Delhi Court February 1998 Judgments

Bihar State Electricity Board Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(111)ELT828TriDel

1. This is a stay application filed with reference to the order of Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna dated 22-7-1997.2. Learned Counsel stated that the appellants had a number of units manufacturing PSC Poles as per specifications laid down by the Bihar State Electricity Board and were not meant for the market. The annual clearance of individual unit never exceeded the exemption limit during any of the period under consideration, under the small-scale industries scheme, in terms of Notification No. 1/93, dated 31-3-1993.3. Therefore, the appellants believed that no registration or declaration was necessary. However, declarations in the prescribed form were filed before the respective officers for view of the bona fide belief of the appellants, no penalty was called for. Furthermore, the financial condition of the Board was very bad and they were not in a position to deposit such a large amount. This is apparent from a copy of the annual accounts for 1994-95 filed by them which sho...

Srf Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT68TriDel

1. This is an application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 1.2 lac. In this case, the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of capital goods, that is storage tanks, is denied to the applicants on the ground that storage tanks as such can neither be called as a 'machinery' nor equipment/apparatus/spare parts of accessories of any capital goods.Shri R. Nambirajan, Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants submitted that storage tanks are used for storing of hydrofluoric acid which is corrosive in nautre and the hydrofluoric acid is stored in the storage tanks in order to maintain pressure and temperature. He submits that these storage tanks are necessary components of the plant for the manufacture of the final product. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Metrochem Industries v. C.C.E. and Customs, Vadodara reported in 1997 (96) E.L.T. 114 (Tribunal) and submits that in this case measuring tanks used for pumping into it measured quantity of the liquid ra...

Debikay Information Technology Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. These are three appeals by the assessee against the orders of the CIT(A), IV New Delhi, pertaining to asst. yrs. 1989-90 to 1991-92.Since the issues involved in all these appeals are common and also arise out of the consolidated order, therefore, for the sake of convenience these appeals are being disposed of by a consolidated order.2. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of private automatic branch exchanges, purchase and sale of yarn, HDPE bags and sale of cement on consignment basis, mining and transportation work, etc. The assessee-company set up a manufacturing unit in the accounting year relevant to asst. yr. 1988-89 at Bhilai for manufacture of electronic private automatic branch exchange (EPABX) with the technology provided by Department of Telecommunication. The assessee obtained a term loan of Rs. 43.30 lakhs from Pradeshiya Industrial Corporation, Uttar Pradesh (for short "PICUP") and utilised the same for the purpose o...

Parkashwati and anr. Vs. M.C.D. and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1998IVAD(Delhi)117; 73(1998)DLT55; 1998(46)DRJ112

JudgmentK. Ramamoorthy, J.1. The first petitioner is the widow of late Shri Shom Parkash Tiwari. The second petitioner is the eldest son of the first petitioner. The husband of the first petitioner died on 2.7.1989. He was working as a senior clerk with the second respondent (DESU) controlled by the first respondent. Setting out the condition of the family, the petitioners sought an appointment of the second petitioner on compassionate grounds as per the scheme of the respondents.2. On 17.8.1989, an application was made for seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. Nothing was done on till 13.1.1993 a reminder was sent on 13.01.1993. On 24.3.1993 the Assistant Personnel Officer of the second respondent passed the following on 23.4.1993.Sub: Regarding employment to your son Shri Mukesh Kumar Tiwari on compassionate grounds. Madam, With reference to your letter dated 13.1.1993 on the above subject, I am directed to inform you that as per information obtained from Asstt. Chief Accoun...

Capt. Pawan Kumar Vs. Chief of Air Staff and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 73(1998)DLT72; 1998(45)DRJ580

K. Ramamoorthy, J. 1. The writ petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Air Force in 26.11.1985. At the time when he joined the service he had passed all necessary examinations. Later on, in the year 1992 he acquired Engineering degree. Subsequently he acquired M.B.A degree in April 1996, from Pune University.2. On 28.02.1997, the petitioner applied for premature discharge as he had completedthe age of 30 years and having regard to his higher educational qualification, if he getsdischarge he can get the better employment. According to the petitioner on the basisof the post he has held as he crossed 30 years. He is not eligible to be considered forcommissioning. But according to the learned counsel for the respondents the can still apply for commissioning when he became a Sergeant until he attainsthe age of 40 years. The respondents had filed annexure R-1 which is the instructionsor guidelines for discharge of Airmen on Educational Grounds. Para 2 of the instructions read as under: The dis...

Debikay Information Technology Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Inco ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (1998)62TTJ(Del)709

ORDERJ. P. Bengra, J.M.These are three appeals by the assessed against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), IV New Delhi, pertaining to assessment years 1989-90 to 1991-92. Since the issues involved in all these appeals are common and also arise out of the consolidated order, thereforee, for the sake of convenience these appeals are being disposed of by a consolidated order.2. The assessed is a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of private automatic branch exchanges, purchase and sale of yarn, HDPE bags and sale of cement on consignment basis, mining and transportation work, etc. The assessee-company set up a manufacturing unit in the accounting year relevant to assessment year 1988-89 at Bhilai for manufacture of electronic private automatic branch exchange (EPABX) with the technology provided by Department of Telecommunication. The assessed obtained a term loan of Rs. 43.30 lakh from Pradeshiya Industrial Corporation, Uttar Pradesh (hereinafte...

Shahe Alam and ors. Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)(75)LC267Tri(Delhi)

1. These are four appeals filed by (1) M/s. Bharat Brass and Silver Manufacturing Co. (2) Shri Masood Alam, (3) Shri Shahe Alam, & (4) Shri Abul Hasan, being aggrieved by the common order-in-original No. 234/91 dated 7.1.1992 passed by the Addl. Collector of Customs, New Delhi.Under his order in original dated 7.1.1992 the Addl. Collector of Customs, New Delhi had imposed a penalty of Rs. 20,000/- each on (1) M/s. Bharat Brass and Silver Manufacturing Co. (2) Shri Masood Alam (3) Shri Shahe Alam (4) Shri Abul Hasan and (5) Shri P. Juneja. In addition a redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/-was imposed and it was ordered that the goodsNickel Silver alloy confiscated could be redeemed on payment of appropriate customs duty and the redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/- aforesaid.1.1. The Appeal No. C/376/92-B2 filed by Shri Abul Hasan had come up before the Tribunal on 5.6.1997 for final hearing. When the matter was called none appeared for the appellant Shri Abul Hasan. In the circumstances the ...

Collector of Customs Vs. Titan Watches

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(110)ELT536TriDel

1. Order-in-Appeal No. 50/91, dated 4-3-1991 setting aside the Order-in-Original dated 11-5-1990 passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Bangalore is challenged by the Department.2. Respondent, engaged in the manufacture of watches, imported a consignment of watch components and presented Bill of Entry dated 11-5-1990, Invoice and other documents and sought clearance at the assessable value indicated therein. The consignment consisted of Crystals, Gaskets, 'O' Rings. Assistant Collector enhanced the value of Crystals of two models from Japanese Yen 22 to Japanese Yen 28 per unit and Japanese Yen 30 per unit respectively. Respondent paid duty accordingly and cleared the goods. Thereafter, the respondent challenged this order before the Collector (Appeals) who set aside the loading of value made by the Assistant Collector and allowed the appeal. Department is now challenging the order of Collector (Appeals) on the sole ground that the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) would ...

Methodex Systems Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)LC164Tri(Delhi)

1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Methodex Systems Ltd., the matter relates to the demand of central excise duty in respect of the products which the appellants had classified under Heading No. 83.04 and which the Revenue had sought to classify under Heading No. 94.03. The Collector of Central Excise, Indore, who had adjudicated the matter had classified the products under Heading No. 94.03 of the Central Excise Tariff, had demanded duty of Rs. 6,63,037.14 and had imposed a penalty of Rs. llakh.2. We have heard Shri R.D. Pahwa, Consultant, who appeared for the appellants and Shri Satnam Singh, SDR, who is present for the respondents /Revenue.3. We have carefully considered the matter. We find that the period involved in these proceedings is from 1-3-1988 to 31-7-1989 and the show cause notice had been issued on 22-12-1989. The learned Consultant referred to the classification list effective from 7-3-1988 in which they had described their products in detail and had declared the classific...

Dollar Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(110)ELT719TriDel

1. The appellants manufactured Hadensa Medicament in cream form contained in collapsable aluminium tube with a cap. This medicament was marketed in a cardboard box which also contained a separately packed plastic cannula (Nozzle). The instructions supplied alongwith the medicament read follows: "How to use the ointment: Pierce the tube by reversing the cap and screwing down to break the seal on the tube. Screw the plastic applicator on to the tube and introduce it into the rectum, without soiling the fingers. Wash applicator after use and replace cap. Do not unscrew the applicator. HADENSA ointment does not stain clothes." In the price list, the appellants claimed abatement towards cost of this plastic cannula. The Assistant Collector denied the deduction. The Collector (Appeals) compared the plastic cannula with eye dropper separately supplied with eye drops. The appellants relied upon the CEGAT judgment in the case of Metal Box of India Ltd. reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T. 956 (CEGAT)....