Delhi Court December 2002 Judgments

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Manisha International P. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(152)ELT345TriDel

1. Issue involved in this appeal, filed by the Revenue, is whether the process of putting stickers by M/s. Manisha International Pvt. Ltd. on the imported goods amounts to manufacture in terms of Note 3 of Chapters 18 & 19 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act.2. Shri Vikas Kumar, learned SDR, submitted that the respondents imported chocolates, sugar confectionary and pasta falling under Chapters 18.17 & 19 respectively; that the respondents re-labelled the products by affixing their labels which reads as under :- 3. The learned SDR, further submitted that it is a requirement of Rule 33 of Weight & Measure (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 that all the pre-packed commodities imported into India shall carry a declaration regarding name and address of the importer, general or common name of the commodity packed net quantity, month and year of package, and retail sale price; that as such without putting the declaration containing these informations the product can...

Metropol India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(151)ELT460TriDel

1. In these appeals, filed by M/s. Metropol India Private Ltd., the issue involved is whether the products namely "Cleanzo" and "Cleano" are classifiable under sub-heading 3401.12 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act as Soap as claimed by the Appellants or under sub-heading 3402.90 as cleaning preparation as confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order.2. Shri B.L. Narasimhan, learned Advocate, submitted that the products have been classified by them under sub-heading 3401.12 as Liquid Soap Solution; that these products are manufactured out of vegetable oil such as castor oil, acid oil, rosin and pine oil; that the pine oil is added for antiseptic and medicinal purposes; that these oils are used in the manufacturing process of soap as fatty acid is required and it is reacted with Alkali; that various vegetable oils are blended in a vessel and thereafter reacted with caustic soda; that after heating of the blend, hydrolysis of oil takes place and as a resul...

Sandeep Mani (Huf) Vs. Dcit, Spl. Range 7

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT (Appeals) date 2.1.1997 for the asstt. year 1992-93.2. The controversy relates to computation of deduction u/s 80HHC for asstt. year 1992-93. The grievance of the assessee is two fold :- (i) The CIT (A) has grossly erren in reducting the export turn over by Rs. 17, 22, 800/- received in respect of export made in 1982; and (ii) The Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in excluding Rs. 34, 87, 773/- being the interest received through Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Limited on the delayed remittance of export made to Nigeria in the financial year 1982-83.3. Ld counsel for the assessee filed a paper book wherein at page 1 details of claims in respect of exports made in financial year 1982-83 to Nigeria are indicated. From the 10 export bills, one of which is dated 25.8.1982 pertains to asstt. year 1982-83. The remaining 9 bills relate to export bills made to Nigeria during the financial year 1982-83 relevant to asstt. ...

Surender Kumar Singhal Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2003(66)DRJ18

K.S. Gupta, J.1. This order will govern the disposal of I.A.7526/02 filed under Order 39, Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 CPC by the plaintiff.2. Suit was filed, interalia, alleging that plaintiff is the owner of property No. BM-30 (West), Shalimar Bagh, Delhi and building plan for carrying additions and alterations in property was sanctioned by the defendant on 20th July 1999. On 23rd July 1998 a notification was issued by the Ministry of Urban Affairs & Employment were by the building bye-laws 1983 were amended in the light of recommendations made by the Committee set up under the Chairmanship of Sh. V.K. Malhotra. Modifications made in said bye-laws have been set out in Para 3 of the plaint. It is alleged that the plaintiff started making additions and alterations in property on the basis of relaxed building bye-laws. Defendant issued show cause notice dated 1st March 2002 alleging that plaintiff had made deviations beyond the sanctioned building plans by way of excess coverage at...

J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 101(2002)DLT503; 2003(66)DRJ251

Vikramajit Sen, J. C.A. Nos. 654-656/2002 654-656/2002 in CP 227/2000 : 1. By orders dated 9.11.2000, Honble Cyriac Joseph, J. had directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 15,56,168/- to the petitioner on or before 11th December, 2000. The question of payment of interest by the respondent was specifically left open. The deposit of Rs. 15,56,168/- has admittedly been made by the respondent within the period allowed by the Court.2. Thereafter, by a detailed orders dated 6.3.2002, Honble Mukul Mudgal, J. had directed the respondents to pay the petitioner interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the afore-mentioned sum of Rs. 15,56,168/- with effect from 17th July, 1997 till the date of payment. My learned Brother had also ordered the payment of costs which he quantified at Rs. 10,000/-. Although, the respondent was duly represented on all hearings previous and subsequent to March 6,2000, it went unrepresented on that date.3. When the mater came up for hearing on 27.5.2002, learned Coun...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Antartica Investment Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2003]262ITR493(Delhi)

D.K. Jain, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), against the order dated May 9, 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D', New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal'), in I. T. A. No. 1379/Delhi of 1996 pertaining to the assessment year 1992-93. According to the Revenue, the order involves the following substantial questions of law :'(a) Whether, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and thereby deleting the additions of Rs. 1,34,50,000 to the income of the assessed ?(b) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in treating the share application money as explained even though the major share investing companies were non-existing ?(c) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessed had discharged its onus of proving the identity and credit-worthiness of both the creditors as ...

Pushpa Godhwani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Del)540; [2003]260ITR582(Delhi)

D.K. Jain, J.1. An order dated November 27, 2001, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'F', New Delhi, in W. T. A. Nos. 71/Delhi of 1997 and 654/Delhi of 1996 pertaining to the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93 is under challenge in this appeal by the assessed under Section 27A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act').2. Briefly stated the background facts are :In her return of wealth for the assessment year 1992-93, the assessed declared the value of her share in immovable properties, bearing Nos. 2137-2140 and 2152, Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, New Delhi, at Rs. 2.50 lakhs. However, while completing the assessment for the relevant assessment year, the Wealth-tax Officer adopted the value of the properties at Rs. 44,08,992. Being aggrieved, the assessed preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals), (for short 'the CWT(A)'). Before the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals), it was argued on behalf of the assessed that a mere possession, ...

Director of Income Tax Vs. Sir Shri Ram Education Foundation

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Del)615

D.K. Jain, J. 1. This appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (for short the Act), by the Revenue, is directed against a composite order dt. 22nd Aug., 2001, passed by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench, Delhi, in ITA No. No. 3591 & 3592(Del)/l996 pertaining to the asst. yrs. 1992-93 and 1993-94. According to the Revenue the order involves the following substantial question of law : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Tribunal has erred in allowing benefit of Section 10(22) of the IT Act, 1961, even though it is not an educational institution but merely providing financial assistance ?' 2. As is evident from the format of the question, the only issue arising for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the assessed, who is only providing financial assistance to educational institutions is entitled to the benefit of Section 10(22) of the Act. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Since the issue raised is purely legal and is no longer rest inte...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Antarctica Investment (P) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Del)526

D.K. Jain, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (in short the Act), against the order dt. 9th May, 2002, passed by Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D', New Delhi (for short the Tribunal), in ITA No. 1379/Del/1996 pertaining to the asst. yr. 1992-93. According to the Revenue the order involves the following substantial questions of law : (a) Whether Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of CIT(A) and thereby deleting the additions of Rs. 1,34,50,000 to the income of the assessed ? (b) Whether Tribunal was justified in treating the share application money as explained even though the major share investing companies were non-existing? (c) Whether Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessed had discharged its onus of proving the identity and creditworthiness of both the creditors as well as the genuineness of the transactions (d) Whether Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the director of those companies could n...

T.N. Tobacco Co. Ltd. and Libra Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC515

1. When the matter was called, no one was present on behalf of M/s.Tamil Nadu Tobacco Col Ltd., Appellant No. 1. As the issued involved is in very narrow compass, we take up both the appeals filed by M/s. Tamil Nadu Tobacco Co. Ltd. and M/s. Libra Constructions and Finance Ltd. for disposal, after hearing Shri V. Ramachandran learned Sr. Advocate on behalf of Appellant No. 2 and Shri Jagdish Singh, learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue.2. We observe from the impugned order, passed by the Commissioner Central Excise that a show cause notice dated 8.3.94 was issued to M/s.Tamil Nadu Tobacco Co. Ltd. for demanding duty of Excise amounting to Rs. 2,09,46,537 and for imposition of penalty and confiscation of land building plant, and machinery used in relation to the manufacture of cigarettes under Rule 209 of Central Excise Rules 1944. The said matter was adjudicated by the Commissioner under Adjudication Order No. 5/99 dated 19.5.99 confirming the demand of duty, imposing th...