Delhi Court September 2003 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.
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. S and P Threads (i) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2004)(91)ECC55
1. These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against a common Order-in-Appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) had reversed the Order-in-Original passed by the Additional Commissioner.2. The only issue involved in these appeals is as to whether the respondents were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 7/94-CE (NT) dated 1.3.94. The respondents filed application for condonation of delay for claiming proforma credit. But they were served show cause notice dated 15.9.94 that they were not entitled to the benefit of said notification as well as proforma credit. The adjudicating authority denied the benefit of this notification earlier through Order-in-original dated 16.2.96, that order was challenged by them in appeal and then the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 28.4.98 observed that the respondents were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 7/94-CE (NT) as the sewing thread of synthetic staple fibre was covered under that Notification and under Rule 57A. Howe...
M.P. Agro (India) Industries Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC303
1. The above captioned appeals have been filed by the Appellants against a common impugned Order-in-Original dated 20.10.2001 vide which the Commissioner had confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 52,25,447 with equal amount of penalty for the period, August 1997 to August 1999 against appellant Company and imposed penalties against the other Appellants as detailed therein.2. The manufacturing premises of the Appellants No. 1 was visited on 19.3.99 by the Central Excise Officers. On checking of the stock of their finished excisable products as well as inputs used by them in the manufacture of finished products, excess stock of 3899,8 kgs of HDPE fabric, 37739 cement bags and 1550 kgs of wastage was detected and seized. On scrutiny of RG-1 and RG-23A Part I register, it was observed by the Officers that the production shown by the Appellants and recorded in the RG-1 register did not commensurate with and proportionate to the inputs/raw materials issued and that they had shown less production...
Ranjit Singh Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC154
1. Arguing the matter for restoration of the appeal, filed by Shri Ranjit Singh, which has been dismissed by the Tribunal Vide Final Order No. A/342/03-NB(B) dated 23.6.2003, Shri. R.K. Bajaj, learned Advocate, submitted that he could not attend the hearing on 23.6.2003 as he was suffering from high fever and blood pressure. We also heard Shri Virag Gupta, learned DR, who has no objection if the appeal is restored.Accordingly, we recall our earlier order and restore the appeal to its original number.2. Brief facts of the case are that on the specific information, the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, intercepted on 11.6.95 one Contessa car No. PB-10-4787 in which Shri Wirsa Singh and Sarabjit Singh were traveling. The officers also intercepted two scooters No. PB-08J-8261 and PB-08J-9973, which were being driven by Ranjit Singh, the appellant and Shri Naresh Kumar. The search of scooter No. PB-08J-8261, driven by the appellant, resulted in the recovery of foreign cu...
Sushila Steels Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC596
1. Appellant is a manufacturer of steel bars, rods, etc., which were liable to duty under Chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff. With effect from 1-8-97, units like the appellant's were brought under Compound Levy Scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Waste and scrap generated after 1-9-97 in a unit under Compound Levy Scheme were also exempted under Notification No. 49/97. The appellant cleared the waste and scrap produced in their mill before compound levy scheme was introduced, without payment of duty. Under the proceedings impugned in this appeal, the lower authorities have made a duty demand of over Rs. 1.5 lakhs and imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on the appellant in regard to such clearance of waste and scrap produced before the change-over to the compound levy scheme.2. The contention of the appellant in the present appeal is that it was under the impression that once a unit changed over to compound levy scheme, the waste and scrap in stock also remained cov...
Sherwani Industrial Syndicate Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC440
1. The appellants had made pre-deposits of Rs. 35 lakhs and Rs. 7 lakhs under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act in two appeals which they had preferred to this Tribunal against certain demands of duty affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). When those appeals succeeded, the appellants filed an application in July 2000 for refund of the above amounts totalling to Rs. 42 lacs. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner sanctioned the refund but ordered that the amount be adjusted, under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, to0wards certain arreras of Central Excise duty recovery whereof was pending against the party. Against this direction for set-off of the refund claim against the demand of Central Excise duty, the party preferred an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) and the latter held in favour of the appellants and directed refund of the aforesaid amount (Rs. 42 lacs) to them. The Commissioner (Appeals) however, did not accede to the appellant's claim of interest on the amou...
Veer Bahadur Products Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2004)(91)ECC51
1. This application is by the appellant's advocate. It is for recalling Final Order No. 347/2003 NB(C) dated 21.5.2003 passed in the captioned appeal. When the appeal had arisen to be heard by the Bench on 21.5.2003, there was no one to represent the appellants, though a letter dated 24.3.2003 of their advocate seeking adjournment of the hearing was noticed. However, as the bench, on examination of the records, found the case to be one which was fit for instant disposal, the appeal was finally disposed of on its merits as per the above Final Order.2. When the Misc. application arose for consideration by the Bench, again, there was no representation for the appellants. However, 'written submissions' dated 8.9.2003 of the advocate were there on record and the same suggested that the Misc. application be disposed of without hearing him. The 'written submissions' were also accompanied by copies of the judgments which were relied on in the Misc. application.3. We have considered the Misc. ...
Cce Vs. T.P.S. Mfg. and Construction Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC821
1. In this appeal, filed by Revenue, the issue relates to the classification of Body built on motor vehicle chassis.2. Shri Kumar Santosh, learned SDR, submitted that M/s. IPS Mfg. & Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. manufacture bodies designed for transport of goods and bodies of special purpose carrier and spare parts thereof, that the Additional Commissioner under Order-in-Original No. 3/2002 dated 8.2.2002 classified the bodies under Heading 87.07 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act and disallowed the benefit of Notification No. 6/2000-CE dated 1.3.2000; that on appeal filed by the Respondents the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned Order, has set aside the Order-in-original classifying the bodies under Sub-heading 8704.90 of the Tariff in terms of Note 3 to Chapter 87 of the Tariff. He, further, submitted that the bodies manufactured by the Respondents are clearly classifiable under Heading 87.07 in view of the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Ka...
Hotline Wittis Display Devices Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2004)(91)ECC628
1. These are two applications for waiver of pre-deposit of Modvat credit of duty and penalties as under :- 2. Shri B.L. Narasimhan, learned Advocate, submitted that M/s. L.G.Hotline CPT Ltd. manufacture colour picture tube which are supplied to various colour T.V. manufacturers on payment of appropriate Central Excise duty; that some of the colour picture tubes were received back from their buyers and D-3 intimation were made; that after undertaking process of yamming they had cleared the said tubes to M/s. Hotline Wittis Display Devices Ltd. on the strength of invoices issued under Rule 52A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by giving a reference to the duty payment under earlier invoices under which initially the colour picture tubes were cleared and subsequently received back; that the Commissioner under the impugned order has disallowed the Modvat credit taken by Appellants No. 1 on the ground that Appellants No. 2 ought to have paid Excise duty on the higher value since the proces...
Steri Mould (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: (2004)88ITD78(Delhi)
1. These are two appeals by two different assessees against the orders of CIT under Section 263 relating to assessment year 1998-99. The issue involved in these two appeals are similar, therefore, they are disposed off by this consolidated order.2. The brief facts of these cases are that assessments in both of these cases were completed under Section 143(3).2.1 In case of Steri Mould Pvt. Ltd., the return declaring loss of Rs. 60,12,160 was filed, against which the assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on an income of Rs. 2,13,085 on 3-11-1999.2.2 In the case of Ranpharm Investment Pvt. Ltd., the return declaring a net loss of Rs. 1,15,25,320 was filed, against which the assessment under Section 143(3) was completed at a net loss of Rs. 40,707.3. Having examined the assessment records in both of these cases, the respective CIT found that the orders passed by the Assessing Officer were erroneous insofar as they are prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. The Commissioners ...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors Vs. Nav Bhart Nirman Company and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ARBLR309(Delhi); 106(2003)DLT617; 2003(70)DRJ551; 2003(3)RAJ549
R.C. Jain, J. 1. Through this application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') Union of India seeks for setting aside the arbitral Award dated 25.1.01 with additional Award dated 11.6.01. Along with said application, an application under sub-section 3 of Section 34 of the Act has also been made explaining the delay in not challenging the said Awards within a period of three months from the date of making of the additional Award and for extension of time beyond three months but within a further period of 30 days. The Arbitral Award dated 25.1.01 and the additional award dated 11.6.01 rendered by the sole arbitrator are sought to be challenged and set aside primarily on the ground that the sole arbitrator has exceeded his jurisdiction and powers and thereby misconducted the proceedings by making an additional award on the application filed by the respondent-contractor under Section 33 of the Act because the said provision could ...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »