Delhi Court May 2005 Judgments

Cit Vs. Hindustan Cycles and Tubes Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2005]147TAXMAN555(Delhi)

Swatanter Kumar, J. Commissioner of Income-tax being aggrieved from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, dated 28-82003 has preferred the present appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It is contended that the following substantial question of law arises for consideration of the court in the present appeal:'(A) Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in setting aside the order passed by the assessing officer under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?(B) Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the allowability of claim of payments towards Provident Fund (PF), Family Pension (FP), Employee State Insurance (ESI) and administrative charges are debatable issues and cannot be termed as mistake apparent on record?'2. The assessed had filed his return for the assessment year 1992-93 and assessment was completed vide order dated 20-1-1994 under section 143(3) of t...

Bhagsons Paint Industries Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(102)ECC85

1. M/s Bhagsons Paint Industries (India) manufactured paints and varnishes. In addition they manufactured Thinners also. The appellants classified Thinner also under Tariff Item 14 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff and claimed by exemption under Notification No. 71/78-CE.The Revenue has classified Thinner under Tariff Item 68 of the old Tariff and denied the benefit of Notification No. 71/78 on the ground that the aggregate value of clearance exceeded Rs. 20 lakhs.2. Shri Bipin Garg, Ld. Advocate for the appellant mentioned that they are contesting the demand of duty only on the ground of time limit; that the show-cause notice has been issued on 5.9.81 for demanding duty for the period 1979 to June 1980. He submitted that initially as per Explanation III to Notification No. 71/78, value of the goods manufactured without aid of power are not to be computed for the purpose of determining the value of clearances under the said notification; that this explanation was amended subseque...

Universal Cables Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This appeal has been directed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reversed the order of the adjudicating authority who allowed their refund of the duty amount by holding that the same is hit by the principle of unjust enrichment.2. The facts giving rise to the present case may briefly be stated as under: The appellants during the period in dispute i.e. 1-3-1982 to 31-3-1986 were engaged in the manufacture of Wires and Cables and using wooden drums for winding the same. They included the value of those drums in the assessable value of their final products (wires and cables) for the payment of the excise duty. They claimed the benefit of the provisions of Rule 56C for the duty paid on the wooden drums, but their claim was rejected by the Department. Finally, the Tribunal allowed the benefit of these provisions vide final Order dated 30-7-1990 and set aside the order of the lower authorities. The Tribunal while disposing of ...

Mayur Tex Process House Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(102)ECC84

1. Shri Kamaljeet Singh, Ld. Advocate submitted that the appeal filed by M/s Mayur Tex Process House has been dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of time limit; that Commissioner (Appeals) has taken the date of despatch as the date of communication to the appellant which is wrong; that the order was received by them only on 15.1.2002 and the appeal has been filed on 6.3.2002 which is within time limit specified under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act. We find force in the submissions of the Ld. Advocate as the Commissioner (Appeals) have taken the date of dispatch on 18.12.2001 for the purpose of computing the limit of filing the appeal. No date, on which the order reached the appellants has been mentioned in the impugned order, therefore we hold that the appeal has been filed within time limit specified under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act.2. The appellants are independent processors liable to pay duty under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act on the basis...

Shreyans Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(187)ELT57TriDel

2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of paper and were availing the benefit of credit in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of paper and the same was cleared on payment of duty. With effect from 1-4-2001 the appellant opted for benefit of Notification No. 3/2001, dated 1-3-2001 in respect of the paper and paperboard or articles made therefrom manufactured, starting from the stage of pulp, in a factory, and such pulp contains not less than 75% by weight of pulp made from material other than bamboo, hard woods, reeds or rags etc. The Revenue issued a show cause notice asking reversal of credit in respect of the inputs lying in stock and finished goods lying in stock in view of the provisions of Rule 57AG of Central Excise Rules. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty.4. The contention of the appellant is ...

Khandelwal Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(102)ECC89

2. The appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). In this case the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of process of cotton fabric and they were availing the benefit of Notification No. 5/99-CE. On 19.4.99 and 20.7.99 the officers of revenue visited the factory of the appellants and it was found that they were undertaking the processing with the aid of power whereas the Notification provides exemption only on the ground that the power is not used in the processing of the fabric.3. In the impugned order, the seized cotton fabric was ordered to be confiscated and allowed to be redeemed on the redemption fine of Rs. 60,000 and penalty of Rs. one lakh is imposed on the appellant.4. The contention of the appellant is that the revenue also issued a separate show-cause notice regarding demand of duty after denying the benefit of Notification No. 5/98 and 5/99 for the past clearances and demand was confirmed. The contention is that on a...

Rajender Sharma Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(188)ELT307TriDel

2. The appellant filed these appeals against common adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise whereby by penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs each was imposed under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules. The appellants are the Directors of M/s. Mannu Plastic Industries (P) Ltd. A show cause notice was issued to M/s. Mannu Plastic Industries and Mannu Electrical Ltd. on the ground that M/s. Mannu Plastic Ltd. issued 96 invoices showing the clearances of plastic PVC compounds on the basis of which M/s. Mannu Electrical Ltd. availed the benefit of credit. During investigation, it was found that only invoices were issued, no input was cleared by the M/s. Mannu Plastic Ltd. and no input is received by M/s. Mannu Electrical Ltd. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand denying the benefit of Modvat credit and also imposed penalties on the present appellants.3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Shri Anil Kumar appellant submitted that he was appointed as a Director in M/s. Mannu ...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Shiv Gram Udyog Sansthan

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(188)ELT39TriDel

1. These are two appeals filed by the Revenue against two order-in-appeals by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the demand of duty in respect of Acid Slurry got manufactured on job work basis by M/s. Shiv Gram Udyog Sansthan.2. We have heard Shri U. Raja Ram, ld. DR and Shri Bipin Garg, ld.Advocate. The facts in brief are that the respondents are getting Sulphuric Acid and LAB on payment of duty on which Modvat credit is availed of by them. Both the inputs are being sent to the job worker for converting into Acid Slurry under Notification No. 214/86-C.E. The Acid Slurry received back by the respondents from their job worker is used in the manufacture of Detergent Cake and Detergent Powder. The Detergent Cake attracts Central Excise duty whereas Detergent Powder is exempted from payment of duty. It is the case of the Revenue that Acid Slurry which has been used in the manufacture of Detergent Powder which is exempted from payment of duty should suffer Excise duty in terms ...

Punjab National Bank Vs. Dcit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)280ITR270(Delhi)

1. These four appeals preferred by the assessee against four separate orders- of the Id CIT (A) -XVII, New Delhi dt 28.22003 involve common issue and the same are, therefore, being disposed off by a single order for the sake of convenience.2. The solitary effective ground raised by the assessee which is common in all these appeals reads as under:- "That the Id CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the additions made by AO in respect of interest tax recovered by the Appellant Bank from its borrowers in the chargeable interest as it does not form part of interest. It is accordingly prayed that interest tax @ 2/102 (3/103 for AY 97-98) is to be charged instead of 2/100 (3/100 for AY 97-98) from the Bank" 3. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to these appeals are as follows. The assessee in the present case is a Nationalized Bank, which filed its return of interest for the years under consideration declaring chargeable interest as follows: 4. During the course of assessment proce...

Munna Kumar Vs. State Through N.C.T. of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 120(2005)DLT110; 2005(83)DRJ92

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The offence alleged against the petitioner is one under Section 143 of the Railways Act, 1989. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that in view of Section 180D of the said Act which has been introduced in the statute book by Act 51 of 2003 w.e.f. 01.07.2004, the said offence would be bailable. Section 180D of the said Act reads as under:-'180D. Inquiry how to be made against arrested person.--(1) When any person is arrested by the officer authorised for an offence punishable under this Act, such officer shall proceed to inquire into the charge against such person.(2) For this purpose, the officer authorised may exercise the same powers and shall be subject to the same provisions as the officer in charge of a police station may exercise and is subject to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), when investigating a cognizable case:Provided that--(a) if the officer authorised is of the opinion that there is sufficient evid...