Delhi Court October 1999 Judgments

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Standard Wire Rod Mills

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT995TriDel

1. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the respondents.The notice of hearing issued to the respondents was received back with the postal remark 'Left'. Therefore, the appeal is being taken up in the absence of respondents.2. Revenue filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal dated 20-5-1993 passed by the Collector (Appeals). Brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Bars and Rods of Iron falling under Heading 72.14 of the Central Excise Tariff and Angles, Shapes, and Sections falling under Heading 72.16 and availing exemption under Notification No. 202/88, dated 20-5-1988. Three show cause notices were issued to the respondents stating that their final products falling under Heading 72.14 and 72.16 of the Central Excise Tariff are not eligible for benefit of Notification No. 202/88 since exemption is available only for certain primary forms of iron besides iron sliper, tubes and pipes and cast iron fittings manufactured from wast...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Vindhya Telelinks Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(116)ELT119TriDel

1. The Commissioner (Appeals) against whose order the above appeal has been preferred by the Revenue, has held that Voltage Stabilizers and Micro converter and parts thereof used by the respondents herein for manufacture of Telecommunication cables, are capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules and eligible to Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the Rules.2. I have heard both the sides and perused the records. The Voltage stabilizers falling under CET sub-heading 3932.80 consists of isolation transformer, variable stepper motor and electronic circuits to maintain constant output voltage, whereas input voltage fluctuates. The stabilizer is used in insulating line machine for stable input voltage to maintain the various parameters of the machine.3. The contention of the Revenue is that its individual function is only for correction of input voltage and it is neither capable of processing of producing goods nor part of any machinery used in the manufacture of finished goods an...

Shanker Lal Ved Prakash Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

V. Dongzathang, Senior Vice President 1. This appeal has been directed against the order of CIT(A) dt. 21st Sept., 1998. The grounds raised in the grounds of appeal ate disposed of as discussed hereunder.2. The first ground of appeal relates to the nature of loss suffered by the appellant on the purchase and sale of debentures with detachable warrants.3. The assessee is an HUF consisting of S/Shri V.P. Goyal, Rohit Prakash Goyal, Smt. Usha Goyal and Smt. Rohini Chand Goyal as its members. During the course of assessment proceedings, when the AO examined the trading account in detail, he found that the sales to the extent of Rs. 2,81,540 were credited on account of sale of 3,530 non-convertible debentures of D.C.M. Sri Ram Industrial Enterprises Ltd. without detachable warrants. Similarly, the trading account has also been debited to the extent of Rs. 3,53,000 representing purchase price of above mentioned debentures with detachable warrants. Thus, on this transaction, there was a loss...

Goodyear India Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer. (Asstt. Cit V.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. These are cross-appeals against the order of the CIT(A)-IX(Central), New Delhi, dt. 27th March, 1991, for the asst. yr. 1987-88.2. We would first take up the Department's appeal in ITA No.5670(Del)1991. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 66,71,666 in respect of increase in the value of closing stock on account of excise duties payable on manufactured goods." 4. The AO was of the opinion that the excise duty payable on uncleared goods lying within the bounded area had to be included in the valuation of the closing stock, because the excise duty becomes payable immediately on the manufacture of goods though paid on the removal of the goods from the factory. The figure of excise duty payable on the uncleared goods worked out to Rs. 66,71,666 which was added to the value of the closing stock. In appeal before the learned CIT(A) the plea of the assessee was that it was maintaining its accounts on mercantile system ...

Kishore K. Valia Vs. Director of Enforcement

Court: Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. This appeal is directed against Adjudication Order No. ADJ/57/AD/RK/B of 1997 under which a penalty of Rs. 15,000 has been imposed on the appellant for contravention of section 9(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act). The allegation against the appellant is that he paid an amount of Rs. 96,217 (being the amount of difference between the value declared in the import documents and the value as assessed) to Karan Paul, Sales Executive of Jebsen and Jessen of Germany from whom the goods were imported. 2. The appellant has assailed the order on several grounds but in my opinion, it is not necessary to consider all those grounds in detail in view of the final order No. 606 of 1999, dated 22-3-1999 passed by CEGAT in Appeal No. C/337/93-A (Universal Synthetics v. Commissioner of Customs). My view is based on the considerations discussed hereinafter. 3. It is not disputed that the Bill of Entry filed by the appellant declares the value of the goods to be Rs. 42,658. H...

Jaiprakash Industries Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT415TriDel

1. This order will dispose of two appeals, bearing Nos. E/1157/94-C and E/502/94-C 2. Appeal No. E/1157/94-C has been filed against the Order-in-Original dated 25-2-1994 passed by the Collector in pursuance of the show cause notice dated 3-5-1993 relating to the period April, 1990 to September, 1991 vide he raised demand of Rs. 12,05,187/- as excise duty on the crushed stone and imposed personal penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- on the appellants. The other appeal No. E/502/94-C has been filed against the order dated 19-11-1993 passed by the Collector (Appeals) upholding the Order-in-Original dated 14-6-1993 of Assistant Collector who raised duty demand of Rs. 17,565/-for the period October, 1991 to January, 1992 from the appellants and imposed penalty of Rs. 1000/-.2. The facts giving rise to both these appeals may briefly be stated as under - 3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of crushed stones falling under sub-heading 2505 of the Schedule appended to the Central Excise Tariff...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Winsome Spinners Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT756TriDel

1. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of yarns falling under Chapters 52 and 55 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act and are availing Modvat credit facility in respect of capital goods under Rule 57-Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Department alleged that the party had wrongly availed Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,39,802/- on certain goods i.e. automatic data processor, metal flexible and elbow fitting etc. treating the same as capital goods under Rule 57-Q ibid in the months of December, 1995 and accordingly issued show cause notice to them proposing to recover the aforesaid amount and also to impose penalty. In adjudication of the show cause notice, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise disallowed the above Modvat credit and confirmed the demand of the aforesaid amount and also imposed penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on the respondents. In the appeal filed by the party against the order of the Assistant Commissioner, lower appellate authority revers...

Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Maniyar Plastic Containers

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)LC186Tri(Delhi)

1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the Order-in-Original dated March, 1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad is under challenge. The matter relates to the evasion of central excise duty in respect of HDPE sacks, which were said to have been removed under the garb of HDPE cut fabrics. The case was made out on the basis of the preventive checks exercised on 19-2-1990 and under show cause notice dated 16-8-1990, a duty of Rs. 28,78,573.00 was demanded in addition to the invocation of penal provisions and proposed confiscation of the seized goods. After examining the facts on record, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 32,650.50. He imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 10,000/- and a penalty of Rs. 5,000/-.Penalty was also imposed on Shree Balaji Enterprises and with regard to the seized vehicles with which we are not concerned in these proceedings. The Revenue in the grounds of appeal had pleaded that the adjudicating authority had not considered v...

Jagroop Singh @ Rupinder Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)557; 82(1999)DLT438; 1999(51)DRJ585

ORDERS.K. Agarwal J.1.The petitioner by this petition has challenged the detention order dated 21st January, 1999 passed against him by respondent No. 2 under Section 3(1) of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Privation of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short the Act) with a view to preventing him from engaging in transporting smuggled goods in future. 2. It is alleged that officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (for short DRI), Delhi Zonal Unit intercepted three Trucks and one Tata Sumo near Majnu-ka-Tila Gurudwara, Delhi on 9.9.98 and 3470 rolls of taffet cloth valued at Rs. 76,82,200/- along with 44 gunny bags containing loose broom sticks were recovered. As the goods were of foreign origin and no document for legitimate or legal import/acquisition of the said goods was produced, the same were seized. These goods were found to have been transported from Calcutta to Delhi. The petitioner in his statement admitted his involvement and stated that he had accompanied the ...

Sajjad Ali Khan @ Sanjay @ Sajjan Vs. State of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000IAD(Delhi)50; 82(1999)DLT521; 1999(51)DRJ678

ORDERM.S.A. Siddiqui, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 4.5.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in S.C. No. 25/91 convicting the appellant under Section 304 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/-.2. Shorn of verbiage, the prosecution case is that Om Prakash (PW-1) was residing in a servant quarter of Kothi No.16, which was allotted to the appellant's father. On 31.5.1990, at about 9.45 p.m. the deceased Sher Singh accompanied by Bishambhar Singh (PW-2) entered the said Kothi through the main gate and at that time they were drunk. Incensed by this, the appellant started beating the deceased Sher Singh. It is the prosecution case that the appellant gave a fist blow on the temple as a result whereof the deceased fell down on the manhole sewer and sustained the fatal injury. Immediately after the alleged incident, the appellant called the police to the spot. Thereupon one Assistant Sub-Ins...