Delhi Court September 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.
Goetze India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT323TriDel
1. By the present appeal, the appellants have assailed the order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) held that no Modvat credit will be admissible on Grinding Wheels, Honing Stones/Sticks and Graphite Crucibles. Being aggrieved by this order, the Appellants have come up in appeal before us.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Pistons, Piston Rings and Cylinder liners, LMCs, etc. They are availing the benefit of duty paid on inputs under the Modvat scheme. The Department alleged that Modvat credit of duty was not available on 7 items set out in the Order-in-Appeal.Examining the admissibility item-wise, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed Modvat credit on 3 items as indicated in the preceding paragraph.2. Shri P.S. Bedi, the ld. Consultant appearing for the Appellants, submits that Grinding Wheel is made out of Aluminium Oxide/Silicon Carbide greaius and bound in a circular form having a bore a...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Johnson and Johnson Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT189TriDel
1. The department has filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 26-8-1989 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay reversing the Order-in-Appeal dated 24-11-1988 passed by the Assistant Collector, Bombay-III.2. Respondent, engaged in the manufacture of excisable products filed certain price lists claiming deduction on various counts including average freight. These price lists were approved provisionally. Goods were being cleared on payment of appropriate duty on this basis. After the judgment dated 7-10-1983 of the Supreme Court in the Bombay Tyres Intt. case and the clarificatory order dated 14-11-1983, respondent filed price list effective from 1-1-1987 claiming of deductions allowed in the Bombay Tyres Intt. case including deduction for average freight and transit insurance, on the basis of the actuals of preceding account year as reflected in the balance sheet for that year and provisional approval was granted. Respondent submitted certificates from C...
Bhagat Construction Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: [1998]232ITR722(Delhi)
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. By this application under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, the assessed seeks a mandamus commanding the Tribunal to draw up a statement of case and refer the following questions of law for the opinion of the High Court arising out of the order of the Tribunal relevant to the asst. yr. 1985-86 : '1. Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that a perusal of the agreement makes, it abundantly clear that the assessed has not manufactured or supplied any intermediary products in the execution of civil engineering works and other works and whether in arriving at its finding the Tribunal has misread the evidence and the agreement between the assessed and the Bokaro steel unit 2. Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that all the works undertaken by the assessed under the agreement with Bokaro Steel, do not involve the activity of manufacturing any article or thing 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessed is not engaged in the activity of manufacturi...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bry Air (India) (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: [1998]232ITR314(Delhi)
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. This petition under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue seeks a mandamus to the Tribunal for drawing up a statement of case and referring the following question for the opinion of the High Court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in directing the AO to allow deduction under s. 80-I in respect of income from engineering and design charges and also other income ?' 2. It is not disputed that the assessee-respondent is an 'industrial undertaking' engaged in the manufacturing activity of de-humidifiers. During the course of such activity, the assessee-respondent has made earnings on account of engineering designing fee. However, it is not disputed that the assessed is not rendering professional advice to others and thereby earning the said fee. The engineering designing activity is related only to the articles manufactured and produced by the assessed itself. In our opinion, the view taken by th...
Forcast Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ARBLR210(Delhi); 71(1998)DLT201
K.S. Gupta, J. (1) Submission advanced by Mr. C.R. Somasekharan appearing for the respondents was that the amount of the Bank guarantee in question has been credited by the State Bank of India, Commercial Branch, Calcutta, in the account of respondent No. 1 on June 9, 1997 & thereforee, O.M.P. No. 29/97 has been rendered infructuous and may be dismissed as such. On the other hand, submission advanced by Mr. B. Sen appearing for the petitioner was that in the arbitration matter between the parties notice has been issued by the International Court of Arbitration to respondent No. 1 and if the amount of the Bank guarantee in question has been transferred in the account of respondent No. 1, it may be ordered either to deposit the same in Court or to keep in a separate account to safeguard the interest of the petitioner. (2) It is not in dispute that in Suit No. 3126/96 filed by the petitioner against the respondents, which was treated as an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration an...
A.K.G. Acoustics (India) Ltd. Vs. Company Law Board
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)975; 70(1997)DLT767
M.K. Sharma, J. (1) The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the order passed by the Company Law Board, Northern Region Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Board) on 16.5.1996 in the Company Petition No.4/17/96-CLB filed by the appellant Company under section 17 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) confirming the Special Resolution passed in the Extraordinary General Meeting of the appellant Company with condition that the appellant Company shall provide transportation facilities to its shareholders from Delhi to Gurgaon for every Annual General Meeting of the Company held at Gurgaon. (2) The appellant Company was incorporated on 7.3.1988 and is a public Company under the provisions of the Companies Act. The paid-up capital of the appellant Company as on 23.11.1995 was Rs. 5,75,16,390.00 divided amongst 8125 shareholders holding 5751639 shares out of which 2490 shareholders are in Maharashtra, 2023 shareholders are in Delhi,...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bry Air (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)150CTR(Del)675
R.C. Lahoti J.This petition under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the revenue seeks a mandamus to the Tribunal for drawing up a statement of case and referring the following question for the opinion of the High Court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in directing the assessing officer to allow deduction under section 80-I in respect of income from engineering and design charges and also other income ?'2. It is not disputed that the assessed respondent is an 'industrial undertaking' engaged in the manufacturing activity of de-humidifiers. During the course of such activity, the assessee-respondent has made earnings on account of engineering designing fee. However it is not disputed that the assessed is not rendering professional advice to others and thereby earning the said fee. The engineering designing activity is related only to the article manufactured and produced by the assesee ...
Owens Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: (1997)(95)ELT299TriDel
1. Arguing the stay petition for dispensing with the pre-deposit of duty and penalty, Shri Alok Arora, learned Advocate submits that the applicants are engaged in the manufacture of glass bottles/vials. He submits that the stacking of the items is done by semi-literate workers and, therefore, there can be some mix up. He submits that the Central Excise Officers visited their factory premises and found some excesses in certain categories of the glass bottles and vials and some shortages in some categories of these items. He submits that the number of varieties of these items is very large. He submits that since the number of these items is very large and the stock stacking is done by semi-literate workers, therefore, there is likelihood of mix up. He submits that about 25% of the containers get broken no doubt, they are recycled. He submits that since the excesses and shortages were found and since there could be some mix up in the varieties of these items, the applicants should have b...
Collector of Customs Vs. Knic Knac Agencies
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT339TriDel
1. The Revenue being aggrieved with the Order-in-Appeal dated 2-8-1991, passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bangalore, had filed the present appeal in which the matter relates to the classification, under the Customs Tariff, of the Steam Irons. The Importers M/s. Knic Knac Agencies, Bangalore, sought classification of the above goods under sub-heading 8451.30 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tariff'), with the benefit of exemption Notification No. 16/85-Cus., dated 1-2-1985. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Bangalore, on examination found the goods to be smoothing steam iron classifiable under Heading No. 85.16 of the Tariff. On appeal, the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bangalore, observed that the irons imported by the appellants derived the heat from the steam which in turn was produced by electricity and they did not employ any heating elements directly in the iron boxes. Their source of heat was the steam. He hel...
icpa Health Products Private Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT84TriDel
1. Appellant, engaged in the manufacture of patent and proprietary medicines opted for Modvat scheme and benefit of Notification No.175/86 which gives two optional benefits, one of the benefits being payment of duty at only 5% on the first clearance of value up to Rs. 50 lacs where Modvat. credit is availed. It was this benefit which was availed by the appellant. The dispute in this case relates to the period from April, 1986 to 26-12-1986. Appellant was paying duty @ 5% but collecting duty @ 15%. Show cause notice dated 12-3-1987 was issued to the appellant stating that the excess duty collected should be treated as part of profit in the hands of the appellant, that the excess duty would become part of the wholesale price and reflected in the assessable value and in such a view the limit of Rs. 75 lacs would have been crossed much earlier and therefore during the interegnum duty was payable at the tariff rate. The notice proposed demand of differential duty. Though appellant conteste...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »