Delhi Court September 2000 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.
The Commissioner of Income-tax New Delhi Vs. M/S Hindustan General Ind ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: [2001]247ITR51(Delhi)
ORDERArijit Pasayat, C.J.1. These three references under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) relate to assessment years 1972-73 to 1974-75 and following questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribu- nal, Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi (for short the Tribunal) for opinion of this Court: '1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the company was liable to deduct tax from dividends under section 194 of the Income-tax Act when the dividend warrants were sent out to the share holders and not on the dates of issue put on the dividend warrants? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to recalculate the interest levied under section 201(1A) from the date the dividend warrants were actually sent out to the share-holders and not from the date(s) of issue put on the dividend warrants?' 2. Factua...
Dcw Limited Vs. Appellate Tribunal, Sales Tax and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: [2002]126STC29(Delhi)
1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Sales Tax, Delhi, in appeal No. 44/STT/2000-2001. The said appeal relates to the assessment year 1992-93. An extra demand of Rs. 2,70,917 was raised on account of the petitioner's failure to produce statutory forms in respect of sales, claimed to have been made to registered dealers. The quantum of transactions covered by the forms which were required to be produced was Rs. 38,70,235. An appeal was filed before the Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, Appeal I. In view of the submission made by the petitioner that he had procured some of the requisite forms and some more were to be obtained, appeal was admitted subject to deposit of Rs. 30,000 which amount was deposited. But when the appeal was taken up, first appellate authority found that the declaration forms, which were produced, were in fact obtained after the date of order passed in the stay application. It was, thereforee, construed that by making a ...
Munjal Showa Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: (2001)69TTJ(Del)480
ORDERR. Swarup, V.P.The appeal has been directed by the assessed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, dated 3-3-1997, pertaining to the assessment year 1989-90. By various grounds raised the assessed has challenged the very validity of the order under section 154 of the Act and the disallowance of Rs. 2,27,73,422 confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The assessed is a public limited company engaged in manufacture of automobile shock absorbers. It maintains its books of accounts on regular basis. Its accounting year was ending on 31st July of each year. Consequent upon the amendment to section 3 of the Income Tax Act, the assessed adopted its accounting year on the basis of financial year. However, for the purposes of Companies Act, the assessed continued to adopt its account as on 31st July, of each year.3. For the current year the assessor's accounting year is of 20 months i.e., 1-8-1987, to 31-3-1989. The return of income decla...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hindustan General Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: [2001]113TAXMAN506(Delhi)
Pasayat, C.JThese three references under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') relate to the assessment years 1972-73 to 1974-75 and following questions have been referred by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi, for opinion of this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the company was liable to deduct tax from dividends under section 194 of the Income Tax Act when the dividend warrants were sent out to the shareholders and not on the dates of issue put on the dividend warrants?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Income Tax Officer to re-calculate the interest levied under section 201(1A) from the date the dividend warrants were actually sent out to the shareholders and not from the date(s) of issue put on the dividend warrants ?'2. Factual position which is almost undisputed is as...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Angira Devi Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: [2001]247ITR485(Delhi)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. These four references have been made under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (in short 'the Act'), at the instance of the Revenue by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D' (for short 'the Tribunal'), and the following questions have been referred for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts ami in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessed was not liable for penalties under Section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ?' 2. The factual position as indicated in the statement of case is as follows :The assessed filed her returns of wealth for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1973-74 belatedly. Proceedings under Section 18(1)(a) of the Act were initiated. The assessed submitted that being an old lady, she had to depend on the accountants ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. D.L.F. United Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-2000
Reported in: [2001]247ITR446(Delhi)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the 'Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B' (in short the 'Tribunal'), for opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in its conclusion that Section 52(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not applicable to the asscssee's case ?' 2. The assessment year involved is 1970-71. The Tribunal allowed the assessor's appeal with the following observations : 'In the present case, there is no suggestion that the consideration for transfer as shown by the assessed was not the correct amount of consideration or that the assessed was in receipt of any additional amount not declared in its return of income. On the contrary, the genuineness and the accuracy of the amount of consideration received by the assessed was actually accepted by the Reven...
Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT45TriDel
1. These appeals 6 in number are directed against adjudication order No. 14/CE/2000 dated 04.04.2000 passed by Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur. Appellants were the notices to the show cause notice dated 02.07.1999. These notices are jot workers, merchant and employees. M/s.Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. are job workers. M/s. Sangam India Ltd. and M/s. Sangam Suitings were getting their grey fabrics processed through M/s. Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. The traders, namely, Sangam India Ltd. and Sangam Suitings were declaring the value of the grey fabrics sent to Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. for job work. On the basis of the declaration of the value given by the Sangam India Ltd. and Sangam Suitings, Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. paid excise duty. The duty so paid by the job worker was found to be not correctly assessed on the value of the fabrics supplied by the traders. The case of the Department was that the job worker was not showing the actual value of grey fabr...
J.G. Exports Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)(72)ECC95
1. These four appeals have come up before this Larger Bench pursuant to an order of reference passed by Bench 'A' in view of conflicting decisions rendered by co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal in two cases viz. MVT International v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi - 2000 (36) RLT 799 and Galani Infin Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi 2. These appeals are directed against Order-in-Original dated 30-10-1999 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, New Delhi. M/s. J.G. Exports (appellants in appeal No. C/409/99-A), who are a partnership firm engaged in the export of goods, are aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner confiscating 215 Quartz Analog Watches and imposing a redemption fine of Rs. 30 lakhs in lieu of confiscation.Shri Rajesh Jain and Shri Mahesh Jain (appellants in appeal Nos.C/410/99-A and C/411/99-A respectively) are partners of the said firm and are aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner imposing personal penalties of Rs. 20 lakhs e...
Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT572TriDel
1. The appellants are manufacturers of woollen fabrics falling under Heading No. 51.07 of the Central Excise Tariff. They took Modvat credit of Rs. 85,000.00 on `boiler' as capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules in October 1994, which was disallowed by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner as per order dated 30.04.1998, which was, later on, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) as per order dated 25.07.1999. The present appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Carefully examined the grounds of the appeal after perusal of the orders of the lower authorities and connected records. Heard the representative of the appellant-company, Shri N.D. Jain and JDR Shri Y.R. Kilania.3. Shri Jain has submitted that the orders of the lower authorities are on grounds, some of which are beyond the scope of the show cause notice. The show-cause notice proposed to deny the Modvat credit on boiler on the ground that the final product namely woollen fabric was not c...
Triveni Engineering and Inds. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT386TriDel
1. Appellant M/s. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of Steam Turbines. They also undertake supply of turbines and bought out items like alternator control panel etc. By the impugned order the Commissioner confirmed the demand of Rs. 16,30,68,192/- on 80 turbo alternator sets erected on and commissioned by the appellant at the various sites of the customers during the period May, 1994 to February, 1999. A differential duty of Rs. 47,20,345/- was also levied on 69 steam turbines manufactured during the above period which were undervalued for payment of duty. Penalty under Section 11AC and separate penalty under Rule 173Q also imposed.The correctness of these demands are under challenge.Triveni Engineering and Inds. Ltd. v.Commissioner of Central Excise, 2000 (120) E.L.T. 273 their Lordships took the view that the combination of turbine and alternators erected on foundations constructed on earth are immovable property are not excisable goods. So the d...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »