Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1994 1994 (1) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 121 to 140 of 267 Records

• 1994 (1) TMI 150 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Parts of machinery and equipment

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... by the Asstt. Development Officer with the remark ldquo Attested for duty concession rdquo without indicating in each case whether the item was part rsquo or raw material rsquo - Components/Raw Materials to be imported under import licence No. P/D/030703 of 30-4-1991 for the manufacture of RO MEMBRANE ELEMENTS AND SYSTEMS Sl. No. Sl. No. of Customs Notification and end products. Details of the components/raw material with technical specifications Qnty Classification in Import Policy of raw materials and components. (1) Notification No. 155/86/1-3-1986 Sr. No. 1(g) - Customs Tariff No. 84-21.21 mdash mdash mdash (2) -do- mdash mdash mdash (3) -do- Membrane Support Substrate - Polyster Fibre Cloth P/N 84489.4000 45820 Ft. mdash (4) -do- Product Carrier Polyster style fabric impregnated with water based epoxy resin P/N 84505.48 MO 17400 Ft. mdash (5) mdash mdash mdash (6) mdash mdash mdash 9. In view of the above discussion, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 149 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Appeal - Jurisdiction

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... y. As per the proviso to Section 54, the appeal shall lie to the High Court, and the High Court rsquo means the High Court within the jurisdiction of which the aggrieved party ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain. So, if the petitioners are living at Bangalore or carry on business at Bangalore, the High Court of Karnataka would be the High Court to which the appeal is to be preferred. Even if the appeal to the High Court is dismissed, then the direction in the Adjudication Order will stand and if it gives a direction that penalty should be paid at Madras, the non-compliance of the direction alone gives rise to the offence and as such, the court below will have jurisdiction. Thus, I am clear that recourse to Section 54 of the Act will in no way help the petitioners. 5. emsp Taking this view of the matter, I am unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners and therefore this petition fails and shall stand dismissed.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 148 - CEGAT , NEW DELHI
  

  Exemption to SSI

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... io of the judgment quoted above, we hold that the invocation of the extended period in terms of proviso to Section 11A for the confirmation of the demand by the Collector is not legal and sustainable. 13. In view of the above discussion, we confirm the findings in the impugned orders in Appeal Nos. E/899/88-C, E/475/88-C and E/355/89-C that for the purposes of the exemption under Notification Nos. 85/85 or 175/86 the value of the clearances of excisable goods from the appellants rsquo factory and those from the factory of M/s. Freyssinet Prestressed Concrete Co. Ltd. during the relevant periods were required to be clubbed together. However, in view of the finding that there was no suppression of facts and the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A was not invokable, the differential duty recoverable in each of the cases would be only within the normal period of six months of the date of the Show Cause Notice. 14. All the 4 appeals are disposed of in the above terms.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 147 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... enously. There is no satisfactory explanation of the basis for the finding that the basic engineering fee was only for the imported equipments, and did not cover the bulk of the machinery procured indigenously. 11. In the interest of justice therefore, we consider that the matter should be looked into again by the jurisdictional Collector of Customs (Appeals) and accordingly we set aside the order in appeal, and remand the matter to the jurisdictional Collector of Customs (Appeals) for de novo consideration in the light of our above observations. Within one month of the receipt of this order appellants shall furnish their comments on the points made by us above, along with any other information/material they consider relevant. Thereafter, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) will grant them personal hearing, and proceed to decide the matter afresh after observing the principles of natural justice, and then pass a speaking order. 12. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 146 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Cess on vegetable oil

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ce is answered accordingly. 24. The files may be sent to the Original Bench for passing final order. Date Sd/- (S.K. Bhatnagar) Vice President 25. emsp Final order per G.P. Agarwal, Member (J) . - In the result it is held that cotton seed and castor oil recovered by crushing oil seeds even after treatment with caustic soda or steam for the separation of suspending matters such as parts of oil seeds would be liable to cess by virtue of being treatable as Vegetable Oil rsquo in terms of Section 3(h) of the Natural Oil Seeds and Vegetable Oil Development Board Act, 1983 and in accordance with the Majority Opinion cess was not leviable in terms of the Vegetable Oil Cess Act, 1983 on the vegetable oil which was in stock in the appellants rsquo mill on the midnight of 31-12-1983/1-1-1984. 26. emsp All the appeals stand disposed of accordingly with consequential relief to the appellants, if any, according to law. 19-1-1994 Sd/- P.K. Kapoor) Member (T) Sd/- (G.P. Agarwal) Member (J)

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 145 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Appeal - Limitation

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... e appeal before the Collector (Appeals) in pursuance of the direction under Section 35E(2) of Collector Central Excise Pune has been filed beyond 6 months. 5. emsp The statutory limit under Section 35 Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with its proviso requires appeal before Collector (Appeals) to be filed within 3 months from the date of communication of the order impugned and the Collector (Appeals) is given power to condone delay upto a period of 3 months only. Section 35E(4) also requires the adjudicating authority acting under direction of the Collector, under Section 35E(2) to make an application before the Collector (Appeals) within 3 months of date of communication of the order under Section 35E(2). 6. emsp In such situation the order of the Collector (Appeals) in this case entertaining appeal before him filed beyond 6 months is without jurisdiction and on this reason we set aside the impugned order. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. Order dictated in Court.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 144 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Appeal - Remand

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... nts and (2) PVC Compound containing inorganic pigments. In the impugned order, the Collector (Appeals) also confined himself to the consideration of the question of classification of coloured Master Batches. Thus none of the lower authorities gave any finding in regard to the classification of Compound of LDPE (Black Cable Sheathing Compound) consisting of mixture of 2 to 3 Carbon Black with LDPE resin in the form of granules and other additives. In the appeal before us the appellants have also raised the question of classification of LDPE Compound (Black Cable Sheathing Compound). This has not been examined by the lower authority. We therefore, remand the matter back to the Assistant Collector for de novo consideration and give finding in respect of the disputed products in accordance with law and after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants. 5.In view of the above discussion, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 143 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Reference to High Court - Raw material used in manufacture

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... referred to the High Court. Question No. 3 This is again a question of fact dependent upon the other two questions and as we have already held that the questions No. 1 and 2 do not require reference, the same finding holds good for this question also. Question No. 4 Since it is a well settled legal position that technical or minor infractions of a procedural nature cannot stand in the way of substantive benefit if otherwise due, no question arises for reference as a settled legal issue cannot form the subject matter for reference. In the case of Collector of Central Excise v. UP State Sugar Corporation Ltd. reported in 1987 (29) ELT 475, the Tribunal has held that the question whether procedural breach committed is substantive or technical is a question of fact not referable to the High Court. Further, the Department cannot seek review of the order in the guise of a reference application. 5. Accordingly, we reject the reference application as already announced in open court.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 142 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Orders - Adjudication or Appellate

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... serious doubts about the impugned order being drafted by the Collector. The case is, therefore, fit for remand, as concluded by the learned brother. Since the aforesaid finding is based only on circumstantial evidences, it would not be proper to make any specific enquiry into this case. 7. emsp Central Board of Excise and Customs, however, may like to make a general enquiry and issue suitable instructions to the adjudicating officers to desist from taking the help of the subordinate officers in drafting the orders. A quasi-judicial officer has to apply his own mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and reach at his own decision unfettered by anything else. From this it follows that even the narration of facts in an adjudication order has to be drafted by the adjudicating officer himself. 8. emsp In short, the matter is remanded to the Collector for de novo adjudication. A copy of this order be also sent to the Chairman, Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 141 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Classification

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ng terms with consequential relief and adjustment as may be called for. The appeal is disposed of in the foregoing terms. rdquo In this regard it is seen that in the case of United Offset Process Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay reported in 1985 (19) E.L.T. 242, the Tribunal had held that when classification was made by the Appellate Collector under a different entry than the one set out in the show cause notice on the basis of the fact in the case he could not be deemed to have made out a new case not make known to the appellant at the time of show cause notice and the modification of the Tariff Item would not cause any prejudice to the appellants. On the ratio of this decision of the Tribunal, we see no force in the appellants contention that for the period between 25-1-1986 and 28-2-1986 no duty can be demanded from them by assessing the goods under Tariff Item 68 in terms of the decision of the Tribunal. 6. In view of the above discussion, the appeal is rejected.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 140 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
  

  Confiscation of goods used for concealing smuggled goods

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... der the Customs supervision, only with 250 drums. Hence, the VCRs could not have come to be placed in the lorry and these drums could not have been used for camouflaging those VCRs. In view of this undisputed factual position, it is evident that the loading of the VCRs under the declared goods covered by lorry receipt was done, much after the lorry left the Kandla Free Trade Zone. The appellants, M/s. M.J. International are found to be genuine despatcher of the goods and if some goods are illegally loaded on this vehicle by the Truck driver and re-arranged the goods so as to conceal the illegal goods, in our view such a case should not be visited with fine or penalty. Section 119 has to be viewed in the perspective of the facts of each case and cannot be applied in a routine or mechanical fashion. In this view, we set aside the fine of Rs. 55,000/- and also the penalty of Rs. 15,000/- imposed on M/s. M.J. International. 8. Consequential relief, to follow, wherever called for.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 139 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Stay / Dispensation of pre-deposit

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... final product and the modvat credit was taken only for the purpose of paying this duty and the appellants had filed the Classification lists indicating that they will be availing modvat credit. 10. emsp The question as to whether the assessee could voluntarily pay duty in respect of goods exempted by a Notification and implication thereof are arguable on merits. Similarly implications of these trade notices could also be taken into account only in the above context. At this stage the Trade Notices produced before us themselves show that there was some practice of voluntary payment of duty on exempted goods was prevailing for some time and the Department has been shifting its stand from time to time. We feel that the assessee should not be put to hardship on account of such shifting stands and the balance of convenience is in the circumstances in their favour. We therefore, waive the pre-deposit of the amount in question and stay its recovery during the pendency of the appeal.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 138 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Adjudication - Ex parte decision

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... is and the bank transactions by themselves do not in any way constitute evidence of manufacture and sale of labelled bidis by the appellant. At the same time the preponderance of probability was there that the appellant was having various types of labels and Jhillis etc. with him and was using them in labelling the bidis in his premises and selling labelled bidis for the past six months or so. The show cause notice was, therefore, valid for the normal period of six months prior to the date of its issue (but was time barred for the extended period). The Department was, entitled to demand duty and impose penalty only in respect of such quantity which could be shown to have been manufactured and cleared during the normal period. We, therefore, feel that the liability has not been correctly determined and is required to be readjudged. 49. emsp The impugned order is, therefore, modified and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication in accordance with law and the above findings.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 137 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... e use of the word lsquo simply rsquo in that sentence. In any case, as rightly pointed out by the learned advocate since the judgment has been set aside, as brought to notice by the learned JDR, observations of Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej Boyce would no longer be a binding authority. 26. emsp In view of the aforesaid discussion, I hold that there can be more than one normal price in respect of industrial consumers on the basis of regions taking into account the market conditions prevailing in the said region as in the facts and circumstances of this case. Sd/- (P.C. Jain) Dated 11-11-1993. Member (T) FINAL ORDER Order per G.P. Agarwal, Member (J) . - In view of the Majority Opinion that there can be more than one normal price in respect of industrial consumers on the basis of regions taking into account the market conditions prevailing in the said region, all the appeals are allowed. emsp Sd/- Sd/- (P.K. Kapoor) (G.P. Agarwal) Dated 6-1-1994 Member (T) Member (T)

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 136 - CEGAT, MADRAS
  

  Exemption to SSI

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... e certificate holder. The lower appellate authority has not given any finding in the light of these certificates. However, we observe that the competent authority who had issued the certificate would be the one who can give any authoritative view as to the validity of the certificates whenever a manufacturer holding SSI certificate leases out the factory and the authorities below should have taken the opinion of the Director of Small Scale Industries or the competent authorities who issued the certificates and the statutory rules and orders under which SSI certificates are issued. In the light of our above observations we hold that the matter will have to be reconsidered. We, therefore, set aside the impugned orders and remand the matter to the original authority for de novo adjudication in the light of our above observations after giving the appellants an opportunity of hearing and after obtaining the views of the authorities as above. The appeals are thus allowed by remand.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 135 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... f M/s. GMMCO reported in 1987 (27) E.L.T. 344 are relevant and by and large can be applicable to the present case also. We have already held that price was not the sole consideration and therefore, the CIF value has to be determined in terms of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1963 for imports prior to 16-8-1988 and under Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 for imports on or after 16-8-1988. We, therefore, in the light of the findings rendered in the preceding paragraphs, hold that the CIF value shall be loaded by 8.3 for imports covered by the Customs Valuation Rules, 1963 as well as imports covered by Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. In this view of the matter, we allow the appeal of the Department against the order of Collector (Appeals) in so far as the imports on or after 16-8-1988 are concerned. We reject the appeal of M/s. GMMCO against the order of Collector (Appeals) in which the Collector had held that the CIF value on imports prior to 16-8-1988 shall be loaded by 8.3 per cent.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 134 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Confiscation

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... ble import of the car into India. But it is at the same time well-settled that suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of evidence. The department has not been able to show with the evidence that the appellant had connived with the illegal import of the car at the time of its import or in forging the related documents which is the charge against him in the show cause notice. The department also could not trace Mr. Wolfgang, who had imported the car under carnet procedure or Ram Gopal. In these circumstances of the case, one is inclined to agree with the order proposed by the Hon rsquo ble Member (Judicial) that the appellant be given the benefit of doubt and penalty on him be set aside. The order proposed by Hon rsquo ble Member (Judicial) is, therefore, concurred with. FINAL ORDER 25. In view of the majority opinion, the benefit of doubt is extended to the appellants. While the confiscation of vehicle is upheld but the penalty imposed on the appellants is set aside.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 133 - ITAT NAGPUR
  

  Penalty, For Concealment Of Income

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... dated 14th January, 1992 is prior to the decision of the Bombay High Court relied upon by the assessee in P.M. Shah s case. Apparently it seems to be in conflict with the later decision of the Bombay High Court. However, the decision in P.M. Shah s case of Bombay High Court being later decision is being followed by us. 6. We are of the opinion that though by the rule of the preponderance of the probability the Department has a strong case of imposing penalty, in view of the two Bombay High Court decisions quoted above, we have no alternative but to cancel the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under the main section 271(1)(c) and confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) by relying upon the Explanation to section 271(1)(c). 7. After taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the CIT(Appeals) was not justified in confirming the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer. We delete the same. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 132 - ITAT MADRAS-D
  

  Assessment Year, Authorised Representative

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... Assessing Officer on the basis of such agreement made by the authorised representative of the assessee. It cannot therefore, be said that the assessee was not aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, I am of the considered view that an appeal lies to the appellate forum from the orders of the assessment so made especially keeping in view the Madras High Court s judgment in the case of Indian Express (Madurai) P. Ltd., wherein it was highlighted that an assessment is nothing but an ascertainment of the tax liability of the assessee correctly. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case, I set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restore the matter to the Assessing Officer. He is directed to frame fresh assessments as per law after ascertaining the correct facts obtaining in the assessee s case and after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 11. In the result, the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

  ---

• 1994 (1) TMI 130 - ITAT MADRAS-B
  

  Assessment Year, Partnership Firm, Private Trust, Sales Tax

  
  
  ... ...
  ... ... ..... an outgoing represented by the discharge of the liabilities attached to a business which an assessee acquires for consideration would depend upon whether the liabilities themselves could be related to the revenue account or to the capital account, as the case may be . 19. As we see it, the rationale behind the aforesaid principles is equally applicable to cases of the type under consideration where the successor steps into the shoes of the predecessor not by reason of having purchased the business of the predecessor but in his own right as the beneficiary of a trust and in accordance with the terms of the trust deed. In the case before us, the outlay in question, namely, the sales-tax paid, is clearly an outlay on revenue account. We, therefore, hold that the assessee is entitled to revenue deduction in respect of the sum of Rs. 88,773. We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to allow revenue deduction in respect of the said sum. 20. In the result, the appeal is allowed.

  ---

1 ....34567891011........ 14