Delhi Court August 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.
Sail Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-1997
Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT694TriDel
1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), the issue for our consideration is whether the goods imported viz. Relays 230 Volts. D.C. upto 5 Amperes were eligible for concessional rate of basic customs duty under Notification No..188/87-Cus., dated 29-4-1987 and of auxiliary duty under Notification No. 209/87-Cus., dated 12-5-1987. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) had taken a view that the benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 188/87-Cus. was available only to the goods used in the Electronic Industry while the goods imported were actually meant for industrial control for control of different electrical operation in the Skelp Mill in the Plant of the appellants.2. Shri K.A. Siddiqui, Manager (Finance) appearing for the appellants submitted that the High Powered Committee on disputes in their Meeting held on 11-7-1997 had already allowed the appellants to pursue their appeal in the Tribunal. He referred to the SI. No. 14 of the SUBJE...
Trilok Chand Tyagi Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)109; 68(1997)DLT544; 1997(42)DRJ732
Devinder Gupta, J. (1) The Appellant is aggrieved by dismissal of his Cw No. 2277 of 1983 by the learned Single Judge on 16.11.1984. The Appellant had challenged the order of rejection of his two applications for allotment of an alternative plot under the Scheme of `Large Scale Acquisition, Development and Disposal of Land in Delhi'.(2) The facts as noticed in the impugned order are that on acquisition of the Appellant's property, an application was made by him under the Scheme on or about 09.08.1979, which was dealt with by the Delhi Administration in the Land and Building Department. The said Department through its letter dated 07.09.1979 called upon the Land Acquisition Collector to verify the particulars of the land acquired and to furnish the required information to enable the Land and Building Department to take further action. Through letter dated 15.04.1982, the Collector, Land Acquisition called for a copy of the original application of the Appellant so that the particulars co...
Sohan Lal Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-1997
Reported in: 68(1997)DLT550; 1997(42)DRJ735
Devinder Gupta, J. (1) The decision of the learned Single Judge dated 29.11.1984 partly dismissing the Appellant's writ petition No.283 of 1983 is under challenge in this appeal.(2) The Appellant in his writ petition had sought quashing of an order dated 26.10.1982 passed by the Delhi Administration cancelling the allotment of plot No. A-2/59, Paschimpuri, West Zone, New Delhi, on the ground that the Appellant had concealed that he had applied earlier for alternative plot of land under the Scheme 'Large Scale Acquisition, Development and Disposal of Land in Delhi' and the order dated 17.12.1982 passed by the Delhi Development Authority forfeiting the premium of Rs. 13,382.00 .(3) The Appellant on 13.12.1971 filed an application for allotment of an alternative plot in lieu of his acquired land. After necessary enquiry, a recommendation was made by the Delhi Administration, (Land & Building Department) in its letter dated 26.05.1979 to the Delhi Development Authority for allotment of 250...
Samrat International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)LC566Tri(Delhi)
1. The brief facts necessary for a proper understanding of the case are summed up as under : The appellants imported cold rolled stainless steel strips and sought clearance duty free under the DEEC Scheme in accordance with the provisions of Notification 116/88-Cus. against two Import Advance Licences, one dated 10-3-1987 and the other dated 30-3-1987, both valid till 30-9-1988. A query memo was issued by the Customs authorities asking for the complete itinerary of the Vessel 'Frontier Wind' (the ship on which the goods arrived) for the period 1-9-1988 to 1-11-1988 and it was seen from the schedule of the said vessel that it arrived in Kobe Port, Japan on 2-10-1988 and departed from that Port on 5-10-1988.Since the appellants produced,a copy of Bill of lading showing that the goods were loaded on 30-9-1988 whereas the ship arrived at Kobe Port on 2-10-1988, the department was of the view that the Bill of lading did not reflect the correct date of loading of the goods. Since by the tim...
Collector of Customs Vs. Elcaps Capacitors Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT88TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue being aggrieved with the order-in-appeal dated 19-12-1991 passed by the Collector, Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. The matter relates to the benefit of exemption Notification No.315/83-Cus., dated 26-11-1983 to the spare parts imported by the respondents M/s. Elcaps Capacitors Ltd. The respondents had imported various items of machinery for the initial setting up of industrial unit for the manufacture of electronic items in their plant in the State of Madhya Pradesh. They had registered themselves for the benefit of assessment under Heading No. 98.01 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, (sic). The imports were affected and the benefit of assessment under Heading No. 98.01 of the Tariff read with Notification No. 315/83-Cus., dated 26-11-1983 as amended was extended. At the time of final tally, the Revenue raised objection that the benefit of Notification No. 315/83-Cus. was not available to the spare parts and while such spare parts were el...
Deioners Speciality Chemicals Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT659TriDel
1. The appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi upholding the decision of Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi demanding Central Excise duty of Rs. 2,77,090/- consequent to disallowing of Modvat credit taken by the appellant. Such disallowance was on the ground that the appellant being entitled to the benefit of full exemption of duty under Notification No. 1 /93, dated 28-2-1993, Rule 57C of Central Excise Rules got attracted and credit hence became inadmissible.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant, Ms. Ginni Bedi placed reliance upon the Tribunal decision in Everest Convertors v. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta-II [1995 (80) E.L.T. 91 (Tribunal)] wherein it was held that Rule 57C of Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not applicable in such a case and that a Notification having character of exemption cannot be forced upon an assessee if it does not suit him. It was further held therein that if an as...
Collector Of Central Excise Vs. Dowell'S Electro Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)(94)ELT674TriDel
1. The respondents are manufacturers of Cable terminals, Wire pins, In-line connectors, Ferrules and snap-on terminals for which they had filed classification list; classifying the above products under sub-heading 8548.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 claiming concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No.160/86-C.E. As the department was of the view that the products Cable terminals and sockets were correctly classifiable under Heading 8536.90, a show cause notice proposing such classification and proposing recovery of differential duty since according to the department, goods attracted duty at the rate of 20% ad valorem, was issued.2. The notice was adjudicated by the Assistant Collector who confirmed classification under Heading 8536.90 and confirmed a demand of Rs. 13,81,406.50 P for the period from July, 1987 to December, 1987. The Collector (Appeals) however, relying upon his earlier order in the case of the same appellants, extended the benefit ...
J.K. Foam Products Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)(94)ELT497TriDel
1. The appellants M/s. J.K. Foam Products filed these two appeals against the order-in-original No. 100/CE/ KNP/92, dated 24-4-1992 and against the order-in-appeal No. 101/CE/ KNP/92, dated 23-4-1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Allahabad. The appellants filed classification for their products bus seats/scooter seats and scooter back seats under T.I. 4008.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The classification was approved by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise. Thereafter show cause notices were issued stating therein that the product of the appellants are not classifiable under chapter sub-heading 4008.90 but are more appropriately classifiable under chapter subheading 9401 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.After adjudication, the Assistant Collector held that bus seats manufactured by the appellants are properly classifiable under Heading 9401 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and the seats meant for two wheelers are to be classifiable und...
Collector of Customs Vs. Bharati Surgical Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT340TriDel
1. All the appeals involve a common question of law hence these appeals are taken up together for final disposal.2. Collector, Customs (Appeals) in the impugned order held that "Scalp Vein Sets" imported by the respondents are "Intravenous Canulae & Tubing for long term use", hence they are entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 208/81-Cus., dated 22-9-1981.3. The Revenue filed these appeals on the ground that "Scalp Vein Sets" imported by the respondent are to be assessed as infusion sets under Customs Tariff Heading No. 9018.32.4. Heard Shri S.N. Ojha, JDR on behalf of the appellant. The respondents made a written request for adjournment. We find that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the Trio Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI reported in 1992 (57) E.L.T.249, therefore, the request for adjournment is declined.5. In this case, the respondents made import of "Scalp Vein Sets" and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 208/81-Cus., dated ...
Amrit Bottlers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: (1998)(97)ELT490TriDel
1. The appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 22-3-1996 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) upholding the decision of the Assistant Collector, Faizabad disallowing Modvat credit in respect of the glass bottles used by the appellants for filling their final product, aerated waters. The adverse decision was taken on the ground that cost of such glass bottle which are packaging materials was not included by them in their price which formed the basis of assessment of duty.2. Learned Consultant, Shri K.L. Rekhi, appearing on behalf of the appellants stated that out of total demand of Rs. 1,87,685/-, a sum of Rs. 1,19,448/- related to the period which was beyond six months prior to the date of the show cause notice and was hence barred by limitation since the elements of suppression, wilful mis-statement, etc. were totally absent. The notice was issued on 26-9-1994 whereas the credits in question had been taken in the month of March, 1994, the last of which ...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »