants to rectify the defects, as pointed out by the Bench on 31-12-1993. On that day, the learned counsel was himself present in the Court and requested for time to do the needful. Accordingly, the case was a...

Madurai Soft Drinks (P) Ltd. Vs. Collr. of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT647TriDel

1. M/s. Madurai Soft Drinks Pvt. Ltd., Madurai, have filed the present appeal against the Order-in-Original dated 24-08-1984, passed by the Collector of the Central Excise, Madurai.2. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of different brands of aerated waters falling under Item No. ID of the old Central Excise Tariff. They had filed price lists in Part-I of the Price List Proforma, in which only net assessable values (Ex-duty) were declared.The aerated water bottles were delivered by the assessee in their specially designed vehicles, to the premises of their dealers. By way of separate debit notes, the transportation charges were being collected from their dealers by them. In addition another debit note towards advertisement and publicity charges was also being raised. This second debit note was raised towards advertisement and publicity charges, up to 31-3-1979, and thereafter these debit notes were named as for management service charges. " 3. It was alleged vide Show Cause...

Mehmak Textile Processors Vs. Collector of C. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)(71)ELT1040TriDel

1. This is a case in which the appellants herein are required to pay duty amounting to Rs. 5,13,930 and penalty of Rs. 50,000 in terms of the impugned order of the Principal Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi. They had filed a Stay Application alongwith the appeal. The Tribunal disposed of the stay application by his order S-173/1993, dated 28-9-1993. By that order the appellants were directed to deposit duty amount in question within three months from that date subject to which the pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 50,000 was dispensed with. The appellants were asked to report compliance by 5-1-1994. On 5-1-1994, the appellants did not comply with the stay order but pleaded for further time. The Tribunal granted further time upto 31-1-1994. The matter came up again on 3-2-1994 for ascertaining compliance. On that day, the learned Counsel submitted a letter saying that the appellants have moved the High Court in Writ Petition against the Tribunal's Stay order that the hearing of the P...

Banswara Fabrics Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT772TriDel

1. The above captioned appeals have been filed by the appellants being aggrieved from the common order passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay-H. Four stay applications have also been filed. When the matter was called today, only stay application of M/s. Toshniwal was listed.Shri Kamal Parasurampuria, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellants and pleaded that the other stay applications of M/s.Banswara Fabrics Ltd. and Sh. B.L. Sharma are listed on 29-3-1994 and the stay application of Shri Murarilal Dalmia listed on 4-4-1994 may also be taken up today. He stated that all the stay applications emerge from a common order and pleaded that judicial propriety requires that these stay applications should be heard together which will save inconvenience to him as well as to the parties.2. Shri Prabhat Kumar, learned Senior Departmental Representative who is present on behalf of the respondent fairly agrees with the request of the learned Advocate for hearing of all the sta...

Pawa Brothers Trading P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)LC47Tri(Delhi)

1. The above miscellaneous application has been filed for early hearing of the above appeals in the following circumstances: The bills of entry dated 8-8-1991 and 30-10-1991 were filed for clearance of diplomatic cargo by the First Secretary to the Polish Embassy and the Military Attache of the Polish Embassy respectively, for clearance of consignments sent by the applicants herein (floppy disc, rolls of camera films, cameras, cordless telephones etc.) under the directive of the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India and with the consent of the Diplomats the consignments were opened and examined and recovered goods were found in excess of the invoice and order placed by the diplomats concerned. The excessive goods were disclaimed by the diplomats and were detained by the Customs authorities under detention receipts. The Ministry of External Affairs intimated to the Customs Department that the covering invoices No. 2098 and 2579 both dated 26-7-1991 had been tampered with an...

H.C.L. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)LC43Tri(Delhi)

1. The issue for determination in this appeal is the eligibility of the appellants to Modvat credit of Rs. 4,07,871.51 P. availed of by them on 28-1-1988 on Selenium drums and ASM Blades-280 utilised as inputs in the manufacture of Photocopiers cleared during the period April 1986 to April 1987.2. Initially, the appellants' stand was that these items did not form part of the Photo-copying Machines as they were imported and supplied under separate invoices and therefore, were in the nature of consumables and hence not includible in the assessable value of the finished product namely Photocopying machines. Vide order dated 20th October, 1987, the Assistant Collector held that the above-mentioned items are parts of Photo-copying machines and are to be included in the value of the Photo-copying machines. This order was confirmed by the Collector (Appeals) by order dated 4-3-1987. On the introduction of the Modvat Scheme in March, 1986, the appellants filed a declaration containing details...

Brigadier V.K. Dandekar Vs. M/S. Creation Constructions and Others

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.N. Mittal, President: 1. Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondent is carrying on business as a Builder and Mr. Sanjay Sharma is its proprietor. Mr. Sharma purchased the first and second floor of a house bearing No. A-l/66, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi, measuring 216 sq. yards from Mrs. Shanta Badhwar and made additions and alterations in its first and second floor. He also constructed the Servants Quarters on the 2nd Floor. Thereafter, he sold the rights, title and interest in the 1st floor comprising of 3 bedrooms, attached bathrooms, drawing cum dining room, study room in staircase, one kitchen front and rear balconies and one Servant Quarter together with common facilities for Rs. 8 lacs, to the complainant. 2. The complainant took possession of the house on 5th May, 1992. It is alleged that the premises have got inherent defects viz. leakage, seepage, non-provision of protective ledges, defective windows, poor quality cupboards, defective electric connections, poor qua...