Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 150 Records
-
1992 (6) TMI 109
Baggage - Re-export ... ... ... ... ..... ended that when the applicant went through the Green Channel the camera was detected, But on questioning whether he was in possession of any other article, he had admitted that he was having a gold chain also with him. It is true that the applicant did not deny about the possession of the gold chain in question. However, it is clear that without making any declaration the applicant wanted to clear the goods by opting to the Green Channel. The question of knowledge of law in this regard is not relevant on the facts of this case. It is highly unbelievable that the applicant did not know that it was necessary for him to declare the goods. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that he wanted to take the goods by opting to the Green Channel. He also gave the statement that the gold chain and the camera were purchased by his uncle at Hong Kong. In the circumstances of the case, the re-export sought for cannot be granted. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
-
1992 (6) TMI 108
Demand - Removal of semi-finished goods from one factory to another for conversion into finished goods
-
1992 (6) TMI 107
Appeal - Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... irection/order is of the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi, whereas it has been communicated by the Superintendent, Central Excise on the direction of the Assistant Collector. Accordingly, appeal against such order lies to this Tribunal being an order of the Collector. This has been held so in Tribunal rsquo s judgment in the case of IOL Ltd. v. Collector of Customs 1992 (59) E.L.T. 477 (Tribunal) . We also observe from the impugned order that there are no reasons given for passing the aforesaid operative part of the order. In the circumstances we while allowing the stay application, at the same time remand the matter to the Collector for readjudicating it in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the applicants/appellants herein. We also direct, as has been urged by the learned advocate that the digester is ready for delivery, that the Collector should decide the case within the period upto 20th of June, 1992. Order to be given lsquo DASTI rsquo .
-
1992 (6) TMI 106
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... nto all the other contentions which were raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants and the point of difference can be answered straightaway. Thus, answer to the point is as under - In the facts and circumstances of this case, slitting of duty-paid jumbo rolls into pancakes would amount to manufacture inasmuch as a new and marketable article comes into existence, and the evidence on recoed shows that pancakes were cleared for home consumption and were also proposed to be cleared for export against Advance Licences. Pancakes are, therefore, liable to duty even though they fall under the same Sub-heading in view of Supreme Court rsquo s judgment in Laminated Packaging case (supra). rdquo 41. The point of difference having been answered, the matter may be placed before the Bench which originally heard the appeal. (N.K. BAJPAI) TECHNICAL MEMBER FINAL ORDER 42. In view of the majority opinion the appeal is dismissed. (P.C.JAIN) TECHNICAL MEMBER (S.V. MARUTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER
-
1992 (6) TMI 105
Confiscation ... ... ... ... ..... of the Customs Act for unauthorised import as well as misdeclaration is justified. 14. As far as the third point is concerned, we have to find out as to what is the proper order to be passed in this case. It is an admitted fact that the appellant is a small SSI unit and the proprietor is a retired person from the Army and due to the fact that such heavy redemption fine is already paid by him, he is in dire trouble and in the facts and circumstance of this case, the redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh in each of the cases is excessive. We have considered this aspect of the case and we find that in each of the case, the goods worth Rs. 2,94,818.09. Roughly the C.I.F. Value of goods would be about Rs. 3 lakhs. In the circumstances of the case, we reduce the redemption fine to a sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand) instead of Rs. 1 lakh in each of these cases. Appellant entitled for consequential reliefs. 15. Subject to the above modification these appeals are dismissed.
-
1992 (6) TMI 104
Redemption fine ... ... ... ... ..... should again be cut into proper sizes. Unless they are cut to proper sizes, they will not become labels. Since these are strips of woven fabrics these can only be taken as woven fabrics in running length. The character of these goods therefore, remains as that of fabrics and it cannot be said that they have reached to the stage of labels in order to qualify for import under OGL as covered by Appx. 6, List-8, Part-1 of the relevant policy. That being so, the goods are not covered under additional licence and they are rightly confiscated under Sec. 111(d) of the C.A. rsquo 62. However, it is seen that the appellants are a S.S.I. Unit and in the circumstances of the case, the redemption fine of Rs. 1,50,000.00 for redeeming the goods valued at Rs. 2,80,000.00 is excessive. On that count we reduce the fine to a sum of Rs. 70,000.00 (Rupees seventy thousand only). But for this modification, the appeal is dismissed rsquo . The appellants are entitled for the consequential reliefs.
-
1992 (6) TMI 103
Baggage - Confiscation ... ... ... ... ..... terms of Section 77 of the Customs Act, 1962 luggage of the passenger is considered to be baggage. These are the principles laid down in the decision reported in 1985 (21) E.L.T. 341. Therefore, the confiscation of the goods is not in accordance with law. However, the petitioner wanted to re-export the same. At the time of inventory he did not make such a request. It was through a letter dt. 4-3-1991 wherein he made such a request. The re-export of the goods can be ordered only if the goods belonged to a particular person and the particulars of the said person are given by the appellant. The appellant was abroad only for a period of five days and while coming back he brought the goods in question. Therefore, the question of re-export does not arise as the appellant is an Indian National. However, the order is set aside and the goods are ordered to be released to the appellant on his payment of usual duty as may be assessed in this case. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
-
1992 (6) TMI 102
Customs - Interest on customs duty payable on warehoused goods ... ... ... ... ..... bove-said decision, the appellants have no liability to pay interest. The reasoning is that the liability to pay interest is linked with the liability to pay duty. It cannot be delinked or divorced from the liability to pay duty. The appellants rsquo liability to pay duty is there, when they clear the goods from the warehouse for home-consumption. But when they clear the goods from the warehouse for re-exportation, there is no question of payment of duty. Since there was no payment of duty in view of the re-export, the natural as well as legal corollary is that the appellants cannot be burdened to pay interest on a non-existing duty. The principles enunciated in the above decision squarely apply to the facts of this case. In that view of the matter, we allow this appeal and set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities in demanding the interest from the appellants. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the appellants are entitled for the consequential relief, if any.
-
1992 (6) TMI 101
... ... ... ... ..... he goods was effected on 18-12-1990 i.e. within the period of 90 days of 6-11-1990 as required under Public Notice No. 95-ITC(PN)/90-93 dated 23-11-1990, it has to.be held that the disputed moulds were covered by the Open General Licence in terms of ITC Public Notice No. 83 dated 6-11-1990. In this regard, it would be pertinent to mention that in his letter No. IPC/17/39/90/16 dated 2-4-1991, the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports had also informed the appellants that having regard to the fact that the LC was opened prior to 6-11-1990, its validity and shipment period was being extended upto 30-4-1991 for Moulds worth US 110.200. 10. Before we part with the matter we would observe that paragraphs 204(6) and 224(2) of the Import Policy relied upon by the Additional Collector are not relevant to the issue under consideration in this case since they relate only to REP licences. 11. In view of the above discussion, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1992 (6) TMI 100
Valuation - Regional discount ... ... ... ... ..... l of the goods. Such trade discounts shall not be disallowed only because they are not payable at the time of each invoice or deducted from the invoice price. rdquo Thus the non-indication of regional discount on the invoices (because of raising the invoices on net assessable value after deducting the discount from ex-factory prices) will not render the regional discount inadmissible. The Bombay High Court judgment in Ballarpur Industries Ltd. - 1987 (30) E.L.T. 267 (Born.) also supports the above view. 6. In view of the foregoing position the disallowance of regional discounts on the grounds that the same were not indicated in the invoices and the same had not been passed on to the customers is not proper and correct and therefore is not sustainable. It is not the case of the Department that the discount is inadmissible otherwise. Accordingly, the impugned order based on incorrect legal position, incorrect facts and not based on any evidence is set aside allowing the appeal.
-
1992 (6) TMI 99
Stay/Dispensation of prior deposit ... ... ... ... ..... of the majority order, the preliminary issue raised in the above appeals is disposed of in the following terms - (i) In terms of the Supreme Court rsquo s directive in the case of ONGC v. Union of India, the appeals of Public Undertakings are to be heard by a Committee of Secretaries constituted by the Cabinet Secretary, notwithstanding the appeals pending in the Tribunal (ii) The Revenue also being a party to the directive, should not resort to coercive measures till the settlement by the appointed Committee of Secretaries. Sd/- (R. Jayaraman) Member (Technical) Sd/- (S,L. Peeran) Member (Judicial) 15. I am signing the majority view recorded by the Ld. Judicial Member and concurred by the Ld. Technical Member with reservation as in my considered opinion it does not flow from the order written by them for, it nowhere says that appeals of Public Undertakings are to be heard by a Committee of Secretaries constituted by the Cabinet Secretary. Sd/- (G.P. AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER
-
1992 (6) TMI 98
Original Assessment, Revised Return ... ... ... ... ..... ssee by way of issue of shares would not make any difference in view of the clear pronouncement of the Bombay High Court and the reasons what we have stated hereinabove. The assessee s right to appropriate the mixed funds to the declaration of dividend for investment allowance is also not absolute and as held by Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT 1991 187 ITR 182, it depends upon the facts on record and the provisions of the statute and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in our opinion, the view adopted by the CST (Appeals) that the appropriations having made out of the profits/general reserve would normally be out of the profits of that year or the general reserve as existing at the beginning of the year and that only if there is any shortage, such shortage would be out of the difference in the depreciation, appears to be correct. 7. In the result, the appeals of the assessee have no merit. They are, accordingly, dismissed
-
1992 (6) TMI 97
Cash Basis, Penalty Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... y case the assessee was able to substantiate the explanation offered and succeeded in proving that the explanation is bona fide because the amount in question which has been added for the assessment year 1982-83 has been treated as receipts by the assessee in the assessment year 1983-84 and was also assessed by the ITO for that year. It is only when the assessee pointed out that there is a double addition of the same amount, the ITO reduced the amount from the assessment year 1983-84 and it is only on account of this fact the assessee did not consider it fit to press the ground before the CIT(A) for the assessment year 1982-83. Therefore, we are satisfied that the facts of the assessee s case do not attract Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. In the light of the judgments supra, we are satisfied that penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not warranted. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld. 9. In the result, the cross appeals are dismissed
-
1992 (6) TMI 96
Amnesty Scheme, Assessment Proceedings, Late Filing, Penalty Proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... e assessee has been co-operating not only in payment of tax but also interest. It was also stated that he was satisfied that the assessees petition deserved sympathetic consideration and therefore, petition for both the assessment years were allowed, vide para 8 of the revisional order dated 6-9-1988. In view of these categorical findings given by the CIT, there is no force in the contentions urged by the learned departmental representative. 9. In view of these facts and circumstances, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the assessee is also entitled to the benefit of immunity of the amnesty scheme because the assessment was completed on 10-9-1986 which falls within the extended time limit till 30-9-1986. Consequently, the order of the CIT (Appeals) confirming the penalty is set aside and the penalty levied is hereby cancelled. The ITO is also directed to refund the penalty, if it has been paid by the assessee already. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed
-
1992 (6) TMI 95
... ... ... ... ..... Hindu deity falls within the meaning of the word individual in section 3 and can be treated as a unit of assessment under that section. An assessment to tax can be made on the deity through the shebaits. The Hindu idol is a juristic entity capable of holding property and of being taxed through its shebaits who are entrusted with the possession and management of its property. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court cited above the property held by the family deity is assessable in the hands of the deity as an individual through its shebaits and the department is at liberty to assess it accordingly. In our opinion, the property dedicated by the assessee cannot be said to belong to the assessee or owned by the assessee to bring it to tax under the Wealth-tax Act. In this view of the matter the assessee is entitled to succeed for deleting such property dedicated to the family deity from the wealth-tax assessment. 9. In the result, appellant succeeds and the appeal is allowed
-
1992 (6) TMI 94
Interest Payable By Assessee, Penal Interest, Waiver Of Interest ... ... ... ... ..... nal assessment order regular or regular assessment order is very much relevant in this case. Viewed from this perspective and taking into account the decision of the Dy. CIT (A) in restoring the matter, no interference is called for with the order of the Dy. CIT (A). However, inasmuch specific ground No. 2 taken before the Dy. CIT(A) in grounds of appeal by the assessee, namely, the assessee denies liability to interest under section 217 and hence same may please be cancelled was not specifically dealt with by the Dy. CIT (A), I direct that while passing the fresh order as directed by the Dy. CIT(A), the ITO should consider this contention also after observing the principle of natural justice and also the provisions of Rule 40(1) because the return was filed on 30-1-1986 and the assessment was made on 12-2-1987 after more than one year and thus one of the conditions laid down in Rule 40 is satisfied. 11. In the result. the appeal succeeds as per further directions given above
-
1992 (6) TMI 85
Interest Payable, Trading Liability, Waiver Of Interest ... ... ... ... ..... cancelled. The material now given by the assessee to indicate that amounts owed by M/s Satyanarayana Bros. was much more than the amount due to the assessee, has to be considered in deciding whether there was any chance of the assessee recovering any amount due to it. Similarly the exact position and the chance of recovery has to be ascertained from the liquidator with regard to the debt from M/s Satyanarayana Bros. (P.) Ltd. With regard to the amount of Rs. 10 lakh the ITO has to consider whether it is a business loss, even if it is not a bad debt, keeping in view the decisions cited above. Since the matter regarding profit under section 41(1) is remitted to the ITO, we are of the opinion that this issue may also be remitted to the ITO for fresh consideration after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee of being heard. For this purpose we set aside the orders of the authorities below and remit the matter to the ITO. Both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
-
1992 (6) TMI 84
Deduction In Respect, Export Business, Previous Year ... ... ... ... ..... se (b) in respect of the entire turnover of the predecessor, as if the export turnover of the assessee was nil in the earlier year. This claim of the assessee is based on the decision of the Tribunal in Mid East Shipping (P.) Ltd. s case where it was decided after taking into account the notes of clause, the memorandum explaining the statute and the the speech of the Finance Minister that the provisions of as section intended to encourage export and any increase over the earlier year was entitled to the deduction. Keeping that object in view the original claim of the assessee for deduction in increase in the turnover from that of the predecessor is very fair and just. We cannot allow the revenue to subvert the section for defeating the just claim of the assessee. We therefore set aside the orders of the authorities below on this point and direct the ITO to grant the admissible deduction treating the turnover of the predecessor as that of the assessee. 8. The appeal is allowed
-
1992 (6) TMI 81
Co-operative Society, Profits And Gains, Property Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ourt went on to observe that section 80QQ restricted the rather wide dictionary meaning of the word book . In that regard, the Court observed that the question was not whether the books printed are of enduring value but whether they answer the description of books . It was also not necessary that to answer the description of book , a book should have wide sales, or should be in circulation all over the country. Thus, the true ratio of the Andhra Pradesh case cuts at the very root of the assessee s claim. 24. In view of the foregoing, therefore, we hold that CIT (A) was not justified in allowing assessee s claim for deduction under section 80QQ even to a limited extent. On a proper construction of the section, the assessee is not entitled to have benefit at all under the said section. We, therefore, set aside the impugned orders of the CIT (A) on this issue, and restore those of the Assessing Officer. 25. to 39. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1992 (6) TMI 80
Business Expenditure, Capital Expenditure, Expenditure On Acquisition, Patent Rights, Revenue Expenditure
|