Delhi Court December 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.
Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Angora Wool Combers Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-26-1997
Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT317TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed by the department against the Order-in-Appeal dated 17-12-1990 passed by the Collector (Appeals).2. Heard Shri S. Kannan, learned JDR for the Revenue and Shri T.R.Tandon, learned Consultant, for the respondents.3. The respondent has filed a refund claim on the ground that scoured wool is nothing but wool from which the grease has been removed almost entirely by washing with hot water and soap or other detergents or with alkaline solutions. The refund claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector as per his Order No. 12/Refd/84 dated 16-5-1984 on the ground that the party has voluntarily declared scoured wool under Tariff Item 68 and they did not choose to contest the approval of classification list. He also observed that moreover, after scouring of wool, a new product 'scoured wool' comes into existence having different character and use. Aggrieved by the said order the party filed an appeal to the Collector (Appeals). The Collector as per his impugned order...
S.D. Trading Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-26-1997
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT433TriDel
1. Order dated 16-1-1996 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Cochin determining value of a consignment as Rs. 11,49,140/- under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 (for short, the Rules), confiscating goods under Section lll(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short, the Act) read with Section 3(3) of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, with option to redeem on payment of fine of Rs. 10 lacs and imposing penalty of Rs. 1 lac under Section 112(a) of the Act is under challenge in this appeal.2. Appellant imported a consignment of second hand photocopier machines of Japanese origin from a supplier in Singapore and presented Bill of Entry dated 9-11-1995 along with Invoice and other documents. The consignment was declared as consisting of 88 photocopying machines of various types and grades including 5 coloured machines of the total CIF value of Singapore $ 43,070 equal to Rs. 10,86,656/-. Examination showed that of ...
Barmalt (India) Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-26-1997
Reported in: (1998)(75)LC108Tri(Delhi)
1. The disputed appeal relates to the question whether the manufacturer who has collected estimated transit insurance charges from the buyers, liable to pay Central Excise duty on the difference between the charges collected and the amount actually paid as insurance charges The Tribunal has held that the differential amount cannot be added to the assessable value. See, Final Order No. 93/97, dated 17.10.1997 in appeal E/2025/90-A. The lower authorities were in error in taking the contrary view. Hence we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal....
Bhartia Cutler Hammer Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-26-1997
Reported in: (1998)(75)LC450Tri(Delhi)
1. Appellant, engaged in manufacture of electrical control and switch gears filed price-lists from time to time and cleared goods on payment of appropriate duty on the approved prices. In respect of a contract, appellant filed a price-list in Part II and the same was approved and goods were cleared on payment of appropriate duty. The agreement between the appellant and the buyer contained an escalation Clause and a clause for payment of liquidated damages. It appears that on account of delay in supply and in conformity with Clause 9, appellant deducted liquidated damages at the stipulated rate from the prices shown in the invoice and paid central excise duty on the balance amounts. In respect of such payments made during the period from February 1988 to May 1988, appellant filed refund claim of the duty referable to the amount of liquidated damages deducted from the price. The Asstt. Collector held that the deduction of liquidated damages did not amount to variation or reduction of pr...
Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Malerkotla Steel and Alloys (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-26-1997
Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT697TriDel
1. When the matter was called, none appeared for the respondents.However, Shri Sanjiv Srivastava, learned JDR is present for the appellant. Since the issue in these appeals is short one and is also covered by the decisions of this Tribunal, it was decided to decide the issue on merits instead of dismissing the appeals for non-appearance.2. Shri Sanjiv Srivastava, learned JDR submits that the Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh had issued a Trade Notice No. 20/93-C.E., dated 29-10-1993. He submits that this Trade Notice set out a procedure to be followed by ingot manufacturers. He submits that this Trade Notice required submission of D-3 intimation on receipt of melting scrap and melting the same in the presence of jurisdictional Superintendent. He submits that the trade notices are issued under Rule 233 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and, therefore, they are part of the statute. The ld. JDR submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Aluminium Company Limited v...
Transpeck Industry Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT1095TriDel
1. Arguing for the appellants the ld. Advocate submitted that during the period 1985-86 to July, 1988, they used to file two types of Price Lists; (a) Part [I] Price List in respect of goods sold to consumers at their factory gate at Baroda; (b) Part [VII] Price List in respect of goods stock transferred to consignment agents in various regions such as Amritsar, Patna, Bombay, Bangalore and sold through such agents.1.2 The prices in Part [VII] were less than those in Part [I] list.This was because quantity sold by consignment agents was larger than those purchased by the consumers at their factory. The factory gate sales were only Rs. 5,000/-.1.3 Prices mentioned in Part [VII] price list were those which the appellants expected to fetch on sale by the consignment agent. The Part [VII] price list also contained an undertaking that if the price ultimately realised by sale by the consignment agent was more than the declared, the appellants would pay duty on the difference, The appellants...
Krisons Electronic Systems Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)(101)ELT352TriDel
1. The appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Ghaziabad upholding the Order-in-Original of the Assistant Commissioner, Division-I, Noida rejecting there refund claim for a sum of Rs. 1,74,001/-. This amount had been claimed by the appellant in respect of countervailing duty (additional duty of Customs) paid on certain component parts imported by them which had been used in the manufacture of coloured T.V. sets exported by them.They had originally claimed drawback of duty on such exports but what was sanctioned to them as drawback was only on account of the Customs duty paid on the imported goods and the Central Excise duty paid on the indigenously procured items. Their contention before the authorities below was that the element of countervailing duty paid on the imported goods had not been included in the drawback rates. They had taken up the matter with the Ministry of Finance and got a reply from them that in fixing the drawback rates t...
Miracle Foil (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT513TriDel
1. The appeal challenges the Order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur confirming duty demand of Rs. 2,16,410/- and imposing penalty of Rs. 25,000/-. The said finding had been reached by the adjudicating authority on the ground that the appellant had manufactured certain quantity of final product polythylene film which had not been accounted for in the statutory records and on which appropriate duty had not been paid.2. Arguing the case of the appellant Ms. Amrita Mitra submitted that the entire case of the department hinged on the contents of private non-statutory note book which was maintained by the concerned worker who was in charge of the extruding machine where the input materials both HDPE and LDPE granules were being fed. She raised a plea that the show cause notice did not contain any worksheet to indicate how the figure of nearly 11,000 kgs. of the final product alleged to have been clandestinely manufactured and cleared without payment of duty had been arri...
George Kutty Kuncheria Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1997
Reported in: 1998IIAD(Delhi)842; 1998CriLJ1871; 71(1998)DLT726; 1998(44)DRJ627
ORDERAnil Dev Singh, J. 1. This is a habeas corpus petition for the release of the petitioner from detention. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this petition are as follows:. 2. The petitioner who is an Indian citizen was working in the Chase Manhattan Bank (for short 'the Bank'), New York (United States of America) from the year 1982 to 1985. He resigned his job and returned to India in January, 1986. On 20th September, 1988, the Government of United States of America through its Embassy in New Delhi sent a letter of request to the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India for extradition of the petitioner under Section 4 of the Extradition Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act') to United States of America on the ground that the petitioner embezzled $ 1.5 million out of the funds of the Bank while he was working for it and caused the funds to be transferred by Wire out of the United States of America to the United Arab Emirates where he claimed the alleged ill gotton gains. A w...
Midland Rubber and Produce Co. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1997
Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT187TriDel
1. The appellants desire disposal on merits which we proceed to do after hearing Shri R.S. Sangia, ld. JDR.2. The Central Excise officers intercepted a lorry carrying tea waste which was certified to be duly denatured by the jurisdictional Superintendent on the face of the accompanied gate pass. Physical examination of the consignment did not show presence of denaturing agents such as lime or cowdung. However, the accompanying bill mentioned denaturing with lime. The samples of the goods were drawn.The Chemical Examiner did not detect presence of lime or cowdung. A clear statement was given by Shri Eliezer, Factory Officer to the effect that although on record the tea waste was denatured, the jurisdictional Superintendent had permitted clearance without such denaturing. On the evidence in the form of statement and test report of the samples, a show cause notice was issued demanding Central Excise duty on the goods. The Astt. Collector confirmed the demand for duty and CESS and also im...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »