Hoist - Judgment Search Results

Hercules Hoists Limited Acit Vs. Mumbai

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Sanjay Arora, A.M. 1. This is a set of four Appeals by the Assessee directed against the Orders by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Mumbai ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 07.09.2010, 07.09.2010, 21.12.2010 and 13.09.2011 for...

Hercules Hoists Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)LC27Tri(Delhi)

Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-III is under challenge in this appeal.2. Appellant, engaged in the manufacture of electric hoists and brake motors, is also manufacturing rotor-stator assemblies for captive consumption in the manufacture of electric hoists and

Consolidated Hoists (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1998)LC434Tri(Delhi)

1. Appellant engaged in the manufacture of hoists was paying duty on the basis of invoice price under Rule 173C(11) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944

Hercules Hoists Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT833Tri(Mum.)bai

notes to the HSN.He held that systems of pulley blocks without chains could not perform the function of hoisting loads, and therefore upheld the order of the Assistant Collector. Against this order the present appeal is filed.2.

Hercules Hoists Ltd. Vs. Cce and C

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(100)LC557Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Hercules Hoists Ltd. sold some of the hoists manufactured by it to Batliboi & Co. Ltd. In terms of the

Hercules Hoists Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(141)ELT199Tri(Mum.)bai

indicating also lift of 2.5 metres establishes that the goods are other than pulley block and were of hoists. The Commissioner (Appeals) concluded that the reference to lift of 2.5 metres in the invoice does not establish

Hoist-o-mech Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1984)(18)ELT442TriDel

an appeal in terms of Section 35P(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.2. The appellants manufacture Hoists and Cranes. They also manufacture Micro Speed Attachments which are supplied to customers only when ordered. Micro speed

Consolidated Hoists P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1993)LC183Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Both the stay application as well as the appeal are against the order in original No. 068/CEX/1991 dated 23-10-1991.2. Though this day only stay application was listed for hearing, after hearing both the sides and...

Chandrabhushan Prasad Purushottam Prasad Mishra Vs. Hercules Hoists Lt ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1992)94BOMLR309

'the Act').2. The first Respondent is a Company engaged in the manufacture and sale of Travelling Trolleys, Electric Hoists, Cranes and other allied equipments. The first Respondent has a factory at Mulund, Bombay, where it employees about

Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Vs. Mechanical Hoist Mfg. Divis ...

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Matched in: Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Vs. Mechanical Hoist Mfg. Division