Delhi Court June 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.
D.S.M. Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-20-1997
Reported in: (1997)LC316Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 31-5-1989 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Madurai confirming demand to the extent of Rs. 1,61,389.59, directing seized goods to be treated as confiscated with redemption fine of Rs. 6,000/- and imposing penalty of Rs. 5,000/-.2. The appellant has two units, one at Tiruchirapally and the other at Karur. Railway brake blocks (iron casting) were being manufactured at the Karur factory, while certain other products were under manufacture at the Tiruchirapally factory/Appellant had not taken excise licence for Karur factory and brake blocks were being cleared without payment of duty. Excise officers visited the Karur factory on 2-9-1988 and finding the above state-of-affairs seized the manufactured goods available in the factory. Show cause notice dated 27-2-1989 was issued alleging that brake blocks fall under Heading 86.07 and duty was payable and proposing demand of duty in respect of clearances made without paymen...
Reliance Petrochemicals Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-20-1997
Reported in: (1997)(95)ELT274TriDel
1. The importer has challenged the rejection of their claim for the benefit of exemption Notification No. 320/76-Cus., dated 2-8-1976 in respect of "Pontoons" which had been assessed under Heading 89.07 of the Customs Tariff. There is no dispute as regards the classification in this appeal and the only question is with regard to the availability or otherwise for benefit of the Notification in respect of the said goods, imported by the appellants along with "used equipment, parts Accessories and Auxiliary Equipment of Dredger Amstel" as described in the Bill of Entries dated 28-4-1989 and 24-5-1989 filed by them. The Items 4 & 6 of the Bill of Entry, the goods were described as follows :- Both the items were assessed under 8907.90 with the benefit of Notification No. 320/76-Cus. The Assistant Collector of Surat, vide his notice dated 19-6-1989 issued a demand for Rs. 92,67,253 /- on the ground that the benefit of the said notification is not available to floating pipeline pontoons ...
Frank Educational Aids Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Fair Deal Marketing
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-20-1997
Reported in: 1997(42)DRJ231
S.N. Kapoor, J. (1) This order relates to is 5075/97 under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code seeking ad interim injunction restraining the defendants themselves, their servants, agents, shop-keepers, stockists, representatives & all other persons acting on their behalf, from manufacturing and selling, from printing, publishing, reproducing, circulating or offering for sale or advertising the game entitled, 'Funston' (Annex.B in the list of documents) and any other game under the infringing work of plaintiff or any other artistic work which has the substantial reproduction of the plaintiff copyright of the game having title 'Whatever Next' thereby infringing the copyright that vests in the said game.(2) The aforesaid application has been filed in suit No. 1187/97. According to the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff-company is a part of the Frank group of companies, the flagship company being M/s Frank Bros. & Co. (Publishers Ltd). The plaintiff prides its...
Tirupati Cigarettes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-19-1997
Reported in: (1997)LC80Tri(Delhi)
1. These appeals are directed against the concurrent findings of the Assistant Collector and the Collector (Appeals) leading to rejection of three refund claims put forward by the appellant. Appellant is absent in spite of notice of hearing, but has sent a request for disposal of the appeals on merits. We have heard Shri K. Srivastava, SDR and perused the papers.28-5-1987 29,41,855.30 1-1-1987 to 28-2-198730-12-1986 21,67,164.00 1-7-1986 to 30-9-198631-3-1987 33,16,680.00 1-10-1986 to 31-12-1986 3. At the relevant time, tariff rate of duty was Rs. 440.00 per 1000 cigarettes or Rs. 300.00 ad valorem plus Rs. 20.00 per 1000 cigarettes, whichever is higher.4. Appellant being entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 201/85 was availing benefit of the same. The Notification defined "sale price" as maximum price (exclusive of local taxes only) at which a package of cigarettes may be sold in accordance with the declaration made, in print, on such packages. This printed price was required ...
Precision Tooling System Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-19-1997
Reported in: (1997)(94)ELT375TriDel
1. Appellant is absent in spite of notice of hearing, but has sent a request for decision of the appeal on merits. We have heard Shri K.Srivastava, SDR and perused the papers.2. We are handicapped in deciding the appeal on account of the failure of the appellant to produce copies of relevant records such as show cause notices, contract, invoices and even the original order. We have only a copy of the appellate order and the memorandum of appeal.3. Appellant was manufacturing tools and toolings falling under erstwhile Tariff Item 68 and 51A respectively. The appeal memorandum states that at one stage appellant had filed a price list in respect of tools claiming certain deductions and the same was returned with the direction to delete discount claimed for. Obviously, this relates to goods falling under Tariff Item 51A. In regard to goods falling under Tariff Item 68, in respect of an earlier period, appellant availed benefit of Notification No. 120/75. After the Notification ceased to b...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Empire Indo Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-19-1997
Reported in: (1997)(94)ELT106TriDel
1. By the captioned appeal the Department has challenged the applicability of Notification Nos. 35/88 and 34/88, dated 21-12-1988 stating that since the goods of the assessee were classifiable under Chapter Heading 55.08, therefore, they were not entitled to the benefit of this Notification as they were classifying the goods under Chapter Heading 55.12. The facts of the case are that the appellants were manufacturing man-made fabrics. They claimed assessment of their product under Chapter Heading 55.12. The Asstt. Collector held that the goods were classifiable under Chapter Heading 55.08 and therefore the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 35/88.On appeal the ld. Collector (Appeals) accepted the contention of the assessee and held that the respondents herein were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 35/88. Against this order the Department has filed the present appeal. The short point for determination in this appeal is whether the goods being clai...
Raymond Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT562TriDel
1. Shri L.P. Asthana, the ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants, narrated the facts as follows : That the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of POY and Polyester Flat Yarn; that the appellant's product, viz. POY/Polyester flat yarn as well as inputs namely Triethyl Glycol, Alfa Alumina and Silicon compounds are specified items for purposes of taking Modvat credit under Rule 57A; that the appellants filed a declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, declaring that Triethyl Glycol, Alfa Alumina and Silicon compounds are inputs in the manufacture of the final product. The Department alleged that Triethyl Glycol, Alfa Alumina and Silicon compounds are not inputs and, therefore, disallowed Modvat credit taken in respect of these items and also imposed a personal penalty. The ld. Counsel submits that insofar as triethyl glycol is concerned, it is already covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of J.K. Synthetics Limited v.C.C.E. reported in 1996 (8...
Samex Trading House Inc. Vs. Collr. of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1997)LC655Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 19-10-1990 of Additional Collector (Customs).2. The appellants imported what they claimed to be Honey Brass Re-melt Scrap. The impugned goods were inspected by the Customs Officers, who found that goods are in the form of ingots, perhaps with some defects.The Customs Authorities held that the goods fall under CTH 7403.21 as copper zinc based alloy (Brass) and that benefit of OGL could not be extended to such goods. Hence, this appeal.3. Arguing for the appellants, the ld. Advocate submits that goods originally were in the form of scrap but were cast into ingots. These ingots were defective and did not conform to definition of ingots given under ISI, these could therefore be treated only as scrap. He pressed into service definition of re-melting scrap ingots given in HSN notes under 7402 and submits that such re-melting scrap ingots are also scrap.4. Ld. DR reiterates department's arguments and submits that goods have to be assessed in...
Rita Bottling Machines (Pvt.) Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1997)LC324Tri(Delhi)
1. Order-in-original dated 31-7-1989 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Madras is under challenge in this appeal. The order confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 6,28,241.76, imposing penalty of Rs. 60,000.00 and confiscating a machine seized from a buyer of the appellant, allowing redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 25,000.00. The order also imposed personal penalty on three employees who have not preferred an appeal. The appeal is only by the manufacturer and the order to be passed by us will relate only to the manufacturer.2. The dispute relates to the liability to pay duty demanded in respect of clearances made during the year 1987-88. The demand relates to 1988-89. Appellant was availing benefit of Notification No. 175/86.Benefit would be available only if the value of clearances during the preceding year did not exceed Rs. 1.5 crores. According to the appellant, the value of previous year's clearances was only Rs. 1,49,18,116.00. The Department found that the above amount di...
Gateway Papers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1997)(72)LC84Tri(Delhi)
1. This matter had been cause listed yesterday. When it was called, none appeared on behalf of the appellants and there was no report regarding compliance, if any with the conditions of the stay order dated 8.4.1985 in spite of notice. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on the ground of non-compliance with the statutory requirements of Section 35F and the order was pronounced and dictated in the open Court.Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta v. Dico Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. came before us, it came to our notice that Hon'ble Supreme Court had remanded that matter to the Tribunal and Hon'ble Supreme Court's order covered not merely the appeal with reference to the Tribunal's order in the case of Dico Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. but also the one with reference to the order in respect of M/s Gateway Papers Pvt. Ltd. As Hon'ble Supreme Court's order referred to two appeals filed by the Department against the common order of the Tribunal in respect of the aforesaid two part...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »