Delhi Court June 1995 Judgments

G.M.G. Insulated (India) Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT568TriDel

1. After hearing the learned counsels S/Shri N.V. Raghavan Iyer and B.B. Gujral and learned consultant Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan who appeared for the respective applicants and Shri M. Chandrasekharan, learned Additional Solicitor General who appeared for the respondent Collector, we waive the requirement, for the purpose of hearing of their appeals, of pre-deposit of the amounts of penalty imposed on the concerned applicants and post the appeals for hearing on 31-8-1995 and 1-9-1995.During the pendency of the appeals the recovery of the amounts in question shall stand stayed. As the amounts involved are high and as these appeals arise from a common order and the goods in question are lying uncleared for re-export in terms of the impugned order, incurring demurrage and container detention charges. We post the appeals for hearing on out of turn basis. Both sides indicated that they would be ready to argue the case at short notice. The appeals are posted for hearing on 31-8-1995 and 1-9-199...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Nagpal Steels (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT463TriDel

1. The Central Excise officers visited the premises of the respondents' factory at Ludhiana and took stock of the ingots in the factory. There were nearly 2,000 such ingots and in view of the difficulties that would be faced for weighing this lot, it was agreed that truck load of ingots selected at random would be weighed. The weight of one ingot was determined to be 92.375 kg. Accordingly, the total weight of ingots was worked out at 265.115 MT. Since the recorded balance in the RG was 250.560 MT, the excess of 14.555 MTs containing 157 ingots was seized.After adjudication proceedings, the Assistant Collector ordered confiscation of this quantity with an option to redeem it on a fine of Rs.10,000/-. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the respondents.2. The Collector (Appeals) before whom the assessee went, held that there was no provision in law to take action on the basis of average weight. She therefore, set aside the Assistant Collector's order. This order is now being ch...

Raj Motors Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)54ITD542(Delhi)

1. This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the CIT(A) dated 8-12-1992 for the assessment year 1976-77 for which the previous year ended on 31-3-1976.2. The assessee is a registered firm. The Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) noticed credits in the names of the following parties : The Assessing Officer vide letter dated 10-12-1986 requested the assessee to establish the identity of the creditors and to submit evidence regarding their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. In response to the same, confirmations have been filed only from Smt. Ratan Mala Jain and Smt. Maina Devi. In respect of the credit in the name of Miss Asha Jain an undated letter signed by one Sushma Jain has been submitted. Confirmations have not at all been filed for the loans in the names of Shri Des Raj and Smt. Santosh Rani Jain. Vide letter dated 7-1 -1987, it has been submitted by the assessee that when business was so large small loans were received in routine course which we...

Mahesh Chand Gupta Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [1995]55ITD202(Delhi)

ORDERPer Mehta, A.M. - This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) raising for the consideration of the Tribunal various grounds which are being disposed of as under :The appellant in this case is an Individual, deriving income from the manufacture and sale of insulated wires in respect of a proprietary concern, run under the name and style of Khandelwal Wires. The first two grounds in the appeal pertain to the claim for deduction under sections 80HH and 80-I and in respect of which the following common facts emerge from the order of the Assessing Officer :It was found during the course of the assessment proceedings that the assessed had claimed deductions under the aforesaid section amounting Rs. 4,28,295 each, i.e., 20 per cent of the profit from the alleged newly established industrial undertaking in a backward area. To consider the aforesaid claims the Assessing Officer proceeded to verify the records of the preceding assessment year...

Collector of C. Ex Vs. Coromandal Prodorite Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT733TriDel

1. This is an appeal filed by the Department against the Order-in-Appeal No. 7/92(M), dated 21-1-1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras.2. The facts of the case in brief as stated in the statement of facts are that the respondents M/s. Coromandal Prodorite Pvt. Ltd. are manufacturers of articles of fibre glass such as pipes and fittings, storage tanks, fume exhaust systems, tank covers, chimney and other tailor-made items against specific orders from their customers. These items are manufactured by moulding plastic sheets like PVC/Polypropylene/Polyethylene and on these layers of fibre glass are laid and coated with resins. During the relevant period the respondents were clearing these goods on payment of duty at the rate applicable to Chapter 39. The Department was of the view that the items merit classification under Chapter Heading 70.14 and accordingly issued show cause notices periodically covering the period from 1-8-1989 to 23-7-1991 on the ground that...

D.C. Rastogi (Huf) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)57ITD295(Delhi)

1. We find it convenient to dispose of this bunch of five appeals by a common order. Rival contentions have been heard and records perused.Before we take up individual appeals we would like to point out that these appeals belong to same group. Shri D.C. Rastogi had made a disclosure of Rs. 58.90 lakhs in his own name and Rs. 38.70 lakhs in the name of Smt. Meena Rastogi, his wife. The gifts in the name of various family members had been claimed to have been received in earlier years as well as in the year under appeal. These gifts have not been accepted as genuine. Though the amount of the gifts have been assessed in the hands of the appellants on protective basis these sums have been added in the assessment of Shri D.C. Rastogi as his income from undisclosed sources on substantive basis. We shall deal with the facts of each appeal separately. We first take up the appeal of Shri D.C. Rastogi (HUF). Assessee is a specified HUF. For assessment year 1986-87, assessment had been completed...

industrial Chemicals and Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT1016TriDel

1. These are three appeals. Two are filed by M/s. Industrial Chemicals and Monomers Ltd., and the other filed by M/s. Gulf defines (P) Ltd., involving common issues and, therefore they are clubbed together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The point to be considered in these cases is whether Carbon Paste used in the manufacture of Calcium Carbide is entitled to benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 201/79-C.E., dated 4-6-79 as amended, Notification No. 201/79-C.E. exempts all excisable goods on which duty of excise is leviable and in the manufacture of which any goods falling under Tarrif item 68 have been used, as raw materials or component parts from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is equivalent to the duty of excise already paid on the inputs.3. The appellants are manufacturers of Calcium Carbide. It was contended that they used carbon paste in the manufacture of calcium carbide and though the purpose was to convey electricity to arc fu...

Ceramic Products Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT468TriDel

1. The point to be considered in this case is whether the party is entitled for incentive rebate in terms of Notification 150/83, dated 13-5-1983 during the 1983-84 incentive period. The appellants manufactured refractory bricks falling under T.I. 68 i.e. at Serial No.23 of the table of Notification 150/83, dated 13-5-1983. The appellants have claimed the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification 77/83.The exemption is available to units who fulfilled the conditions contained in clauses 2,3 and 4 of the said Notification. Condition No.2 of the Notification stipulates that for eligibility of this exemption, the aggregate value of clearance of excisable goods from factory in the previous financial year should not exceed Rs. 40 lacs.According to Department total clearance during 1983-84 exceeded Rs. 40 lacs and the factory was not eligible for the benefit contained in the Notification for the year 1984-85. It was claimed by the party that they are entitled to rebate in terms of Notif...

D.P. Hazra Vs. Indian Airlines

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. This order would dispose of preliminary objection regarding limitation. The objection is twofold (i) mat the complaint is barred by limitation u/Sec. 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, and (ii) that the right to compensation stands extinguished in view of Rule 30 of the Schedule II of the Carriage By Air Act, 1972. 2. Facts necessary for the disposal of these objections are that D.P. Hazra, complainant, was one of the passangers in IC 605 on Feb., 14, 1990 from Bombay to Delhi. On way the said plane caught fire and crash-landed near Bangalore Airport. 90 passengers were killed and 56 survived receiving varying degrees of injuries. The complainant also suffers injuries. He filled in a claim form on 15.3.91 claiming Rs. 2,50,000 /- as compensation on account of loss of cash, luggage, loss in business and partial permanent disablement. He followed up the claim by two reminders dated 20th June, 1991 and 10th Oct., 1991. The case is that no reply was received ...

Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Arun Kumar Jain

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)54ITD724(Delhi)

1. We find it convenient to dispose of these two appeals involving similar issues by this consolidated order. The learned D.R. Shri Abrar Ahmed and the learned counsel for the assessees Shri H.G. Malik have been heard and records perused.2. We snall first take up the case of Arun Kumar Jain [IT Appeal No.994 (Delhi) of 1991]. The relevant facts are that assessee has two minor children, namely, Ms. Anima Jain and Master Nipun Jain. During the year relevant to assessment year 1982-83, it was claimed that the minor children of the assessee had received the following gifts :Name of the donor Amount Date of giftSh. Dinesh Kr. Gupta Rs. 20,000 16-7-1981Mrs. San tosh Devi Agarwal Rs. 15,000 17-7-1981Sh. Anuj Jhujhunwala Rs. 15,000 17-7-1981Sh. Raj Kumar Agarwal Rs. 15,000 17-7-1981Sh. GopiDutt Rs. 15,000 25-7-1981Smt. Lalita Devi Gupta Rs. 15,000 25-7-1981Sh. A jit Kr. Agarwal Rs. 20,000 16-7-1981Sh. Radhey Shyam Rs. 15,000 17-7-1981Sh. Suresh Kr. Agarwal Rs. 15,000 17-7-1981Sh. Hari Kishor ...