Delhi Court December 2004 Judgments

Asstt. Cit Vs. P.Z. Estates (P) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)2SOT563(Delhi)

This is an appeal filed by revenue against the order dated 8-3-2001 of learned CIT(A)-XV, New Delhi relating to the assessment year 1997-98."On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in treating the net income on the growth and sale of specialized grass as agricultural income.2. The order of the assessing officer may be restored and the order of the CIT(A) may be set aside with respect to the above mentioned ground(s).3. The appellant craves to be allowed to amend, delete or add any other ground(s) of appeal during the course of hearing of this appeal." The facts and circumstances under which the present appeal has been filed by revenue are as follows. The assessee is a Private Limited Company. It is primarily engaged in business of real estate development viz., acquiring, planning, developing and offering consultancy in the field of Real Estate. The assessee also has the necessary infrastructure to oversee construction work. A company by name M/s.Land B...

Swatantrata Senani R.D. Somani Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)99TTJ(Delhi)1102

1. This appeal by the assessee society is directed against the order of learned CIT, Rohtak dated 20^th June, 2002 whereby he refused to grant registration to it Under Section 12AA.2. The assessee in the present case is a society registered with the Registrar of Firms & Societies, Haryana on 21/6/93 originally in the name of 'R.B. Somani Memorial Samiti', Rewari. Subsequently, the assessee society changed its name to 'Swatantrata Senani R.D. Somani Shiksha Sansthan', Rewari by virtue of Resolution passed on 9/4/2000 and certificate to that effect was issued by the Registrar of Firms & Societies. Haryana on 20/6/2000. It applied in form 10A for registration of charitable trust for institution Under Section 12A(a) to the Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak on 28-12-2001. He, however, found following deficiencies in the application so filed by the assessee society:- (i) The assessee society is old and the application filed in form 10A is late for which no reasons whatsoever have b...

Swatantrata Senani R.D. Somani Vs. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)95ITD305(Delhi)

This appeal by the assessee society is directed against the order of learned CIT, Rohtak dated 20-6-2002 whereby he refused to grant registration to it under section 12AA.The assessee in the present case is a society registered with the Registrar of Firms & Societies, Haryana on 21-6-1993 originally in the name of R.B. Somani Memorial Samiti, Rewari. Subsequently, the assessee -society changed its name toSwatantrata Senani R.D. Somani Shiksha Sansthan, Rewari by virtue of Resolution passed on 9-4-2000 and certificate to that effect was issued by the Registrar of Firms & Societies, Haryana on 20-6-2000. It applied in Form No. 10A for registration of charitable trust for institution under section 12A(a) to the Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak on 28-12-2001. He, however, found following deficiencies in the application so filed by the assessee society : (i) The assessee society is old and the application filed in Form No.10A is late for which no reasons whatsoever have been adva...

Pacific Consultants Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)92TTJ(Delhi)818

1. These are eight appeals by the assessee against a combined order of the learned CIT(A), dt. 10th Feb., 2002, for asst. yrs. 1991-92 to 1998-99. As common issues are involved in these appeals, for the sake of convenience, all the eight appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order, 2. Shri M.S. Syali, senior advocate, along with Shri Satish Khosla and Shri Manu K. Giri, advocates, appeared for the assessee whereas Shri B.D.S. Kharb, GIT, Departmental Representative, and Shri R.P. Meena, Departmental Representative, represented the Department.3. The assessee has taken common grounds in these appeals to challenge the sustenance of order of penalty made by the AO under Section 271C of the IT Act, 1961.4.1 The assessee-company, namely, Pacific Consultants International which had its headquarter in Japan, was engaged in carrying on business of rendering engineering services to various projects in India. During the assessment years under consideration the assesse...

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)99TTJ(Delhi)330

1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the learned CIT(A), dt. 17th Feb., 2000, for the asst. yr. 1995-96. Shri S.K. Gupta represented the Department, whereas Shri Ved Jain, chartered accountant, appeared for the respondent.2. The Department has taken only two grounds in this appeal to challenge cancellation of penalty of Rs. 40 lakhs levied by the AO under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act.3. The learned Counsel for the assessee, Shri Ved Jain, raised a preliminary legal ground to support the order of the learned CIT(A) and submitted that in the assessment order the AO has not recorded his own satisfaction regarding concealment of income and, therefore, on this basis alone the order of penalty is not sustainable. In support of this contention, he placed reliance on the ratio of decisions in the following cases :S.K. Gupta & Co. v. ITO and Ors. (ii) CIT v. Super Metal Re-rollers (P) Ltd. (2004) 265 ITR 82 (Del); and (iii) Ram Commercial Enterprises Ltd. v....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Mahaveer Gases (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(181)ELT260TriDel

1. Revenue is mainly seeking to include the profit made in regard to cylinder repair and maintenance and loading and unloading charges. The contention of the respondent is that maintenance and unloading of cylinders are in no way connected with the manufacture of the gas and therefore the entire amount charged towards those activities are required to be excluded for excise purposes. It is being pointed out that law on this subject is settled by the order of the Apex Court in the case of Baroda Electric Meter reported in 1997 (94) E.L.T. 13 (S.C.) and the Commissioner has passed the impugned order following that order. As against this, the learned DR has submitted that the entire collection by the appellant would not get excluded even in terms of the judgment inasmuch as part of the collection is towards loading of the filled cylinder in the manufacturing factory. He has also submitted that it is well settled that costs up to delivery of the manufactured goods are required to be includ...

Surya Industrial Corporation Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(182)ELT325TriDel

1. M/s. Surya Industrial Corporation were directed by the Tribunal vide Stay Order No. S/392/2004-NB(C), dated 28-8-2004 to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- out of the total demand of Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,23,637.83 confirmed and penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on them. When the matter came up for reporting compliance on 27-10-2004, the applicants had filed a miscellaneous application for modification of the stay Order on the ground that their unit is sick and non-working since long and has been registered with the Board for Financial and Industrial Reconstruction under the provisions of Section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. It has also been mentioned in the miscellaneous application that the provisions of the said Act apply and all the legal proceedings against the sick unit are suspended under the provisions of Section 22 of the said Act. They, therefore, requested that their request for unconditional stay may be reconsidered. On 27-10-2004,...

Cce Vs. Escorts Mahle Ltd. [Alongwith

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Common issue is involved in these appeals, therefore, they are being taken up together. Revenue filed these appeals against the order, in appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the respondent relying upon the decision in the case of Steel Complex Ltd., v. CCE., Calicut - 2004 (61) RLT 187 and held as under : "The issue is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon'ble CESTAT in the case of Steel Complex Ltd. v. CCE Calicut Reported as 2004 (61) RLT 187 (CESTAT-Bon) wherein it has been held that the "Assessable value Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 - Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (DPEG) Rules, 2000 - Job Work - goods sold at factory to unrelated buyers as well as sent to job workers for further processing and sale - Ex-factory sale price and not value at 115% of production to be adopted for goods to job worker even after 1.7.2000 as manufacturer is making losses". Following the ratio of the judgment of CESTA...

Cce Vs. Toshi Auto Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(98)ECC535

1. In this appeal, the Revenue has contested only the setting aside of the penalty on the respondents under Section 11-AC through impugned order. The Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the penalty on the respondents which was imposed by the adjudicating authority under Section 11-AC while confirming the demand of Rs. 7,02,826 on the ground that duty along with interest was deposited by them before the issuance of the show cause notice.3. We find that during the year 1994-1995, M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (for short MUL) imported moulds and fixtures under EPCG Scheme and supplied the same free of cost to the present respondents for manufacture of components meant for use in the manufacture of motor vehicles. The respondents manufactures the motor vehicle parts with the help of those moulds and fixtures. But M/s MUL failed to fulfill the obligation as required under the EPCG Scheme. The re-assessment of the bills of entry was done by the customs authorities and as a result thereof, the dut...

Vardhman Special Steels Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT390TriDel

1. The issue relates to valuation of Nickel Cathodes imported by the appellant from Canada. The purchase order dated 14-5-99 stated as under with regard to price :- "This has reference to offer dated 16th April, 99 from M/s. Metco Marketing, New Delhi and subsequent discussions/correspondence we had with them regarding import of 12 MT of Nickel 4x4 from you. We hereby place our order for the same as per the terms & conditions mentioned here below :- "PRICE US$5455 per Ton GIF Mumbai (National Price) (Final price basis unknown LME Cash settlement of Nickel plus premium of USD 195/MT. LME to be covered after L/C is established." Subsequently the sale price was concluded under letter dated 3-6-99. It stated as under :- "This refers to the contract # 700 321 of our principals, M/s. Ni-Met Resources Inc, Canada. We are pleased to inform you that the cash LME settlement of y/day was USD 4750. Hence your final price is 4750 + 195 = USD 4945. PMT GIF Bombay/Nhava Sheva 2. The appellant cl...