Delhi Court June 1998 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.
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Indian Organic Chemicals Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-02-1998
Reported in: (1998)(104)ELT149TriDel
1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the matter relates to the classification of the Niknaks potato wafer not put up in unit containers. The respondents, M/s. Indian Organic Chemicals Ltd. have sought classification of the potato wafers under sub-heading No.2001.90 of the new Central Excise Tariff. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise has classified the same under sub-heading No. 2107.91 on the ground that even if the wafers were not put up in unit containers, they were for sale. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) following his earlier order had classified the same under Chapter 20 of the Tariff. In his earlier order, the goods were potato wafers put up in unit containers. He had classified them under sub-heading No. 2001.10 of the Tariff.2. We have heard Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR. The respondents have prayed for decision on merits.3. We have carefully considered the matter. We find that under Trade Notice No. 19/Bombay-in/General (18)/1988, dated 15-3-1988 it has been clar...
Rajesh Kumar Vs. Manoj Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-02-1998
Reported in: 1998(47)DRJ353
J.B. Goel, J.1. By this order I shall dispose of is No. 7076/96 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 and is No. 4916/97 under Section 151 CPC filed by the plaintiff. The first application is for ad interim injunction and the second for release of his two FDR's deposited by the plaintiff in pursuance of the interim order.2. The plaintiff has filed this suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 3.3.1996 which defendant had entered into with him for sale of his house No. 107, Block-A, Lok Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi for a sum of Rs. 37,89,000/-, a sum of Rs. one lakh was paid on that day; the balance amount was payable by 3.6.96 at the time of execution and registration of relevant documents of sale by the defendant. Another cheque of Rs. 3 lakhs was also sent on 7.3.96 but defendant did not encash it; the plaintiff had called upon the defendant by legal notice dated 24.4.96 to complete the sale, after obtaining requisite clearance from income-tax authorities. No reply to it was sen...
Collector of Customs Vs. White Diamonds
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-01-1998
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT380TriDel
1. In these two appeals filed by the Revenue, the only issue for our consideration is whether the imported Diamond Sawing Machine type LS-85 was eligible for benefit of Exemption Notification No. 159/86-Cus., dated 1-3-1986 as amended. The goods were examined and it was found that the item imported was laser based Sawing Machines. The matter was adjudicated by the Asstt. Collector of Customs who denied the benefit of Notification No. 159/86-Cus., S. No. 58 of the table. He referred to the S. No. 31 of the table which covered Drilling Machines and S. No.94 which covered Ultrasonic or laser drilling machines and argued that when only drilling machines were mentioned at S. No. 31, the laser drilling machines were not covered by that description as laser drilling machines were specifically included in S. No. 94 of the table annexed to the Notification. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) examined the matter and observed that drilling sawing machine against S. No. 58 of the table was genera...
Om Shiv Shakti Cement (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-01-1998
Reported in: (1998)(61)ECC217
1. The appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 158/93 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, JAIPUR demanding Central Excise duty of Rs. 17,635/- and imposing penalty of Rs. 15,000/- on the appellant on the charge of manufacture and clearance of cement without payment of appropriate duty leviable thereon.2. Shri Pankaj Malik, learned Chartered Accountant submitted that appellant was procuring non-duty paid clinker from manufacturers thereof under Chapter X Procedure and clearing the cement manufactured therefrom by grinding the same along with gypsum. In addition appellant was producing clinker in their own factory, the cement manufactured from which was being cleared on payment of the appropriate concessional duty leviable in terms of Notification No. 154/90. The duty leviable on cement manufactured from clinker procured from outside was Rs. 215/- PMT. Clearances were made by the appellant after the relevant date i.e.28-1-1991 at the aforesaid rate of duty after the ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-01-1998
Reported in: (1998)(104)ELT62TriDel
1. This is a department's appeal against the order of Collector (Appeals), Bombay dated 14-2-1991.2. Ld. DR stated that the basic issue relates to the classification of HNP (Heavy Normal Paraffin) manufactured by the Petrochemical division of the respondent.3. The A.C. had classified it under 2710.99 but the assessee had claimed the classification under 2710.29.4. The Collector (A) has accepted the assessees classification and they are aggrieved of the same.5. It was the department's contention that the Heading 2710.29 covers kerosene and not HNP and therefore ld. Collector had erred in accepting the assessees appeal.6. He further submitted that the Heading 2710.29 covers kerosene which is ordinarily used for lighting lamps and satisfies the specification mentioned in the heading whereas HNP arises in the course of manufacture of Linear Alkyl Benzene (LAB) and is different from kerosene or aviation turbine fuel covered by 2710.29. The HNP is in fact used generally in lubricating prepa...
Shri Gurunanak Steel and Allied Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-01-1998
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT430TriDel
1. These are 8 appeals filed by M/s. Gurunanak Steel & Allied Industries and Others involving common issue. In view of this fact, all the appeals are taken up for disposal by one common order.2. Shri Gopal Prasad, learned Advocate submitted that all the appellants had purchased railway scrap such as old rails, wheels, angels, crossties, sleepers, plate cuttings etc. and availed of deemed Modvat credit as provided under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules.Show cause notices were issued for disallowing the deemed Modvat credit only on the allegation that old scrap of railway material cannot be rolled /re-rolled directly and as such it would not fall in the category of reliable material or re-rollable material for the manufacture of the products manufactured by them. The learned Advocate submitted that it is apparent from the findings of the Assistant Commissioner in the different Orders-in-Original that the issue involved was only that the condemned railway material did not fall un...
Metal Mfg. Co. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-01-1998
Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT205TriDel
1. The appellants herein manufacture various articles such as fan covers for electric motors, top and bottom for fire extinguishers, M.S.Housing etc. The goods manufactured fell under different headings namely Chapter Heading 73,82,84,85 and 87. In the year 1986-87 they filed classification lists claiming exemption under Notification 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 which is applicable in respect of total clearances up to the value of Rs. 30 lakhs with the condition that the exemption in respect of goods falling under one heading does not exceed Rs. 15 lakhs. In January, 1987 they crossed clearance value under Chapter 84, and then started paying duty on clearances in excess of Rs. 15 lakhs for goods under that heading. In respect of goods falling under other headings where the total clearances had not exceeded Rs. 15 lakhs, they continued to clear such goods without payment of duty as exempted under Notification 175/86. For the purpose of computation of the value of Rs. 30 lakhs, the appellants...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›