Delhi Court November 1997 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.
Liberty Enterprises Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT228TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Additional Collector denying the benefit of duty exemption entitlement certificate on zip fasteners and artificial fur of different sizes to be fitted in shoe uppers on the ground that the sizes of the zip fasteners imported and for use in the shoe uppers was different and that the area of the artificial fur was not indicated.2. The facts in brief of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the export of shoe uppers under the duty exemption entitlement certificate scheme. They imported zip fasteners of various sizes to be fitted in the shoe uppers which they exported. The Department alleged that since the sizes of zip fasteners which were fitted in shoe uppers were different, from those now imported therefore, such zip fasteners were not eligible for duty free import under the DEEC scheme. In the case of artificial fur the Department alleged that in certain cases the area of the fur was not indicated and, therefore, the Department d...
Poona Rolling Mills Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT475TriDel
1. The appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-original dated 4th April, 1988 passed by the Collector, Central Excise, Pune. In the impugned order, the Collector, Central Excise held that the appellants are not eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 208/83-Cp., dated 1-8-1983 and confirmed the demand.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Round bars.The officers of the respondent visited the factory of the appellants on 11-3-1987 and found that the appellants are manufacturing M.S. Round bars from the scraps and plates and they were clearing the bars without payment of duty. A show cause notice was issued and in reply to the show cause notice, the appellants submitted that the material used for manufacture of final product is scrap and the appellants are purchasing scrap from the market being re-roll-able scrap and the scrap consists of cut pieces of bars, plates, angles etc. and they claimed the benefit of Notification No. 208/83-C.E., dated 1-8...
Modi Cement Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT230TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-original dated 8-6-1994 passed by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Raipur, confirming a duty demand of Rs. 27,09,267/- from the appellants apart from imposing a penalty of Rs. 50,000.00 on them.Appellants are manufacturers of cement. They were using HDPE bags made out of jute, paper and plastic strips for packing the cement. According to the appellants, they had filed a declaration on 28-3-1987 under Rule 57G mentioning, among other things, HDPE bags as one of the inputs. At that time there was a dispute about the classification of HDPE bags which came to be resolved by the Board's letter dated 25-9-1992 classifying HDPE bags under Chapter 39 and not under Chapter 63.According to the appellants, since they were receiving the said bags under Chapter 39 and not under Chapter 63 during the relevant period they could not take any Modvat credit in the RG 23A Part II or enter these bags in their RG 23A Part I, as Chapter 63 was not...
Siddho Mal Paper Conversion Co. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT484TriDel
1. This appeal arises from order-in-original passed by Collector of Central Excise confirming the duty amount of Rs. 14,98,714.00 under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11A proviso of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. He also imposed personal penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- under Rule 9(2) and 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for contravention of various Rules of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. The Collector had raised two issues before him which are as follows : (1) whether the mixture that is obtained from power operated mixing machine and used for printing wax paper and polythylene coated paper would be covered under the definition of printing ink classifiable under chapter sub-heading 3215 of Central Excise Tariff and if so the same would be dutiable? (2) as to whether the extended period can be invoked in terms of proviso to Section 11A of the Act for alleged 3. As regards the first issue, the Collector rejected the contention of the assessee ...
A. Wazir Shah Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT473TriDel
1. The appeal is against the order-in-appeal passed by Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant challenging the assessment order passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Air Cargo Unit in terms of which the latter had fixed the value of a Toyota Corolla Sedan CE 13001982 Model car imported by the appellant as 8,27,000 Japanese yen as against 1,43,101 Saudi Ryals declared by the appellant in the Bill of Entry filed by him for its clearance. In the process the assessable value suffered an increase from Rs. 1,64,700/- to Rs. 2,23,080/- for the car. In addition the car air conditioner was valued at Rs. 29,130/-.2. A letter has been received from Shri H.S. Mew, learned Counsel for the appellant requesting that the appeal may be decided on merits. It has been submitted that the method adopted for arriving at the value of the car on the basis of domestic price of a new car is not correct. The judgment of Calcutta High Court reported in 1993 ...
Modi Gbc Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT161TriDel
1. The appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal dated 22-7-1992 passed by the Collector of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.2. The appellants imported a consignment of component for laminating machines vide B/E dated 24-2-1991 and sought classification under Tariff Heading 84.40 read with Notification No. 155/86-Cus., dated 1-3-1986 as amended on the ground that the components are for the manufacture of laminating machines which are covered under the Tariff Heading 84.40. Adjudicating authority held that laminating machine is classifiable under Heading 8479.89 of Customs Tariff Act and further held that laminating machine has an individual function and the principal purpose is to laminate and not to manufacture book covers as claimed by the appellants. In respect of rubber rollers, the adjudicating authority held that these are to be classified under Chapter 40 of the Customs Tariff Act.3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that ...
Shital Kumar JaIn Vs. Delhi Financial Corporation and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: 1998IAD(Delhi)418; 3(1998)CLT657; 74(1998)DLT798
R.C. Lahoti, J. (1) Delhi Finance Corporation, the respondent No. 1 is a statutory body incorporated under the provisions of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 for providing financial assistance by way of granting loans to the entrepreneurs in various fields. One Shri Brahm Singh was sanctioned and disbursed a loan of Rs. 2.68 lacs for purchase of mini bus in the year 1990. He defaulted in the repayment of the dues to the Corporation. Recovery Certificate was issued against the borrower and his guarantors on 4.11.92. The hypothecated vehicle was taken into possession by the Corporation on 22.3.1993 in exercise of power conferred by Section 29 of the Act. (2) It appears that the said Brahm Singh was holding a point-to-point stage - carriage permit from the respondent No. 2 - the State Transport Authority of Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi for operating on the route - from Ito to Rajauri Garden, Delhi. (3) On 2.4.93, the said Brahm Singh addressed a letter to the...
Sahara India Airlines Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: 74(1998)DLT851; 1998(44)DRJ74
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. The petitioner company is a scheduled airlines operating its flights on various domestic sectors within the country. Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1989 provides for levy of tax on all passengers embarking on inland journey by air, called the Inland Air Traffic Tax (IATT for short). The said tax is to be collected by the airlines from the passengers and paid to the credit of the Central Government. Section 46 of the Act provides for the imposition of penalty on carrier or other person who fails to pay IATT to the credit of the Central Govt. The Central Govt. has in exercise of the powers conferred by the Act, framed the IATT Rules, 1989 (hereinafter, the Rules, for short). The Rules provide for depositing with the Central Govt. by the carrier the amount of tax collected by it within 30 days from the last date of the previous month. 2. For the month of January, 1995, the amount of tax collected by the petitioners and payable to the credit of the Central Govt.. was to t...
Lucky Exports Vs. Access Maritime Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)943; AIR1998Delhi252; 4(1997)CLT292; [1999]95CompCas869(Delhi); 69(1997)DLT537; 1997(43)DRJ623
D.K. Jain, J. (1) In this suit for perpetual injunction, seeking to restrain the first defendant-M/s. Access Maritime Corporation, Athens, Greece, from encashing the Bank guarantee No. 009100197, dated 15th July, 1997 in the sum of Us $ 52,500, issued by the second defendant Syndicate Bank, New Delhi, in favor of defendant No. 1, the plaintiff has filed this application under Order 39, Rules 1 & 2, Civil Procedure Code for grant of ex parte and interim injunction in its favor to the same effect. (2) The plaintiff is engaged in the trade and business of export of goods and also acts as a charter party, i.e. charterer, hiring vessels for transportation of goods from one port to another. Defendant No. 1 is engaged in the business of carriage by sea, owning vessels, which are given on hire for a particular voyage or for a particular period of time, under a contract termed as 'charter party agreement'. Defendant No. 2 Bank has furnished the Bank guarantee in question. (3) On 9th July, 1997,...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Maharishi Ved Vigyan Vishwa Vidya Peeth ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)150CTR(Del)194
R. C. LAHO T1, J.An application under sub-s. (1) of s. 256 of the IT Act, 1961, filed by the Revenue having been rejected by the Tribunal, the present application under sub-s. (2) thereof has been filed before the High Court. On the last date of hearing, we posed a question to both learned counsel for the parties: if there be no dispute on the facts and this Court forms an opinion that the question of law proposed by a party does arise as a question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal, is it necessary for this Court to perform the ritual of calling for the statement of the case and then answering the question? Cannot this Court straightaway answer the question and thereby avoid the time consuming process of performing its statutory obligation in two steps, while everybody is agreeable that the same result is capable of being achieved in one step onlyBoth learned counsel have addressed us on the question.2. Sec. 256 of the Act reads as under:'256. Statement of case to the High...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »