Delhi Court December 1996 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.
Vikrant Tyres Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-31-1996
Reported in: (1997)(93)ELT269TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed by M/s. Vikrant Tyres Ltd. against the impugned order passed by the Collector (Appeals), Madras.2. When the matter was posted for hearing no one appeared on behalf of the appellants. However, they have requested to decide the case on merits. Accordingly, we proceeded to pass this order after hearing Shri K.K. Jha, the learned Departmental Representative on behalf of the Revenue.3. In the instant case the appellants imported Sinclair Valves. They were assessed under heading 8481.80 at 60% + 45% + CVD 15%. They claimed refund on the ground that the walls was composed on corrosion resistant material such as Bronze, stainless steel etc. and hence eligible for concessional duty under Central Excise Notification No.60/87. This claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector. The view taken by the Assistant Collector was upheld by the Collector (Appeals) observing that since supporting evidence in the form of supplier certificate is not submitted, appeal remains unsu...
U.K. Paints (India) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-31-1996
Reported in: (1998)66ITD450(Delhi)
1. These two appeals, by the assessee, are directed against the orders passed under ss. 154 and 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act') for asst. yr. 1989-90. As both are interconnected, they are disposed of by a single order after consolidating them.2. Shri R. Ganesan appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri M. S.Syali, standing counsel, represented the Department.3. Briefly put, the facts are that the assessee filed its return declaring an income of Rs. 30,95,450. The return was processed under s.143(1)(a) of the Act and the income determined was at Rs. 31,14,600.This was after including an amount of Rs. 19,150 the depreciation claimed at hundred per cent on the machinery. Subsequently, the AO modified the income under s. 154 of the Act by restricting deduction under s. 80HHC of the Act to Rs. 13,83,30,602 as against Rs. 15,06,77,328 claimed by the assessee. In appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. The assessee is aggrieved against the order on the ground that...
income-tax Officer Vs. Narender Kumar Bharti
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-31-1996
Reported in: (1997)60ITD549(Delhi)
1. This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 1986-87 is directed against order of CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to treat assessee's application under section 154 of I.T. Act as a petition under rule 40 read with rule 117A and disposed of the same after providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that assessee filed return declaring income of Rs. 65,000 besides agricultural income on 30-3-1988. The assessment was made on the same day estimating assessee's income at Rs. 75,117 besides agricultural income as declared. The ITO also initiated penalty proceedings under sections 271(1)(a) and 273(1)(b) of the I.T. Act besides charging interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of the I.T. Act.3. On appeal, the learned A.A.C. cancelled penalty under section 271(1)(a) and reduced quantum of penalty under section 273 to Rs. 1,865.4. The assessee then moved an application under section 154 stating, inter alia that due to search,...
U. K. Paints (India) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-31-1996
Reported in: (1997)57TTJ(Del)537
ORDERMISS MOKSH MAHAJAN, A.M. :These two appeals, by the assessee, are directed against the orders passed under ss. 154 and 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act) for asst. yr. 1989-90. As both are interconnected, they are disposed of by a single order after consolidating them.2. Shri R. Ganesan appeared on behalf of the assessed and Shri M. S. Syali, standing counsel, represented the Department.3. Briefly put, the facts are that the assessed filed its return declaring an income of Rs. 30,95,450. The return was processed under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and the income determined was at Rs. 31,14,600. This was after including an amount of Rs. 19,150 the depreciation claimed at hundred per cent on the machinery. Subsequently, the AO modified the income under s. 154 of the Act by restricting deduction under s. 80HHC of the Act to Rs. 13,83,30,602 as against Rs. 15,06,77,328 claimed by the assessee. In appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. The assessed is aggrieved against ...
Gooly Chem Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-30-1996
Reported in: (1997)(90)ELT424TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 23-2-1989 issued by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay by which he confirmed the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad which demanded from the appellant the duty of Rs. 37,716.73.2. The appellants are manufacturers of synthetic organic dyes as also synthetic organic pigments. They were issued three show cause notices, one on 30-9-1983, another on 2-2-1984 and the third on 4-6-1984 for the period March 1983 to August 1983, October 1983 to December 1983 and February 1984 to March 1984 respectively raising demand of Rs. 36,653.82 for the first period, Rs. 8,716.84 for the second period and Rs. 968.63 for the third period. The show cause notices alleged that the appellants had wrongly availed of exemption under Notification No.44/82 in relation to Copper Phthalocyanine (C.P.C.) captively consumed by them for the manufacture of other dyes during the said period for which they were not entitl...
Sitaram Rajgarhia Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-30-1996
Reported in: (1997)(90)ELT472TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed by M/s. Sita Ram Rajgarhia against the impugned order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi.2. When the matter was posted for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellants. However, they have requested that they have not imported goods under reference but the goods were imported by M/s.Aarkey Electronics, Thangal Bazar, Imphal. It was also submitted by them that they have already deposited the amount and the same may be refunded to them or otherwise the matter may be treated as closed since the demand has already been deposited.3. We have heard Shri K.K. Jha, ld. SDR for the revenue who justified the order passed by the authorities below.4. It was the contention of the party before the authorities below that they are, not the importers but M/s. Aarkey Electronics, Thangal Bazar, Im-phal. According to them, Department should have recovered the duty from M/s. Aarkey Electronics. The authorities below have observed that Bill of Entry issu...
industrial Oxygen Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-30-1996
Reported in: (1997)(91)ELT318TriDel
1. The common appellants in these four appeals are manufacturers of cylinders for the filling up of Liquid Petroleum Gas. They have entered into contracts with two customers, M/s. HPCL and BPCL for supply of specified number of cylinders within specified time frame. The contract provided for price variation since the main raw material, namely, steel sheets, was supplied by the depots of SAIL and TISCO which was itself subject to price variation according to the rates fixed by the Government at different points of time. The appellants has filed various price lists at different points of time and paid duty accordingly. The customers of the appellants had initially issued amended orders indicating the revised rates for cylindeF The appellants had paid duty in such cases where the revised price was the result of escalation of rates. Subsequently the customers had issued another amendment order which had the result of lowering the price from the enhanced rate communicated under the first a...
Maya Devi Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-30-1996
Reported in: 1997(40)DRJ619
J.B. Goel, J.(1) By this order I shall dispose of petitioner's application under section 438 of the Code of Criminal procedure for anticipatory bail. (2) Briefly the facts are that an information of quarrel taking place at House No.18, Joga Bai was received at Police Post Okhla Head through Wireless message at 10.50 A.M. and another similar information was received at 10.55 A.M. These informations were recorded as Dd No.11 and Dd No.12 on 20.11.1995. The injured, now deceased, Smt. Urmilla was removed from the place of occurrence by Head Constable Mohinder Singh on Pcr and got her admitted in Safdarjang Hospital where Mlc No.74086 was recorded at about 11.00 Am or 12.00 Noon and the injured gave the history of the injuries as under: 'ALLEGED history of burns sustained when neighbours put her on fire on quarrel relating to some plot.'(3) As per Mlc she was having 60% deep burns and her general condition was critical. In the meantime, Head Constable Birla Singh from Police Post had also ...
Vikram R. Tikko Vs. Radhika Vikram Tikko
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-29-1996
Reported in: 1996VAD(Delhi)600; 65(1997)DLT735; 1997RLR27
Manmohan Sarin, J. (1) The applicant/husband is aggrieved by the order of this Court dated 30.10.1995, whereby Civil Revision No. 677/95 was allowed and the impugned order dated 14.8.1995 of the Additional District Judge, directing readmission of the minor son to the American Embassy School (for short 'AES') was set aside and the child was permitted to continue in the Vasant Valley School, to which he had been shifted by the mother/non-applicant. (2) The applicant has sought review of the order dated 30.10.1995, inter alias on the ground that this Court failed to hold an enquiry to satisfy itself as to the welfare of the minor and relied merely on the submissions made by the non-applicant. Further the Court erred in not considering that the applicant as father of the minor, being the legal guardian had a legal right to ensure that his son received education in the School to which he was originally admitted with the consent of the parents. It is urged that the order suffers from legal i...
Aparajita Traders Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-27-1996
Reported in: (1997)(92)ELT445TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed with reference to the Order-in-Original passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad dated 25-8-1989.2. The Learned Counsel stated that this order deals with two companies M/s. Aparajita Traders and M/s. Atita Traders and demands duty from them and imposes penalty on the ground mentioned therein.3. A Show cause notice issued for clubbing the clearances of three units namely, M/s. Atita Traders, M/s. Aparajita Traders and M/s.Ananta Chemicals & Plastic Pvt. Ltd. 4. In so far as M/s. Aparajita Traders are concerned, in the adjudication order, the Learned Collector has held, inter alia that they are liable to pay duty on the entire quantity of "Silicon Oil" on "Silicon Emulsion" irrespective of the fact as to whether it was shown as manufactured in their unit or others unit.5. However, at this stage, he does not propose to enter into that controversy as to whether such de facto clubbing was justified or not for the reasons which will be apparent as ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »