Delhi Court April 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. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: (1995)LC189Tri(Delhi)
M/s Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd., Ranukot, Distt. Mirzapur (appellants) manufactures aluminium products. They brought in their factory Hard Pitch, Soft and Coaltar Pitch after payment of duty on the same under T.I. 68 and use the same to manufacture cathodes and anodes which are used in the electrolytic pot cells and availed set off of duty paid on pitch while clearing aluminium and its manufactures as provided in Notification No. 201/79 dated 4-9-1979 to the tune of Rs. 9,09,186.35 during October, 1981 to May, 1982.2. That a demand-cum-show cause notice was issued to the party under C.No. 10-Demand/Hindalco/82/331, dated 4-6-1982 by the Superintendent Central Excise Range-IV, Mirzapur for Rs. 9,09,186.35 which they wrongly availed as set off because Hard Pitch, Soft Pitch and Coaltar Pitch are used in the manufacture of cathodes and anodes which fall under T.I. 68 and were exempted from payment of duty vide Notification 118/75 when consumed captively.3. That the Assistant Col...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Escorts Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: (1994)(54)LC191Tri(Delhi)
1.1. Respondents herein are inter alia engaged in the manufacture of certain excisable goods namely gears and shafts. Revenue contends that these goods are classifiable under Tariff Heading 84.83 because these parts are specifically covered under the said Heading and Notes l(k) and 2(a) of Section XVI of the CETA 1985 come into play. Respondents on the other hand contend that the said goods are covered under Tariff Heading 87.08 as tractor parts. Notes of Section XVI, as mentioned above, do not apply in view of Section Note 2(e) of Section XVII of the CETA, 1985. It may be noted that Chapter 84 falls under Section XVI and Chapter 87 falls under Section XVII of the Tariff.2. In order to appreciate the above controversy, we may reproduce the relevant Tariff Heading and Section Notes: 2. Subject to Note 1 to this Section Note (1) to Chapter 84 and to Note 1 to Chapter 85 parts of machines (not being parts of the articles of Heading No. 84.84, 85.44, 85.45, 85,46 or 85.47) are to be class...
incab Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT131TriDel
1. Incab Industries Ltd. 9, Hare Street, Calcutta has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Allahabad. Dr. D. Pal, the learned Senior Advocate with Shri N. Mukherjee, Advocate and Ms. Priya Hingorani, Advocate and Shri D.B. Desai, Chartered Accountant has appeared on behalf of the appellant. The learned Senior Advocate pleaded that the appellant is manufacturer of electrical wires and cables of different varieties, specifications and types and it markets its products through its depot/branch to the dealers certain general items of its production, major portion of its manufacture is according to the specific requirement of its customers for which it enters into contracts with such customers. Its customers are mainly Government Departments, like Railway, Public Undertakings and other industrial consumers to whom the goods are sold on the basis of contract price. Price lists in part II are submitted for contract sales whereas ...
Shreyans Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT381TriDel
1. The origin of the appeal is an order-in-assessment dt. 19-8-1991 passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Air Cargo Unit, New Delhi, which came to be upheld by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi by the impugned order dt. 17-12-1991. The relevant portion of the Assistant Collector's order is as follows : "The items have been classified under Chapter 8439.99 r/w Notification 156/86 and 180/90 (S. No. 179). At the time of examination it was revealed that the following items have been imported : A careful perusal of the item (sample was seen by AC) and of the catalogue reveals that fact that the functional part of the item under importation by the said B/E is made of ceramic. It is observed that the articles of ceramic are excluded from the purview of Chapter 84. It is very clear from the catalogue that the item declared as Durafoil Outsert Blade is carrying the functional part of ceramic and hence it is excluded from the purview of Chapter 84 of the Customs Tariff. In ...
Maharashtra Fur Fabrics Ltd. Vs. Collr. of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: (1994)(71)ELT857TriDel
1. M/s. Maharashtra Fur Fabrics Ltd., Poddar Chambers, 4th Floor, S.N.Brevli Road, Fort, Bombay-1 have filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), Bombay. Briefly the facts of the case are that M/s.Maharashtra Fur Fabrics Ltd., M.I.D.C. area, Nahad are holding an L-4 licence for the manufacture of high fur fabrics by sliver knitting process and they have filed classification list No. 1/87 dated 10-3-1987 classifying their products under Heading 6001.90 attracting nil rate of duty and the Superintendent vide his letter dated 17th March, 1987 directed that their product merits classification under Heading 4301.00 attracting central excise duty at the rate of 12% ad valorem. Accordingly, the appellants continued to effect the clearance of the said goods by paying central excise duty at the rate of 12% ad valorem under protest. The appellants filed an appeal before the Collector (Appeals), Bombay against order No. 475/87 ...
Indian Communication Network Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: (1994)50ITD411(Delhi)
1. The assessee. a limited company, has filed this appeal and has raised twelve grounds in this appeal, claiming reliefs under different provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee-company is engaged in the business of manufacture of electronic typewriters.Amongst the few issues that have been raised in this appeal, there are five important issues. The first issue, relates to the claim of investment allowance on the ground that, it is a small scale industrial undertaking. The second issue, is claim of deduction under Section 80-1, that is dependent on the outcome of the claim of investment allowance. The third issue, is claim of deduction under Section 80HH, that is dependent the profit derived from the industrial undertaking.The fourth issue, of classification as a manufacturing company for levy of tax at a lower rate, is dependent on the outcome of the third issue.The fifth issue is whether, the excise duty actually paid in the accounting year, which is so allowed to be deducte...
National Research Development Corporation Vs. Vibronics (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: 1994IIAD(Delhi)589; 1994(2)ARBLR3(Delhi); 54(1994)DLT562
Mr. J. K. Mehra, J.1. This is a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The petition was filed on 23.2.1989. According to the allegations in the plaint and in the petition, the petitioner had entered into a license agreement with the respondents on 3.12.1975, being Exhibit P-5 whereby the petitioner granted a license to the respondents about the process for manufacture of ultrasonic probes for non-destructive testing (Vig), Angle Beam Probes, Surface Wave Probes and Normal Beam Probes etc. The petitioner under the said agreement was to supply the technical know how on the said process, which is claimed to be an invention of the petitioner. The agreement was to run for a term of seven years to be computed from the date of the start of manufacture by the respondents and the respondents were to pay to the petitioner a royalty @ 5% of the net ex-factory sale price of the material manufactured by it and marketed by it for a period of seven years. The royalty was to be paid e...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hazari Lal Marwaha and Sons
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: [1994]210ITR860(Delhi)
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. This application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been filed for direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of the facts of the case and to refer the following question of law for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the interest amount of Rs. 11,812.50 should be treated as revenue receipt and the balance amount of Rs. 7,59,748 be treated as capital receipt ?' 2. The matter arises out of the assessment year 1982-83. The assessed is a contractor. It appears that disputes arose relating to a work of contract taken by the assessed from M. E. S. Department, Firozepur, Punjab. The dispute was referred for adjudication by an arbitrator. The assessed had claimed award of interest from the arbitrator on several heads. Out of these several heads, one of the amounts of interest awarded was Rs. 7,59,748. The Trib...
Bal Mukund Narang Vs. Gulshan Lal Narang
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: 54(1994)DLT635
Sat Pal, J. (1) This is a suit filed on behalf of the plaintiff against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 18,000.00 and for recovery of the possession of part of the property bearing No.R-612, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. Summons in the suit were issued to the defendants. Thereafter defendant No.3 filed written statement on 13/12/1989. Since the defendants 1 and 2 failed to appear despite service and did not file any written statement, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide orders passed on 13/12/1989. Vide order dated 8/11/1990 the plaintiff was permitted to lead ex-parte evidence. Pursuant to this order, the plaintiff filed affidavit by way of evidence on 13/05/1991. (2) Mr. Kapur, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff submits that the relief for recovery of possession of the suit property has become infructuous as during the pendency of the suit the defendants 1 and 2 have already handed over the possession of the suit property on 16/07/1991. He has also drawn m...
Dune Leasing and Finance Ltd. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-1994
Reported in: 1994RLR440
K.J. Redy, J. (1) Special leave granted. The appellant a complaint against Shri Gulshan Kumar, proprietor of M/s. A. P. Associates-respondent No. 2 and it was registered as complaint case No. 105/1 of 1990 in the Court of Shri Gupta, M. M. New Delhi. It is alleged in the complaint that respondent No. 2 issued cheques and they bounced and, thereforee, an offence u/S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is made out. The M. M. passed an order on 6-2.91 holding that the court at place where cheque is drawn has the jurisdiction, simply because the same was deposited for collection in Delhi cannot confer jurisdiction on Delhi courts and accordingly the complaint was returned to the appellant for presentation to the proper court. Questioning the same, a revision was filed by the appellant before the High Court and the same was dismissed. Hence, the appeal. (2) From the above facts, it may be seen that the cheques were drawn on the bank at Chilbera branch, Noida, Ghaziabad. thereforee, accor...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »