Delhi Court July 1995 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1995 Page 2 of about 155 results (0.025 seconds)Tata Engineering and Locomotive Vs. C.C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1996)(81)ELT574TriDel
1. These two appeals are against the orders of the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Patna.2. The facts briefly, leading to these appeals are as follows. The appellant manufactures motor vehicle chassis. It was found that on 29-2-1984 gate passes had been issued after payment of duty for clearance of three chassis (covered in appeal No. 2974) and six chassis (covered in appeal No. 2975). However, although the gate passes were made out before 5 P.M. on that date the goods had been removed before that time. Since that date was the date of presentation of the annual budget, the officers detained the chassis in question. Subsequently adjudication proceedings were commenced on the basis that since the duty on the goods was enhanced in the budget, the appellant had intended to evade the duty. After considering the cause shown and hearing the appellant, the Additional Collector confiscated the chassis, but ordered them to be redeemed on payment of fine which was to be adjusted against ...
Tag this Judgment!Sanghi Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT681; 1995(34)DRJ345; ILR1997Delhi297; (1995)111PLR54
D.K. Jain, J. (1) Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts (for short, referred to as IGNCA in the Deed of Declaration of the said body) floated tenders for supply and installation of 'Integrated Document Imaging and Management System for Scanning and Search through - put and retrieval thereof as images on any desired index'. Petitioner No. 1 and respondent No.3 herein submitted their respective bids for tender. The tender was awarded by IGNCA, respondent No.2 herein, to respondent No.3. Petitioner No. 1, a Pvt. Limited Company, through petitioner No.2, its Managing Director, filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a writ, order and direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the process of selection/acceptance of the bid of the 3rd respondent by respondent No.2 and communication of its acceptance to Respondent No.3, in relation to the said tender. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Department of Cultu...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi Vs. Comfort Living Hotel (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT548; [1995]216ITR72(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J. (1) By this petition under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short die Act), pertaining to the assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86, the revenue seeks a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the Tribunal), to refer the following question, said to be a question of law, to this Court for its opinion: 'WHETHER on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the It at is correct in law in holding that the assessed was entitled to the claim of investment allowance?'(2) The respondent (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of running a hotel and restaurant. In respect of aforenoted assessment years it claimed that it was an industrial undertaking involved in the manufacture or production of various food stuffs in its restaurant and was, thereforee, entitled to investment allowance under Section 32A of the Act for both the years. Relying on a C.B.D.T circular and the decision of Kerala H...
Tag this Judgment!East Pakistan D.P. Association Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995RLR505
Mahinder Narain, J. (1) Rule D.B. Since a short point is involved in this matter, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 17030/94 dated 5.10.94 preferred against the order of status quo passed by this Court on 5.8.94 we have heard this W.P. and proceed to dispose off the same. (2) The petitioner Society is registered under the Societies Registration Act and they have filed this W.P. in public interest. (3) The petitioners in this case approached this Court by this W.P. to stop the misuse of zonal park in the colony, known as Chitranjan Park. (4) The Chitranjan Park Colony, actually known as East Pakistan Displaced Persons Colony is covered by the approved zonal plan. (5) EXT. P3 is the site plan approved as one of the zonal plans of the DDA. By virtue of S. 8 of the Dd Act, it is a statutory plan. (6) Section 14 of the Act prohibits any person from using any land contrary to either of the plans. The word eithe...
Tag this Judgment!Pacific Granites Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT797TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order dated 22-4-1994 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are a 100% Export Oriented Undertaking engaged in the manufacture of polished granite slabs falling under sub-heading 6807.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants cleared 77 polished granite slabs measuring 353.9374 Sq. Mtrs. for export under bond to Hong Kong from their factory in Udaipur against AR-4 No. 2, dated 21-4-1992. The goods were sealed at the factory premises in a container. It has been claimed that the said container met with an accident near Adalaj container Yard at Ahmedabad and information in this regard was given by the appellants' clearing agent to the Assistant Collector of Customs, C.F.S., Adalaj vide their letter dated 24-4-1992. According to the appellants the Assistant Collector of Customs, Adalaj inspected the contents of the container and recorded the damage suffere...
Tag this Judgment!G.D. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)LC221Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. G.D. Pharmaceuticals Ltd., the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Boroline antiseptic cream in its factory at Ghaziabad.In his impugned Order, the Collector of Central Excise, Meerut has held that the appellant had manufactured petroleum jelly and used it captively in the manufacture of Boroline but has not paid duty on the petroleum jelly in question. He has, therefore, confirmed demand for duty of Rs. 23,20,092/- on the petroleum jelly stated to have been manufactured and cleared during the period from 1-3-1986 to 29-2-1989.He has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the appellant. The present appeal is against this order.2. Shri Lakshmikumaran, Advocate for the appellant stated that during the manufacture of Boroline, the appellant uses the following raw materials - 3. In the process of manufacture, the three types of paraffin, Microcrys-talline wax and Lanolin are charged in single process and melted at a temperature 90 to 100 C. Resultant liquid is then transfe...
Tag this Judgment!Bansal Exports Private Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1996]217ITR83(Delhi)
S.K. Mahajan, J.1. This suit has been filed by the plaintiff on the allegations that the plaintiff had withdrawn amounts totalling Rs. 28,00,000 from the Asaf Ali Road branch of Bank of India for the purposes of his business in the morning of 29th July, 1983, and it had a cash balance of Rs. 17,28,490. On the same day, at about 10.00 a.m., officers of the Directorate of Enforcement reached the premises of the plaintiff-company and searched the same up to about 5.00 p.m. According to the plaintiff, the raiding party did not find any incriminating documents. However, the said officers wrongly, illegally, unauthorisedly, maliciously and without rhyme or reason or any justification summoned the IT authorities to come to the premises and seize the said amount. On their having been summoned, the Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) of the IT Department made a thorough search of the premises from 5.30 p.m. to 10.00 p.m. and they also did not find any unaccounted money or any other in...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Milk Plant
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)LC68Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue, feeling aggrieved with the Order-in-Original dated 11-12-1987, passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh, in the case of Punjab State Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Pvt. Ltd. - Milk Plant, Ludhiana. The respondent in this case were filling liquid milk, with the aid of automatic machine, in poly pouches which came into existence after the milk had been filled therein. The Additional Collector of Central Excise held that in so far as the poly pouches were concerned, no article of plastic came into existence, which could satisfy the criteria of marketability. In appeal, it has been argued on behalf of the Revenue that the poly pouches were classifiable under sub-heading No. 3922.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tariff'), which is a residuary sub-heading of residuary Heading No. 39.22 of the Tariff. It covered "other articles of plastics and articles of materi...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Ambica Silk Mills
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT460TriDel
1. The Revenue is aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay. The Collector (Appeals) has disposed of two appeals by his common order. The Collector (Appeals) has accepted the appeal of the assessee seeking refund of duty of Rs. 982.44 and Rs. 1677.11. The department had also raised a demand for duty of Rs. 2645.40 which had been confirmed by the Assistant Collector. The ld.Collector has set aside this claim. Therefore, the Revenue is aggrieved on both the grounds and filed these appeals. There are two orders in original, one order-in-orginial dated 19-3-1983 dealing with the refund claim of the appellant and the other order-in-original dated 30-3-1983 deals with the show cause notice issued by the Deptt. and demand of duty of Rs. 15,027.22 for the clearances of goods made during the period indicated in the said show cause notices.2. The facts arising in the order-in-original dated 19th March, 1983 pertaining to refund claim are as follows : The assess...
Tag this Judgment!Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Himachal Concrete Corporation
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1996)(82)ELT120TriDel
1. The Collector, Central Excise, Chandigarh has filed this appeal against the order of Collector (Appeals) on the ground that penalty imposed by the Appellate Collector was not commensurate with the offence committed by the assessee.2. The facts in brief of the case are that Central Excise Officers visited the factory premises of the respondents herein on 29-4-1988 and checked the relevant records. They found that the respondents herein had manufactured and cleared P.C.C. Poles of value exceeding Rs. 15 lakhs during 1987-88. Further scrutiny of the records of the respondents herein revealed that the respondents herein had manufactured and removed P.C.C. Poles valued at Rs. 4,94,633.20, Rs. 13,25,775/- and Rs. 30,32,905.02 during the years 1985-86,1986-87 and 1987-88 respectively. It was also found that the respondents herein had not obtained Central Excise licence. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the respondents herein on 12-5-1988 asking them to explain as to why the ...
Tag this Judgment!