Delhi Court June 1994 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1994 Page 3 of about 55 results (0.027 seconds)K.F. Beltings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT891TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order dated 30-9-1987 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants who are engaged in the manufacture of Synthetic Rubber Nylon Sandwich Belting and various other rubber products filed Classification List No. 46/KPT/86 claiming therein (i) complete exemption from levy of duty upto the limit of Rs. 15/30 lakhs in terms of Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 in respect of Leather Nylon Sandwich Belting, Leather Nylon Condensor Tape and Woven Fabric Beltings and (ii) benefit of Modvat scheme in respect of Synthetic Rubber Nylon Sandwich Belting, Autoleveller belts and wastes thereof. Thereafter on 23-6-1986 they filed Classification List No.59/KPT/86 effective from 2-4-1986 seeking withdrawal from Modvat Scheme and claiming total exemption from levy of duty upto the limit of Rs. 15/30 lakhs in terms of Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 in respect of Nylon Sandwich Belting Aut...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Sukhjit Starch and Chemicals Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)(72)ELT753TriDel
1. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector (Appeals), Central Excise, Chandigarh.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that M/s. Sukhjit Starch and Chemicals Ltd. Phagwara, respondents, filed classification list No.4/CL/91 effective from 1st May, 1991 and No. 24/CL/91 effective from 25th July, 1991. In these two classification lists, the respondents claimed the classification of item liquid glucose and malto dextrin under Heading 1702.19 attracting basic excise duty under protest.Respondents' view was that their product was under sub-heading 1702.29 of Central Excise Tariff, 1985. In view of the respondents' protest, sample of liquid glucose and malto dextrin (special glucose) were drawn and sent to the Chemical Examiner, Central Revenue Control Laboratories, Hill Side Road, New Delhi. The Chemical Examiner's reports say that the sample satisfies the Indian Standard Specification No. 873-1974 given for liquid gl...
Tag this Judgment!Pepsi Foods Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT177TriDel
1. M/s. Pepsi Foods Limited, Sangrur (Punjab), have filed an appeal being aggrieved with the order in-Appeal No. 49/CE/Chd/94, dated 7-2-1994, passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh. Alongwith the appeals they have also filed stay application under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), praying for the waiver of the pre-deposit and for the stay of the recovery of the central) excise duty demand of Rs. 2,16,96,131.2. The appellants were engaged in the business of aerated waters, marketed under the name of Pepsi and Lehar. They themselves were engaged in the production of aerated water concentrate and supplied such concentrate to the manufacturers of aerated waters who were licenced to produce and market their brands of aerated waters, produced out of such concentrate supplied by them. The Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Patiala under his order dated 11-11-1993 had ordered the inclusion of royalty charge...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Nath Cement Industries Vs. Collector of C. Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)(73)ELT142TriDel
1. These appeals arise out of common Order-in-Original No. 23/89, dated 1-1-1990 of Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur. (i) M/s. Shreenath Cement Industries Pvt. Ltd. Bharja, Distt. Sirohi (Rajasthan), the first appellant, are engaged in manufacturing cement at village Bharja Distt. Sirohi (Rajasthan). On receipt of information that the first appellant in collusion with M/s. Ambika Goods (Transport) Co., Saroopganj (Raj.) (the seventh appellant) were engaged in clandestine removal of cement, certain investigations were carried out on the basis of the investigations which resulted in recovery of incriminating documents, it was alleged that M/s. Ambika Goods Transport Co. used to issue separate set of bilties in a manner as to cover tranpsport of non-duty paid cement. Two bilties for instance were issued, one conforming to the Central Excise gate-passes evidencing payment of duty, and another covering transport of non-duty paid cement. M/s. Ambika goods Transport Co. through their prop...
Tag this Judgment!Vikas Engg. Associates Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT763TriDel
1. Shri V. Sridharan, ld. counsel for the applicants submits that a demand of Rs. 6,19,150.86 has been confirmed and a penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- has been imposed upon the applicants in respect of Bus Ducts manufactured by them which according to the Department fall for classification under Heading 85.44 of the CETA, 1985 as "other insulated electric conductors, whether or not fitted with connectors", while according to the assessees, the item is more appropriately classifiable under Heading 85.36 as "electrical apparatus for making connections to or in electrical circuits." He refers to the pamphlets and submits that Bus Ducts are used in electric panel boards and distribution boards and it is used for the purpose of tapping of electricity in electric circuits. The applicants had been filing classification lists during the relevant period and except for the year 1987 in which the said item has not been described in the classification list. Subsequent classification lists describing th...
Tag this Judgment!Sarjoo Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT336TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed by M/s. Sarjoo Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. Belrayan, Lakhimpur Kheri (U.P.) against the order-in-appeal No.463-CE./KNP/91 dated 29-10-1991 of Collector (Appeals), Allahabad.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of sugar at Belrayan, Lakhimpur. During the sugar season 1982-83, the appellants stored 1,10,727 quintals of [molasses] obtained in the factory in Katcha temporary pits as pucca tanks were already full. The appellants in the meantime had sought Central Excise permission for storing molasses in Katcha pits. This permission was granted by the Superintendent on 5-5-1983 with the condition that permission would be valid upto May, 1983. During June and July, 1983 because of heavy rains and floods, the appellant contended that nearly 80,000 quintals of molasses stored in temporary Katcha pits were washed away and the remaining got unfit for consumption. The appellants were served with Show Cause Notice demanding duty amounting to Rs. 3,48,790.05 on...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Maya J. Daryani Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: (1994)50TTJ(Del)510
ORDERCH. G. KRISHNAMURTHY, PRESIDENT :The assessed in this appeal is carrying on business of exports of automobile parts, machinery, cycles as a sole proprietor. The assessed felt aggrieved by various disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT on appeal. Hence, this appeal before us against the disallowances confirmed by the CIT.2. The first ground of appeal was against disallowance of foreign travel expenses amounting to Rs. 1,05,953. The details of this expenditure are as under :S. No.Name of personPeriodNo. of daysCountry visitedTotal1.Mr. R.D. Chandra 09.09.83 to 26.09.8317Del/AMS/MIC/AMS/DEL 25,616 2.Mr. K.G. Badlani 17.02.84 to 01.03.84 HKG/JAP/KOR 42,024 3.Mr. A.K. Sethi 17.02.84 to 01.03.8413DEL/TYO/SEL/HKG/DEL 37,743 1,05,953The IAC (Asst.) noticed that Shri Chandra and Shri Badlani are directors in other connected companies which have their own business activities and these Directors could hardly devote sufficient time to carry on the export promotio...
Tag this Judgment!Nahan Foundry Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)(73)ELT58TriDel
1. All the above appeals arise out of a common order dated 13-3-1985 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi and are hence taken up for hearing together and disposed of by this common order. The issues for determination herein are : 1. Whether Wheel Barrow (Manually operated) is an agricultural implement entitled to the benefit of exemption from duty in terms of Notification 55/75-C.E. at Sl. No. 11 thereto; 2. Whether the rate as prevailing on the date of clearance or on the date of actual payment of duty, would be applicable.2. We have heard the ld. Advocate Shri G.S. Bhangoo and Shri K.K.Dutta, ld. DR.3. According to Webster Dictionary, a Wheel Barrow is a "barrow or shallow open box mounted between two shafts that receive the axle of a wheel at the front ends, the rear ends being shaped into handles and having legs on which it rests, also, a similar controvance with more than one wheel." An implement has been defined as "the apparatus, instruments, etc. employed in...
Tag this Judgment!Modi Rubber Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)(73)ELT129TriDel
1. The above appeal pertains to admissibility of set off of countervailing duty paid by the appellants on imported rubber accelerators.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of tyres, tubes and flaps falling under Tariff Item 16 of the Schedule to the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff and were availing proforma credit/set off of countervailing duty paid on imported raw materials used in the manufacture of the final products in terms of Rule 56-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The appellants received two consignments of Vulkacit-MBTS (Rubber Accelerators) from M/s. Sun Export Corporation, Bombay on 3-4-1985 and 8-7-1985 which were sold to the appellants on High Seas Sale basis. D-3 Intimation No. 474 dated 3-4-1985 and No. 602 dated 8-7-1985 were filed by the appellants for the material. Vide letter dated 26-7-1986, the appellants forwarded the relevant documents viz. Bills of entry, Bill of lading, invoice and Clearing agent's bill etc. stating that Proforma credit could n...
Tag this Judgment!Priya Rubber Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1994)LC119Tri(Delhi)
1. By the present application, the appellant has made a prayer for restoration of the appeal. Shri V. Laxmi Kumaran, learned Advocate has appeared. He pleaded that the present application may be treated as an application for recalling of the order. Shri Somesh Arora, learned JDR does not object to the oral request of the learned Advocate. After hearing both sides, in the interest of justice, we treat this application as an application for recalling of the order passed by the Tribunal. Shri V. Laxmi Kumaran, learned Advocate pleaded that there is no wilful negligence or ommission on the part of the appellant. Shri V.Laxmi Kumaran pleaded that earlier the matter was handled by M/s.Narman Associates, Madras. He pleaded that earlier Counsel instead of sending the papers to Shri V. Lakshmi Kumaran, sent the same to the appellants by mistake and as such the papers could not be presented on that date and as such the appellants were prevented by sufficient cause for non-prosecution. Shri Some...
Tag this Judgment!