Delhi Court January 2001 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Kokoku Wires Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2001]250ITR41(Delhi); [2002]120TAXMAN74(Delhi)

Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court 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') :'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessed was entitled to initial depreciation under Section 32(1)(vi) on the written down value of the plant and machinery amounting to Rs. 3,18,500 which was used for manufacturing of steel wires ?'2. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1976-77. The factual position in a nutshell is as follows. The assessed-company at the relevant point of time was engaged in the manufacture and sale of steel wires and other types of wires which arc used in connection with the manufacturing of A.C. S. R. conductors required in connection with transmission and distribution of electricity. The basic raw material for manuf...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Apparel Express Co. (Pvt.) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2001]251ITR733(Delhi); [2001]117TAXMAN411(Delhi)

Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. These two reference applications are interlinked and are disposed of by this common order. 2. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the assessed-company is an industrial undertaking and thereby allowing deduction under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1976-77 ?' 3. Though the question referred relates to only one assessment year, a reading of the statement of the case makes the position clear that, the question is intended to cover the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77. 4. The factual position is essentially as follows : The assessed, a private limited company, claimed deduction in terms of Section 80J on the ground that it was (a) an industrial company, (b) being an industrial company, it was entitled to deduction under Section 80J(4). The assessed gave t...

M/S. B.H.E.L. Vs. Cce, Bhopal

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. These are 11 appeals filed by M/s. B.H.E.L. against different Orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissing their appeals for non-compliance with the interim Stay Order passed by him.2. Though these matters were listed for hearing of only stay petitions but as the issue involved is in very narrow compass, I have taken all the appeals for disposal with the consent of both the sides.Accordingly, the recovery of the dues are stayed in all these matters.3. The Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed appeals for non-compliance with the requirement of predeposit of duty under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act without affording any personal hearing was even granted at the time of passing the interim stay Order nor the Commissioner (Appeals) considered the applications for modification of the interim stay order filed by the Appellants. As the impugned orders had been issued in gross violation of Principle of Natural Justice all the Orders are set aside and the matters are remande...

M/S. Jct Limited Vs. Cce, Chandigarh - Ii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s. JCT Ltd. is whether Lead Ash and Residue obtained in the process of galvanised steel wires can be removed under the provisions of Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules.2. Shri Jitender Singh, learned Advocate, submitted that Commissioner (Appeals) while rejecting their appeal has only relied upon the earlier Order-in-Appeal No. 35/CE/CHD/96 dated 30-1-96 in their own case; that the Appellate Tribunal vide Final Order No. 1793/2000-B dated 16.10.2000 has remanded the matter to the Asstt.Commissioner for afresh decision in the light of the ratio of the law laid down by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Wyeth Laboratories Ltd. vs. CCE, Bombay, 2000 (39) RLT 745 (CEGAT-LB). He, therefore, requested that this appeal may also be remanded to the Asstt. Commissioner for afresh adjudication.3. Shri S.C. Pushkarna, learned D.R. has no objection, if the matter is remanded to the Asstt. Commissioner.4. I have considered the submissions of bot...

M/S Varun Fabrics Vs. Cce Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal filed by M/s Varun Fabrics Ltd., the issue involved is whether the length of galleries is to be included to the length of chambers while determining the Annual Production Capacity of the Hot Air Stenter.2. I heard Shri K.K. Anand, Ld. Advocate for the Appellate and Shri S.C. Pushkarna, Ld. DR for the Revenue. The issue involved in the present appeal has been settled by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Sangam Processors Bhilwara Ltd. Vs. CCE Jaipur, Final Order no. 16/2000/NB (DB) dt. 4-1-2001, wherein it was held that the gallery which is having no fans or radiators attached to it cannot come within the purview of "any other equipment." as contemplated by Explanation I to Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998. Accordingly Tribunal held that the view expressed by the Tribunal in the case of R.M. Gupta Textile, 2000(40) RLT 234 to the effect that galleries are not to be included in the dimension of h...

Cce, Chandigarh Vs. M/S. Shree Bhawani Cotton Mills and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT118TriDel

1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by Revenue is whether Modvat Credit is available in respect of lubricants under Rule 57A when the Respondents M/s. Shree as capital goods Credit. When the matter was called no on was present on behalf of the Respondents. In fact, the notice issued to them regarding date of hearing has been returned back from the postal authorities with the remark "SBCM has been sealed." I, therefore, heard Shri S.C. Pushkarna, learned D.R. and perused the records.2. The issue involved in the present appeal has been settled by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Meerut vs. Modi Rubber Ltd., 2000 (38) RLT 718, wherein it was held that lubricant oil and grease which are used for lubricating machine/machinery which are used for manufacture of final products, are eligible inputs. The Larger Bench has also held in the said decision that the declaration filed by the Assessee in terms of Rule 57Q is sufficient for the purpose of extending credit on g...

Cce Chandigarh Vs. Hindustan Chemicals

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the issue involved is whether Modvat Credit can be availed of on the strength of original copy of the invoices.2. M/s Hindustan Chemicals, respondents, have submitted under their letter dt. 19-1-2001, to dismiss the appeal as Modvat Credit can be availed of on the basis of original invoices interms of sub-Rule (2A) to Rule 57 G of the Central Excise Rules. Shri S.C. Pushkarna, Ld DR., submitted that as per the decision of the Larger Bench of the Appellate Tribunal in the case of CCE New Delhi Vs. Avis Electronics Private Ltd. 2000 (117) ELT 571, the manufacturer can take credit of the duty paid on inputs only on the basis of duplicate copy of the invoices and when duplicate copy of invoice has been lost in transit, he can take credit of duty paid on the inputs on the basis of original invoices provided he satisfies the Assistant Commissioner about the loss of duplicate copy; that in present matter the Respondents had taken the modvat credit on t...

M/S S.K.S. Ltd. Vs. Cce, New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This is an application for waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed as penalty on M/s S.K.S. Ltd. 2. Shri K.K.Anand, Ld Advocate, submitted that the Assistant Commissioner has imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 Lakhs as the applicants had taken the credit in their PLA on the date of submissions of cheques in the bank and before the date of clearance of cheques which resulted in clearance of excisable goods without payment of duty; that Collector (Appeal) has decided their appeal without hearing them; that they had cleared the goods on payment of duty after depositing the cheques in the bank and the duty stands immediately credited to the Excise Department as soon as the TR-6 challan alongwith the cheque is presented to the bank; that applicants loose their control over the documents and, therefore, it cannot be said that the goods were cleared without payment of duty; that in any case cheques have not been dishonoured; that the unit has been registered with BIFR; that the factory is al...

Groz Becket Asia Ltd. Vs. Cce Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(129)ELT759TriDel

1. The issue involved in this appeal tiled by M/s Groz Beckert Asia Ltd, is whether the Modvat Credit is available in respect of Tempering Oil, Cutting Oil and Nickel Catalyst under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules.2. Shri. K.K.Anand, ld. Advocate mentioned that he is not pressing matter regarding availability of credit in respect of Nickel Catalyst.He submitted that tempering oil is used in tempering process during the manufacture of Hosiery and Knitting Machines needle; that the oil is employed as heat transfer medium for indirect heating of needle in the process called tempering; that the hardened needles after quenching are kept for certain time in hot oil bath having temperature up to 275 degree C; that due to this process stresses are relieved and needle acquire more toughness. He, further, explained that cutting oil is used for the slot cutting in the Needle; that every needle is required to have a slot and during the process of slotting, cutting oil is continuously poured ...

M/S. Owens Brockway (i) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Appellant filed this appeal against the order in appeal whereby the benefit of MODVAT credit was denied to the appellant on the ground that they had taken credit on original copies of the invoice sand they had not produced any evidence to show that Duplicate copies of invoice have been lost in transit.3. The contention of the appellant is that vide letter dated 12.6.94 they had applied to the Assistant Commissioner of Central excise for availing the credit on original copy of invoice as the Duplicate Invoice copies were lost during the transit. The contention of the appellant is that without deciding this application a show cause notice was issued and the benefit was disallowed. Now, the issue for availing the benefit on original Invoice copies, in case the Duplicate Invoice copy is lost in transit is settled by the Larger Bench in the case of C.C.E., New Delhi Vs. Avis Electronics Pvt. ltd. & Ors., reported in 2000 (37) RLT 501 (CEGAT-Larger Bench). The Larger Bench of the Tri...