Delhi Court April 2001 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.
M/S. Maruti Textile Agency Bazar Vs. C.C.E., Chandigarh
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. The Tribunal vide Miscellaneous Order No. M/37/01/NB/SM dt.30.1.2001 had observed that the appellants have filed this appeal against the Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Commissionerate-II, Chandigarh which consisted of 168 pages.However, the appellants had filed only 10 pages of Order-in-Original.Accordingly, they were directed to file complete copy of the Order-in-Original within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of that order. The matter was accordingly adjourned to this date.2. It is observed from the record that the above Miscellaneous Order of the Tribunal was duly sent to the appellants on 6.2.2001. Today, when the matter is called, the appellants are not represented. There is no communication from them either requesting for adjournment or giving reasons for their absence. They have also not complied with above direction of the Tribunal. It, therefore, appears that the appellants are not interested in pursuing their appeal....
M/S. Ganeshji Scrap Traders Vs. C.C.E., Patna
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. In this case, the appellants were directed to file a copy of the show cause notice. Further, the Order-in-Original dt. 16.10.92 passed by the Addl. Commissioner of Customs, Lucknow is in Hindi. It is observed that Shri Rajesh Kukmar, Counsel for the appellants, sought an adjournment on 17.8.2000 with a request to file an English translation of the Order-in-Original. Further, from the proceedings dt. 14.12.2000 recorded in the case file, it is observed that the same ld. Counsel undertook to supply a copy of the show cause notice within one month.2. Today when the matter is called, ld. Counsel for the appellants requests for some more time to file these documents. It is however, observed that the matter is adjourned time and again for atleast six times in the past at the request of the appellants to enable them to file a copy of the impugned documents, but the same are not forthcoming. It is observed that the appeal relates to the year 1993 and ample opportunity has been afforded to ...
C.C.E, Delhi Vs. M/S. Hindustan National Glass and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. The respondents manufacture glass bottles and glass tumblers falling under Chapter 70 of the Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have been allowed modvat credit totally amounting to Rs. 1,13,293.36 on electric cables and parts of inspection machines as capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi vide Order dt.20.6.2000 setting aside the Order dt. 23.3.99 passed by the Asst.Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also set aside the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on the respondents.2. The Revenue are in appeal against the above order of Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard Shri A.K. Jain, JDR for the Revenue/appellants.This matter was last called on 1.2.2001 when the respondents were represented through Shri R.Pal Singh, Consultant. On that date, the matter stood adjourned to this date in the presence of 1d. Consultant for the respondents. Today, when the ma...
Cce, Chandigarh Vs. M/S. National Fertilizer Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. These are two appeals filed by the Revenue being aggrieved with the common order-in-appeal dated 29.10.99 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh.2. The matter relates to the refund claim filed by M/s. National Fertilizers Ltd. on the ground that the use of furnace oil for generating of steam was to be considered as used as feed stock in the manufacture of fertilizers. The respondents are a public sector undertaking.3. Shri Rajeev Tandon, SDR submits that so far the clearance from the Committee on Disputes have not been obtained. Both the appeals were filed with the Registry on 4.2.2000.4. Accordingly, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed for want of clearance from the Committee on Disputes. However, liberty is given to the Revenue to pray for restoration of both the appeals as and when the requisite clearance from the Committee on Disputes is filed.With such liberty, both the appeals are dismissed. Stay applications are also dismissed. Ord...
M/S. Impression Prints Vs. Cce, New Delhi
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. Under Stay Order No.S/480/2000 NB (DB) dated 20.11.2000 while hearing the stay application No.E/Stay/1708/2000 NB in Appeal No.E/2968/2000 NB filed by M/s. Impression Prints, the Tribunal had directed the appellants to pre-deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards duty within a period of 12 weeks from 21.11.2000. For hearing their appeals, the appellants were required to pre-deposit duty amount of Rs.16,33,599/- and penalty of Rs.1,00,000/-. On depositing the above sum, the Tribunal ordered that pre-deposit of the balance duty and penalty amount will be waived and recovery stayed till the disposal of the appeal. The matter was posted for reporting compliance on 7.3.2001.2. When the matter came-up on 7.3.2001, no compliance was filed and a prayer was made for adjournment and the matter was adjourned for 22.3.2001. Again on 22.3.2001, no compliance was filed and it was mentioned that after the remand order by the Tribunal, the appellants have filed a writ petition in the Hon'ble Supreme...
M/S. High Polymer Labs. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Faridabad
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. Shri R.C. Gupta, Advocate for the appellants at the very outset submits that he is withdrawing the Stay Petition, since the duty and penalty confirmed on the appellants have already been deposited by them. Accordingly, the Stay Petition is dismissed as infractuous. The matter shall come up for final disposal in its own turn....
M/S. Birla Vxl Ltd. Vs. Cce Mumbai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. For hearing the present appeal, the appellants, M/s.Birla VXL Ltd. (OCM Woollen Mills), are required to pre-deposit duty amount of Rs.13,83,040/- + interest and penalty of Rs.1,25,000/-.2. Shri R.Sudhinder, Advocate submits that the appellants have already reversed the modvat amount and they had made this clear in reply to the show cases notice. The reply to the show cause notice was filed with the Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Ballard Estate as per endorsement in the show cause notice. The matter has been adjudicated by the Commissioner of Customs Sahar Airport and according to the Id.Advocate, their reply had not been taken note of. He prays that after waiving the requirement of pre-deposit, the matter be heard on merits and remanded to the jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs for de novo consideration after taking note of their reply to the show cause notice.3. Shri Rajeev Tandon, SDR submits that is not clear from the information furnished at page 49 of the paper bo...
Hpl Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., New Delhi
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. This appeal is filed against the letter No.IV(16)240/Tech/DL-II/99/13005 dt. 3.12.99 addressed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-II to the Dy. Commissioner, Central Excise, Division-II, Faridabad, with a copy of same was endorsed to the appellants. The contents of this letter are reproduced below: " Sub:- Remittance of excise duty on goods destroyed by fire - M/s. HPL Industries (P) Ltd. Faridabad-c/r. C.No.IV(16)30/116/Pol.II/99/8981 dated 15.11.99 on the subject cited above. 2. I am directed to inform you that the request letter dated 9.6.99 of M/s. HPL Industries Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad for remission of duty was examined by the Commissioner and the same has been rejected. You are requested to take necessary steps for the recovery of the duty amount from the party in the matter. Party may please be informed accordingly." 2. The party has filed an appeal against the above communication which is the subject matter of the present proceedings. It is observed from the records ...
Ms. Arti Chauhan, Shri Balbir Vs. Cc, New Delhi
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. Vide Stay Order dated 17.10.2000, the appellants, M/s. Kankaran Impex were directed to pre-deposit Rs.9,00,000/- towards the draw-back amount and Rs.1,00,000/- towards penalty while Shri Balbir Singh Chauhan, the appellant was required to pre-deposit Rs.1,00,000/- towards the penalty amount. However, the requirement of pre-deposit of penalty by the appellants, Ms. Arti Chauhan and Shri Avtar Singh Chauhan was waived and their recovery stayed pending the appeal. But M/s. Kankaran Impex had only made deposit of Rs.50,000/- on 9.1.2001 as per records and the balance amount has not been deposited.2. Therefore, the appeal No.C/109/2000 NB of M/s. Kankaran Impex is dismissed for want of compliance with the Stay Order under Section 129 E of the Act.3. However, Shri Balbir Singh Chauhan, appellant,had made compliance to the Tribunal's Stay Order dated 17.10.2000 by making deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the penalty amount. Therefore, appeal no.C/111/2000-NB (D) of Shri Balbir Singh Chauha...
M.P. State Industries Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Raipur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2001
1. The brief facts in the case are that the appellants filed the refund claims of Rs.7.74,451.91, Rs.32,092.90 and Rs. 75,919.77 in respect of the duty paid by them under protest. These refunds had become due to the consequent upon the order No. 402/89 dated 4.10.89 passed by the CEGAT and the order dated 30.5.92 passed by commissioner (Appeals), in their favour. In this decision of the CEGAT, it was held that 26 units of M/s M.P. State Industries Corporation are entitled to exemption under Notification No. 175/86 dated 1.9.86 as amended and they should get benefit of Explanation No. V of this Notification. Consequently the duty paid by them became refundable to them. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bhilai-II issued a show-cause notice dated 13.9.90 calling them to show cause why the claims filed by them should not be rejected. However, on consideration of the representation made by the party, the Assistant Collector allowed the refund claims vide his order dated 24.7.95 bu...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »