Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1990(26)ECC50; 1988(17)LC186(Bombay); 1988(36)ELT283(Bom)
1. The petitioners manufacture mechanical seals which can be used only in Centrifugal pumps and compressors. For this purpose they have a collaboration agreement with M/s. E.G. & G. Sealol Incorporated of the United States of America. The petitioners import various parts which are required for the manufacture of such mechanical seals. These parts are :(a) Ceramic Rings, (b) Sealide Rings, (c) Springs, (d) Spring Retainer, (e) GFT insert, (f) Bellows Cores, (g) Carbon Blanks, (h) Rotary Head 670, (i) Teflon Bellows, (j) Grafoil Packing, (k) Set Screws, (l) 'O' Rings, (m) Carbon Seal Rings, (n) Mating Rings, (o) Seal Sub-Assembly, (p) Stationary Seal Assembly, (q) Rotary Assembly, (r) Seal Components, (s) Type 43 Components :- (i) Carbon Seal Face, (ii) Band, (iii) Shell, (iv) Friction Ring, (v) Spring, (vi) Spring holder, (vii) Ceramic Ring, (viii) Seat Gasket.The Commissioner of Industries, Gujarat State has issued a certificate dated 16th October, 1981 certifying that these parts are ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1988KAR457; 1988(1)KarLJ249
K.A. Swami, J.1. R.F.A.No. 14/1978 is filed by the plaintiff and R.F.A. No. 48/1976 is filed by the defendants. In this Judgment the parties will be referred to with reference to the position assigned to them in the trial Court. As both the appeals arise out of the same suit, they are disposed of by this common Judgment.2. O.S.No. 94/1972 was filed by the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs. 48,409-06 being the amount due towards the work contract entrusted to it under Ex.P. 10. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendants illegally terminated the contract and illegally forfeited the earnest money deposit and also failed to pay the amount towards the work done under the contract Ex.P. 10. Therefore, under all the heads together, the plaintiff prayed for a decree for recovery of the aforesaid sum.3. The defendants disputed the claim made by the plaintiff and contended that the contract was terminated in accordance with the provisions contained therein ; that the plaintiff failed t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1987Delhi323
Mahinder Narain, J. (1) Navjivan Cooperative House-Building Society Ltd. has filed his writ petition against an order passed by the Delhi Cooperative Tribunal in an appeal No. 46/1585/78/H Commissioner of Income Tax /876 dated 20-7-1984. . (2) The case of the petitioner is that it is a society which, was originally registered under the Bombay Cooperative Societies Act, as extended to Delhi. On coming into force the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972, it become a Society under that Act. it is the case of the petitioner Society was formed in the year 1956 with the object, inter alias of acquir. ing land for housing for its members. It is not petitioner Society that respondent No. 3 of its founder members who had formed the on 4th August, 1956 as one of its founder members. He was also a member of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society. It is further the case of the petitioner Society that respondent No. 3 had deposited on 19th February', 1963 a sum of Rs. 8,000.00 towards l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1987)(32)ELT131TriDel
1. This is a revision application filed before the Government of India, which has been transferred to the Tribunal, and is being treated as an appeal.2. The appellants are a partnership concern in the small scale sector engaged in the printing of pure silk sarees falling under Item 20 of the Central Excise Tariff. They were exempt from payment of duty.During the later half of 1980 they started on experimental basis hand printing of viscose sarees without the aid of any machine operated by power of steam. Man-made fabrics fall under Item 22. The appellants submit that they were not using any machine in the printing of these sarees and they were not liable to pay the additional duty of excise in terms of Notification No 179/72, dated 24-4-1972 as amended by Notification No. 298/79, dated 24-11-1979. On 28-11-1980 the Central Excise officers visited the premises of the appellants and seized 107 art silk sarees valued at Rs. 8,560.00. The appellants explained to the Assistant Collector an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (1987)20ITD768(Hyd.)
1. These two appeals are against the consolidated order of the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') setting aside the assessments made by the ITO under Section 147 of the Act and directing him to redo the same afresh. The prejudice caused to the revenue was on account of the omission of the ITO to consider whether two businesses done under the names of Pillai Enterprises and Sagar Enterprises were the concerns of the assessee or not. We are asked to decide in substance one question of law, that is, (7) whether the Commissioner had jurisdiction to revise assessment order admittedly made under Section 147 and (2) a question of fact whether there were materials report that two businesses really belong to the assessee.2. The original assessments for these two years had a chequered history. The assessment for the year 1971-72 was made on 11-11-1971.The income declared by the assessee-firm was accepted as correct.However, this assessment was reopened under ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1985)IILLJ509Mad
1. This writ petition is for certiorari to quash G.O.Ms. No. 1482 (Labour) dated 4th July, 1984, in and by which the Government of Tamil Nadu directed a reference of the dispute between the workmen and the management of the Boiler Auxiliaries Project of Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Ranipet, North Arcot District in respect of bonus for the accounting years 1981-82 and 1982-83. 2. The facts of the case are as follows : The Supervisor Union, BHEL/BAP, Ranipet, raised an industrial dispute against the management of Boiler Auxiliaries Project of BHEL, Ranipet over the issue of payment of bonus for the years 1981-82 and 1982-83. Conciliatory talks were held by the Commissioner of Labour in this dispute. The other unions functioning in the establishment, viz., Boiler Auxiliaries Project, Anna Workers Union, Ranipet also participated in the conciliatory talks. Since no settlement was possible the Commissioner of Labour sent a conciliation failure report to the Government. Thereupon, consider...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar
Reported in : (1993)46ITD104(Asr.)
1. The appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 1975-76, and the cross-objection relating thereto are conveniently considered together and disposed of by a common order.2. The major objection of the Revenue through its first ground is about the cost of construction of a cinema building by the assessee-firm and the addition made on account of unexplained investment. The Income-tax Officer made an addition of Rs. 6,56,186, which represented the difference between the cost of construction as per the Departmental Valuation Officer of Rs. 23,76,505 and the cost of construction as per the assessee's books of Rs. 17,20,320. It was pointed out from para 8 of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the Departmental Valuation Officer made valuation five times and each time the cost of construction worked out was different. The first assessment which was made by the Income-tax Officer by order dated March 28, 1979, was set aside by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1985]156ITR463(Raj)
Sidhu, J.1. On an application made by the assessee under Section 256(1), Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter called 'the Act'), the Appellate Tribunal made a reference to this court inviting our opinion on three questions of law framed by the Appellate Tribunal as follows :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right, in holding that the purchase and installation of secondhand machinery not earlier used by the firm, which was otherwise an industrial undertaking, disentitles the firm from claiming deduction under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that mere purchasing of a polishing machine by an undertaking already in existence and addition of one more process to the existing manufacturing in the accounting year corresponding to the assessment year 1969-70 did not constitute setting up of a new industrial undertaking ?(iii) Whether, on the facts an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1984WLN585
G.M. Lodha, J.1. All the petitioners mentioned above claim to be the Managers of the Primary Agriculture Credit Co-operative Socities in Bharatpur District holding substantive posts and alleged that they are permanent employees. They have now received the orders which are impugned orders issued by the Managing Director, Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Bharatpur directing their compulsory retirement under Rule 17 of the Krishi Rin Datri Sahkari Samitiyon ke Vyavasthapakon ke Chayan, Niyukti and Seva Niyam, 1977 thereinafter referred to as, `the Rules, 19J7) in pursuance of the decision of the Committee. A specimen copy of the order passed in Ismail Khan's case is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:dk;kZy; nh Hkjriqj lsUVy dksvksijsfVo cSd fy0] Hkjriqjdzekad@_.k@293 fnukad 8&1&83 14&2&83Jh blekbZy [kak O;oLFkkid xzke lgdkjh lfefr fy0 }kjklgk;d vf/k'kk'kh vf/kdkjh i0 lfefr uxjfo'k; & vfuok;Z lsok fuo`fRr ckcr Afnukad 8&7&83 dks desVh dh cSBd gqbZ A ftl cSBd es vkidk ekeyk izLrqr gqvk...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1983(12)ELT258(Del)
Sachar, J. 1. This group of petitioners was heard together as common points arose in all these petitions. The arguments were addressed in C.W. 2131/1982. A part from details as to the quantity to be imported and the dates there is no difference and the judgment in this case will govern the other writ petitions also. 2. The petitioners import defective/secondary grade stainless steel circles. The said material is broadly used in the consumption of industries engaged in the manufacture of the utensils in the country. By Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter to be called the 1962 Act) duty of Customs shall be levied at such rates as may be specified under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter to be called the 1975 Act). Goods having been received the petitioner presented their bill of entry for clearance to the Customs Authorities. The petitioners claim that they were entitled to clear the goods by paying rate of duty under entry No. 73.15(1) in the schedule to 1975 Act, wh...
Tag this Judgment!