Delhi Court June 1997 Judgments

Bakeman'S Home Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector Of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)LC39Tri(Delhi)

1. These appeals are directed against Order Nos. 48-49/94-CAC, dated 12-4-1994 passed by the Collector of Customs-II, Bombay. The appellants are :- 1. M/s. Bakeman's Home Products Pvt. Ltd. - Appeal C/539/94-A (for short, BHPL) 3. M/s. Farm House Biscuits Co. Ltd. - Appeal C/540/94-A (for short, FBCL) 2. Each of the two concerns, FBCL and BHPL imported a consignment of certain machines etc. of USA origin through supplier M/s. Peters Machinery Coy USA (for short, PMC). The particulars of the imports are as follows :------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FBCL BHPL-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Bill of Entry 11-4-1990 9-2-1990Invoice 27-10-1989 27-10-1989Goods and (1) Cream Sandwiching 58,000 (1)Same 75,000FOB value in Machine, includingUS $ Cream bite export box (2) F & I 2,030 ----------- (1) Wrapping Machine 2,92,360 (1) Wrapping 2,99,860 with audo and Collating Machine (2) Spares 7,500 (2) F &am...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Sheela Foam Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(94)ELT385TriDel

1. The Department is aggrieved by the order-in-appeal No.377-DEC-CE/MRT/88 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi, setting aside the order dated 1-2-1985 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, NOIDA, has filed this appeal.2. Respondent, engaged in the manufacture of Polyurethene Foam bus seats, had filed price list in 1986 which had been approved on the basis of contract entered into between the respondent and the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. Dispute arose on account of two price lists in Part II No. 131/87 effective from 1-4-1987 and No. 181/87 effective from 30-4-1987 filed by the respondent. Under the first price list, respondent declared Rs. 59.00 per running metre as the price of bus seat (special) 381/406x91/61. It was also indicated that the price was as per the annual rate contract subject to deduction of actual freight the quantum of which was not indicated. In the second price list the price was shown as Rs. 59.20 per ru...

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Tata Tea Limited

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(93)ELT815TriDel

1. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of black tea as also in the manufacture of package tea. During the relevant period there was a Notification No. 217/86, dated 2-4-1986 under which tea manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production, in or in relation to the manufacture of final product specified in Column 3 of the table annexed to this notification was wholly exempt. There was another Notification No.193/86 which inter alia provides that package tea classifiable under chapter heading No. 0902 shall pay duty at a rate of Rs. 1.10 per kg., provided that if the duty payable on tea falling under sub-heading No.0902.19 (black tea) and used in the manufacture of said goods has already been paid and that no credit of such duty has been availed of under Rule 57A. The contention of the department was that the Notification No. 217/86 was not applicable to the assessee inasmuch as black tea is produced in a different un...

Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT130TriDel

1. The appellants in their classification list sought benefit of Entry at Serial No. 2 of the Notification No. 67/88-C.E. in respect of three products namely, Ice cream cups, Ash Trays and Flower Vases. The Assistant Collector permitted the concession for Ice cream cups but denied the same for other two products. The Collector (Appeals) having upheld this finding, the present appeal is before us.2. The appellants desired disposal of the appeal on merits citing the judgment in their own case in Appeal No. E/2780/89-D - Final Order No.407/97-D, dated 30-5-1997 [1997 (94) E.L.T. 337 (Tribunal)]. In this order the Tribunal had held that the benefit of the notification would be available to "Mugs"; On the observation that 'mugs' were akin to 'cups' specifically mentioned in the same notification. Shri G.D.Sharma, learned Departmental Representative submits that the judgment has no applicability here. He states that Flower Vases and Ash Trays cannot be covered under the specific list of Tab...

Dr. Indra Chand JaIn Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. These appeals have been filed by the assessee and the Department respectively against the orders of learned CIT(A), XII, New Delhi, dt.11th October, 1994, on various grounds. Since the appeals involve common grounds urged by the assessee and the Department the same are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. Ground Nos. 1 to 6 urged by the assessee relate to initiation of reassessment proceedings under s. 148 when notice was issued on 27th March, 1992, and the reasons for issuing the notice were recorded on 31st March, 1992, non-existence of valid reasons for formulation of belief for initiating reassessment proceedings under s. 148, the application of the provisions of ss. 147 and 148, as amended w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, and the invocation of the provisions of s. 292-B with reference to notice issued under s. 148 and the finding that reasons had been recorded by the AO before issue of notice.2.1 The brief facts in these cases are that the returns...

Banwari Lal Anand Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)62ITD301(Delhi)

1. This appeal by the assessee for the asst. yr. 1989-90 is directed against order of CIT(A) refusing to allow deduction of Rs. 12,500 claimed towards collection charges out of income assessed under 'house property'.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the assessee is owner of house No. B1/44, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi. The said house was leased out to a lessee on 4th May, 1988, at monthly rent of Rs. 20,000 on terms and conditions mentioned in the lease deed. The assessee also received advance rent of Rs. 4,90,000 at the time of letting out of the house. This lease and advance rent were procured through services of Praveen Sethi who was paid the sum of Rs. 12,500. The above amount was claimed as collection charges under s. 24(1)(viii) of IT Act. The AO denied the claim as no evidence was filed in support thereof.3. The assessee impugned above disallowance in appeal before the CIT(A) and reiterated the claim. The assessee also produced receipt in respect of sum paid to...

Dr. Indra Chand JaIn Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax. (Dy. Cit V ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (1997)59TTJ(Del)699

ORDERB. S. SALUJA, J.M. :These appeals have been filed by the assessed and the Department respectively against the orders of learned CIT(A), XII, New Delhi, dt. 11th October, 1994, on various grounds. Since the appeals involve common grounds urged by the assessed and the Department the same are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.ITA Nos. 7028 & 7029 (Del) 942. Ground Nos. 1 to 6 urged by the assessed relate to initiation of reassessment proceedings under s. 148 when notice was issued on 27th March, 1992, and the reasons for issuing the notice were recorded on 31st March, 1992, non-existence of valid reasons for formulation of belief for initiating reassessment proceedings under s. 148, the application of the provisions of ss. 147 and 148, as amended w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, and the invocation of the provisions of s. 292-B with reference to notice issued under s. 148 and the finding that reasons had been recorded by the AO before issue of notice.2.1 ...

Collector of Customs Vs. Sanghvi Swiss Refills Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)LC53Tri(Delhi)

1. In all these appeals common question of law and facts are involved, hence they are all taken up together for disposal as per law.2. The question that arises in these appeals is as to the correct classification of the goods "Stainless Steel Balls of 1.00 MM" in the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Sanghvi Swiss Refills Pvt. Ltd. 3. The Revenue is aggrieved with the acceptance of classification of the item under Tariff Heading 98.03/90 and granting the concessional benefit of Notification No. 234/82-C.E., dated 1-11-1982 and Notification No. 104/82, dated 28-2-1982.Chandra. Industries v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, the Collector was adopted the classification under sub-heading 7333.40(2) as an articles of stainless steel and did not accept the contention that the goods are required to be treated as parts of ball pens for classification under Heading 98.03/09. He has noticed that the balls are admittedly made of stainless steel which is a base metal. The articles of base meta...

Collector of Customs Vs. Bangalore Surgicals

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)LC58Tri(Delhi)

1. These are revenue appeals along with cross appeals are against the order-in-appeal passed by Collector (Appeals), Madras. As the question involved in the appeals are same, they have taken up together for disposal as per law. The importer had imported intravenous cannulae with tubing for long term use and sought benefit of Notification 208/81-Cus. The Collector held that they are entitled to benefit of notification and has also observed that the lower authorities have not given any specific findings as to why the goods in question cannot be considered as intravenous cannulae with tubing for longer terms use. In this regard, he has also relied in his earlier ruling decided by order in appeal C3/461 and 462/90 and also C3/952, 1211, 1091 and 951/90 in respect of appeals filed by M/s. Bharathi Surgicals, Shah Trading Corpn., and South India Surgical Co. Ltd. wherein he has held the CEGAT's decision. It is contended in this appeal by the Revenue that the importer had sought clearance of...

Collector of Customs Vs. Shriram Refrigeration Ind. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT666TriDel

1. This revenue appeal is directed against order-in-appeal dated 19-7-1990 of Collector of Customs (Appeals). The respondents imported a consignment of Piston Rings for Refrigeration Compressor and cleared the same on payment of Customs duty at the rate of 100% + 40% CVD under Customs Tariff Heading 8414.90/8414.30. Subsequent to clearance of the impugned goods the respondents filed a refund claim claiming exemption of basic duty under Notification 153/86, dated 1-3-1986 and auxiliary duty under Notification 313/86, dated 13-5-1986. The claim was rejected on the ground that the condition specified under Notification in regard to specification under different tariff headings were not satisfied.Collector (Appeals) however, held that the goods have been specified by description in the notification. The fact that the heading or sub-heading under which gas compressors, of which the impugned goods are parts, are classifiable in question, is not material, since Notification No. 153/86 grants...