Delhi Court March 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.
Amitabh Bachhan Corporation Ltd. Vs. Om Pal Singh Hoon
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: 1996(37)DRJ352
M. Jagannadha Rao, C.J.(1) These appeals arise out of the Judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 7.3.1996 in C.W.P. No. 383 of 1996. Lpa 39/96 is preferred by M/s Amitabh Bachan Corporation Ltd. Lpa 43/96 is filed by M/s Bobby Art International, which is the sole distributor of the film 'Bandit Queen' for the Delhi and U.P. region. L.P.A. 51/96 is preferred by M/s Kaleidoscope (India) Pvt. Ltd and another. M/s Kaleidoscope is the, producer of the film. By this Judgment we propose to dispose of all the three appeals before us.(2) In the writ petition the main question is whether the certificate granted by the Censor Board, as modified by the Appellate Tribunal, conforms to the basic principles of law. The film was initially examined by the Examining Committee which recommended about 10 cuts and a general cut of deletion of expletives throughout the film. On 19.7.1995 the Revising Committee examined the film and recommended grant of 'A' certificate to the film subject to certain cuts...
John Bamidele Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: 1996CriLJ3649; 1996(37)DRJ301
Usha Mehra, J. (1) The appellant, a Nigerian citizen was apprehended on 19th February,1989 while coming towards Chanakya Hotel. As per prosecution story, a secret information was received by SI.Harbans Lal that appellant would be coming towards Chanakya Hotel. He would be having smack in his possession. On this information being received, S.I. Harbans Lal (Public Witness -7) Investigating Officer (in short 1.0.) of this Case organized a raiding party comprising ofA.C.P' S.H.O., Sub Inspector and two public witnesses namely Surender Kumar, owner of Chanakya Hotel and Kuldeep Grover, Manager of the said Hotel. At the time of appellant's apprehension he was having a bag in his hand. He was asked as to what that bag contained. After making this enquiry the Acp introduced himself to the appellant and told him that the appellant and his bag has to be searched. A.C.P. gave option to the appellant to be searched before the Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. However, the appellant declined the off...
Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc. and ors. Vs. Assistant Commiss ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: (1998)60TTJ(Del)373
ORDERSMT MOKSH MAHAJAN, A.M. :These appeals filed by different assessees are consolidated as facts and issues are common. For the sake of convenience they are disposed of by a single order. While discussing the facts however the reference would be made to a particular assessed Mr. J. Sillard and the decision as taken in the aforesaid case would be applicable to all the cases, the facts of which are identical with those of Mr. J. Sillard.2. The assessed is a non-resident individual employed with Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc. (hereinafter called SFID). The latter is a company registered in Liberia. It entered into a contract with Oil & Natural Gas Commission (hereinafter called ONGC) for drilling operations in offshore areas of India within the exclusive economic zone. As per the terms of the agreement with the Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc. the assessed was assigned to work in India in a so-called 'Computer basis'. The agreement starting from November, 1985, was for t...
Dujodwala Resins Terpenes Ltd. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1997)(93)ELT451TriDel
1. The captioned appeal is filed against the order-in-appeal dated 5-9-1994 passed by the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) upheld the order of Asstt. Collector. The Asstt. Collector held that Movat credit is not admissible on the portion of input, the corresponding final product of which are cleared under exemption. The Asstt. Collector confirmed the demand for Rs. 13,390.11.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of pine oil. They procured certain inputs and took Modvat credit on those inputs. A part of pine oil manufactured by the appellants was cleared by them in terms of notification No.191/87-C.E., dated 4-8-1987 following the Chapter X procedure. The Department alleged that pine oil was cleared by the appellants without payment of duty in terms of exemption Notification No. 191/87- C.E., dated 4-8-1987 and therefore, Modvat credit of duty on that portion of input which was used in the manufacture of this quantity of ...
Apex Traders Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT459TriDel
1. These ten appeals are directed against common Order-in-Original No.71 /Commissioner/95, dated 18-12-1995.2. The issue relates to admissibility or otherwise of exemption under Notification No. 175/86 as amended. Commissioner has held that the appellants are not entitled to this exemption since the brand name owners that is to say M/s. AMPL, LFFL themselves were not eligible to avail this exemption. The ownership of these brand names remained with PEL only which was not eligible to avail exemption. He also held that during the material time appellants, M/s. Apex Traders factory was being run as a dummy unit of the neighbouring unit of Coolade Beverages Ltd. and by clubbing the clearances of both Apex and Coolade, the turnover exceeded the SSI ceiling limit of Rs. 2 crores and therefore, Apex Traders became ineligible to avail SSI exemption. Hence, these appeals. Alongwith the appeals the appellants have also filed separate stay applications seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty amoun...
Deluxe Electrical Industries Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1997)(93)ELT376TriDel
1. The appellants herein are availing of Modvat credit on the various inputs for their final product. The Scheme required under Rule 57G of Central Excise Rules that the manufacturer intending to take credit of duty paid on inputs should file a declaration with the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise having jurisdiction indicating the description of the final product manufactured and the inputs intended to be used therein. Manufacturer who has filed such a declaration may after obtaining the acknowledgement thereof take credit of duty paid on the inputs received by him. The issue in this case relates to the eligibility for Modvat credit in respect of copper wires falling under Sub-heading 7408.19. The appellants herein filed the declaration on 19-7-1988 saying they manufacture cables falling under Chapter 85 of Central Excise Tariff Act under sub-heading 8544.00. They sought Modvat Credit on the inputs which among others indicated copper and they declared copper wire thicker than...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. G.T.C. Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1996)(86)ELT431TriDel
1. M/s. G.T.C. Industries Ltd. (for short, the assessee) manufactures cigarettes in its factories at Bombay, Baroda, Hyderabad and Jammu. The dispute in these appeals relates to the assessable value of and excise duty payable on cigarettes cleared from these factories during the period 1-7-1978 and 30-6-1980 and from the factories at Bombay and Baroda during the period 1978-1979 to 1982-1983. Duty was ad valorem during the entire period. The goods were being cleared (there is a dispute if provisionally or otherwise) on payment of duty. The dispute in these appeals relates to short levy demand made under three show cause notices and the common final order passed thereon.2. The particulars of three notices and the confirmation thereof are as follows:------------------------------------------------------------------- I Show cause notice II S.C.N. III S.C.N.-------------------------------------------------------------------Date 26-8-1983 19-4-1984 2-9-1985---------------------------------...
General Engineering Works Vs. Commr. of Central Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1996)(86)ELT314TriDel
1. This appeal pertains to the denial of modvat credit amounting to Rs. 11423.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of steel wire and Auto Tyre Bead Wire. For manufacture of these two items, they procured from the market, on payment of duty, wire rods and wire. In the instant case, the appellants cleared steel wire for Auto Tyre Beads under gate pass No.013, dated 5-4-1993. The goods got wet in transit. The goods were cleared for transport to Chandigarh; that on the way, the truck broke down and their goods spoiled [and] they had to receive back all the goods. On receiving the goods, the appellants took modvat credit of duty. The Department alleged that modvat credit of duty was not available to the appellants on the ground that the appellants had not intimated to the Department, the receipt of duty-paid goods back to their factory.3. Shri R.C. Gupta, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that the items receive...
Asia Tobacco Company Ltd. Vs. Director General of Anti-evasion
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT389TriDel
1. These six applications arise with reference to a batch of appeals filed by some of the parties affected by the impugned common order. The common order gives rise to yet another batch of appeals filed either by ITC or by some of its Directors. The applications filed in those appeals under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 have been disposed of already. Of the appeals now before us, all the appeals, except one, are filed by manufacturers of cigarettes as job workers of ITC. Law regards these job workers as manufacturers of cigarettes and they are required to pay excise duty at the time of clearance of cigarettes. We are told that these job workers, under contract with ITC, get only conversion charges at the rate of Rs. 2.75 per 1000 cigarettes. In other words, actually excise duty is paid by ITC on their behalf. The period in question in these appeals is 1983 to 1987. During this period, the job workers were filing declarations regarding prices and other factors. ...
Taxation Owners Sarla Bhargava Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1996)59ITD331(Delhi)
1. The assessee is in appeal against the order of CIT(A) XVI, New Delhi dated 3-6-1991 mainly on the ground of disallowance of exemption under section 11 of the I.T. Act by invoking the provisions of section 13(1)(bb) and applicability of the rate of tax.2. The brief facts in this case are that the assessee filed the first return of income on 30-6-1983 in Form No. 2 declaring an income of Rs. 2,57,160. A revised return was filed on 27-3-1985 in Form No. 2 declaring nil income. A further revised return of income was filed on 27-4-1985 in Form No. 3-A showing nil income and claiming exemption under section 11 of the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 143(2) which was complied with by the assessee.The Assessing Officer observed that the trust came into being vide Trust Deed dated 23-11-1982 executed by Shri O.C. Tandon. He further observed that the said trust deed was executed on the basis of the will of late Shri S.R. Bhargava on 18-5-1976, whereby the e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »