|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 209 Records
-
1989 (5) TMI 202 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... idering anything as goods it should satisfy the test of the meaning of goods, as has neither been defined and interpreted by the legislature and courts. Goods must be something which can ordinarily come to the market to be bought and sold or capable of being sold. Even if, waste fibre is considered as goods than the machinery manufactured by the appellant is not meant for producing or processing any goods but only lost fibre is retrieved and recovered. The waste water nor the lost fibre comes within the ambit of goods nor the process of retrieving and or segregating the fibre from waste water can be considered as processing or manufacture. The waste fibre retrieved from effluent water do not ordinarily come to market for being bought or sold. Hence, the appellants are entitled for the exemption as claimed by them under Notification No. 118/75, dated 30-4-1975 and they succeed in this appeal. The appeal is allowed and the impugned orders of the lower authorities are set aside.
-
1989 (5) TMI 185 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... ed process undertaken. rdquo However, he has not in this background discussed how in the context of the repairs undertaken the process of repair could be considered as manufacture. There is nothing on record to show that in any individual case as held by the learned Collector (Appeals), transformer loses its identity as such and all the essential parts required for working of the transformer were replaced. We, in the facts and circumstances of the case, are only taking note of the process of repair as set out in the Assistant Collector rsquo s order as mentioned above. 13. emsp In view of the case law discussed above, we hold that the repair of transformers in the instant case does not amount to lsquo manufacture rsquo . The appellant is liable to pay duty on the value of spare parts manufactured and used in the old transformers and no duty is chargeable on the labour charges. 14. In the result, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal in the aforementioned terms.
-
1989 (5) TMI 184 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... t with the appellants in so far as the entries having not been made in the RG-I register properly. 10. emsp From the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the settled case law referred to above, the penalty imposed is harsh and severe. As has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. referred to supra, no penalty should be imposed for technical or venial breach of legal provisions or where the breach flows from bonafide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute. A warning in this case would have been sufficient as contended by the appellant rsquo s advocate. The appellants have clearly explained the circumstances under which the boxes were lying in both the places. The mistake appears to be technical. The appellant are entitled to succeed in this appeal. The appeal is allowed and the Revenue is directed to refund the amount of penalty, if paid, within two months from the date of this order.
-
1989 (5) TMI 183 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... t consider himself bound by the judgment of that Court. It is not because the Division Bench of that Court or the Supreme Court had stayed the operation of the learned Single Judge rsquo s judgment, but because the Assistant Collector learnt from the Legal Section that the Department had instructed the Standing Counsel to file an appeal against the decision. Secondly, this approach shows lack of judicial discipline which has been frowned upon in no uncertain terms by the Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs 1983 E.L.T. 1342 (S.C.) AIR 1962 SC 1883. This is but one of the many instances noticed of the lower authorities rendering decisions contrary to the ratio of the decisions rendered by higher quasi judicial authorities. This position requires to be brought to the notice of the Central Board of Excise and Customs for such action as it may deem fit. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the Chairman, C.B.E.C.
-
1989 (5) TMI 182 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Excisable goods ... ... ... ... ..... e Rules. In a subsequent decision in M.P. No. 338/79 dated 16th Jan., 1982 that High Court differed with its earlier decision and held on the basis of Rule 9A that the excise authorities were right in applying the rates prevailing on the date of removal, and thereby agreed with the conclusion of this Court in Alembic Chemical Works case (supra) - See paragraph 17 of Sirpur Paper Mills case (ibid). 7. ensp Besides, this Tribunal in a number of recent judgments, to quote a few, Techno Chemical Industries v. Collector of Central Excise, 1987 (31) E.L.T. 541 Chemicals of India, Faridabad v. Collector of Central Excise, 1989 (13) ETR 692 has also taken the same view after considering the entire case law on the point which includes the various conflicting decisions of the different High Courts in the country and concluded that the excisable goods do not become non-excisable even though fully exempted. 8. ensp In view of the above we find no force in the appeal and dismiss the same.
-
1989 (5) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... f the product could not be doubted. It was in this context that the Tribunal observed that it was immaterial whether the product was actually marketed or not for the purpose of levy of excise duty. In the instant case, the marketability of the product has not been established. This decision is also of no help to the Revenue. 32. emsp In the light of the foregoing discussion, we are of the opinion that the air -SO3 gas mixture which emerged as an intermediate product in the appellants rsquo factory in the course of a continuous integrated process of manufacture of organic surface active agents was not anhydride of fuming sulphuric acid falling for classification under Item No. 14G CET. In the result, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants. 33. emsp In view of the above finding, we do not consider it necessary to discuss and give our findings on the submissions made by both sides on the other related issue of limitation.
-
1989 (5) TMI 170 - SUPREME COURT
Detention period ... ... ... ... ..... ief. It seems to us prima facie that one possible view can be that if parole is granted the period of parole should be counted within the total period of detention and not outside it. As regards the problem raised by the release of a detenue pursuant to an erroneous decision of the High Court, and the subsequent reversal of that decision by this Court, the remedy probably lies in the enactment of legislation analogous to Section 5(1) and Section 15(4) of the Administration of Justice Act, 1960 in the United Kingdom. The question is an important one affecting as it does on the one band the need for effective measures of preventive detention and on the other the liberty of the subject and his right to freedom from detention beyond the period intended by the statute. As the matter is of great public importance, and most cases of preventive detention are bound to be affected, we refer these cases to a Bench of five Hon rsquo ble Judges for reconsideration of the law on the point.
-
1989 (5) TMI 169 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ynthetic condenser rubbing aprons are parts of carding machines. And, in the normal course, they should have qualified for classification under heading 1984.37. But, by Operation of Note 1(a) to Section XVI, they are excluded from that section (Chapter 85 falls in Section XVI). The other and alternative heading then would be 40.05/16. 9. The Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of M.J. Woollens (P) Ltd. (supra) is more to the point. The goods therein were rubber aprons made of synthetic rubber. They were admittedly parts of carding machines used in the woollen industry. The Tribunal ruled classification of the goods under heading 40.05/16(1,) because of Note 1(a) to Section XVI which excluded parts of machinery, though made of rubber, from the scope of that section. 10. In the above view of the matter, the classification by the lower authorities of the subject goods under heading 40.05/16(l) of the Schedule was correct. We uphold the impugned order and dismisses this appeal.
-
1989 (5) TMI 168 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ynthetic condenser rubbing aprons are parts of carding machines. And, in the normal course, they should have qualified for classification under heading 1984.37. But, by Operation of Note 1(a) to Section XVI, they are excluded from that section (Chapter 85 falls in Section XVI). The other and alternative heading then would be 40.05/16. 9. The Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of M.J. Woollens (P) Ltd. (supra) is more to the point. The goods therein were rubber aprons made of synthetic rubber. They were admittedly parts of carding machines used in the woollen industry. The Tribunal ruled classification of the goods under heading 40.05/16(1,) because of Note 1(a) to Section XVI which excluded parts of machinery, though made of rubber, from the scope of that section. 10. In the above view of the matter, the classification by the lower authorities of the subject goods under heading 40.05/16(l) of the Schedule was correct. We uphold the impugned order and dismisses this appeal.
-
1989 (5) TMI 167 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
S.S.I. units and MODVAT ... ... ... ... ..... s ldquo Law Lexicon and Legal Maxims rdquo (page 256-4 II Edition). This book says that a person can be said to have availed himself of something only if he had taken advantage of or profited by that thing or utilised it to his benefit. We do not see how this helps the appellants rsquo case. For, as we have already noted, the notification has provided for two situations, one where the manufacturer (not the factory) avails himself of the credit facility and the other where he does not. There is no dispute that, in the present instance, the manufacturer availed himself of the facility in one factory and not the other. Nothing, in our view, turns on the meaning of the term ldquo avail rdquo in the present case. 16. In the result, we confirm that part of the Collector rsquo s order (which alone is under challenge in the present appeal) which denies the benefit of full duty exemption in respect of the first clearances up to Rs. 15 lakhs by the Kharia unit. We dismiss this appeal.
-
1989 (5) TMI 158 - ITAT NAGPUR
Assessment Year, Deduction In Respect ... ... ... ... ..... n that basis, the Tribunal dismissed the assessee s appeal. 49. In view of the foregoing, therefore, we hold that the assessee is not eligible for any deduction in respect of the ginning and pressing charges received by it from the Federation. It is entitled to such deduction only in respect of the rent or fee for storage received by it under the relevant agreement. In this view of the matter, therefore, we decline to interfere with the order of the A.A.C. 50. Before taking leave of this matter, we may point out that the assessee it would appear, had earlier sought to raise some additional grounds before the Tribunal. There is nothing in the records to indicate that the Tribunal permitted the assessee to do so. Further, even before us, no permission was sought to raise the additional grounds. For a fact, the learned Counsel for the assessee did not press them. In the circumstances, we ignore the said additional grounds. 51. In the result, the assessee s appeals are dismissed.
-
1989 (5) TMI 156 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Assessment Year, Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... ary to go into the various decisions cited before us. Consequently we dismiss the departmental appeal. 10. As regards the assessee s cross-objection regarding the disallowance of Rs. 10,000 out of the total expenses of Rs. 51,664 claimed by the assessee in respect of the business of tephguard agencies, in the course of hearing, the assessee s representative himself conceded that the clearing charges of Rs. 4,000 claimed by the assessee related to payment made to the clearing agents Lee Muir Head (India) (P.) Ltd. and were incurred on behalf of the principal M/s. Air Control Systems and were recovered from them in the subsequent year and that the other expenses were also not fully verifiable. In the circumstances, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowing Rs. 10,000 out of the total expenses of Rs. 51,664 claimed by the assessee is considered to be quite reasonable and does not call for any interference. In the result the assessee s cross-objection is also dismissed.
-
1989 (5) TMI 154 - ITAT MADRAS-C
... ...
... ... ..... wn by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kumbakonam Mutual Benefit Fund (1964) 53 ITR 241 (SC). If all shareholders were to participate in the dividends irrespective of their having transactions with the Nidhi or not, then as explained by the Supreme Court, the position of the Nidhi would not have been different from that of an ordinary bank. A shareholder in the Kumbakonam Mutual Benefit Fund rsquo s case was entitled to receive his dividend as long as he held a share and he need not have to fulfil any other condition. The Supreme Court explained that his position was in no way different from that of a shareholder in a backing company. On the other hand, the essence of mutuality lies in the return of what one has contributed to common fund. The mere fact that only those shareholders who have transitions with the Nidhi during the year were entitled to the dividend make the Nidhi a mutual concern. The order of the CIT(A) is upheld. The departmental appeals are dismissed.
-
1989 (5) TMI 152 - ITAT MADRAS-C
Advance Tax, Application For Refund, Assessment Year ... ... ... ... ..... The circular ends by stating, The purpose of this circular is merely to emphasise that we should not take advantage of an assessee s ignorance to collect more tax out of him than is legitimately due from him. The claim of the assessee could not also be rejected on the technical ground that the application was not made in the prescribed form but was made by filing a return as such. In these circumstances, we have to read the order of the AAC as a direction to entertain a belated application for refund and return the amount which cannot be retained as lawfully assessable tax. When an order is just on merits and does not lead to any miscarriage of justice, it should not be over-turned only on technical grounds. One should think that in the light of the just effect of the order and the administrative instructions given to the Income-tax Officers, this appeal ought not to have been filed at all. We therefore decline to interfere with the order of the AAC. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1989 (5) TMI 151 - ITAT MADRAS-C
Mutual Concern, Mutual Concern, Mutual Fund, Mutual Fund ... ... ... ... ..... down by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kumbakonam Mutual Benefit Fund Ltd. 1964 53 ITR 241. If all shareholders were to participate in the dividends irrespective of their having transactions with the Nidhi or not, then as explained by the Supreme Court, the position of the Nidhi would not have been different from that of an ordinary bank. A shareholder in the Kumbakonam Mutual Benefit Fund s case was entitled to receive his dividend as long as he held a share and he need not have to fulfil any other condition. The Supreme Court explained that his position was in no way different from that of a shareholder in a banking company. On the other hand, the essence of mutuality lies in the return of what one has contributed to a common fund. The mere fact that only those shareholders who have transactions with the Nidhi during the year were entitled to the dividend makes the Nidhi a mutual concern. The order of the C.I.T.(A) is upheld. The departmental appeals are dismissed
-
1989 (5) TMI 149 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... ve to come to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 6,77,505 relates to the Housing Board contracts. The CIT(A) has already found that the net profit shown on Housing Board contracts was ex facie on the high side, after excluding interest payments etc. This aspect also does not stand disputed. There is no material to show that the balance expenditure of Rs. 6,77,505 which relates to the Housing Board contracts is inflated. In the absence of any such material, it is not possible to reduce the figure relating to Housing Board contract from Rs. 6,77,505 to any lesser amount whatever be the eventual resultant net profit. This is the position with reference to the material on record before us. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion, we would hold that the assessee is entitled to a further relief of Rs. 5,77,505, the CIT(A) having already given a relief of Rs. 1 lakh. The Result in the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. The Cross Objection of the Department is dismissed.
-
1989 (5) TMI 146 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Unexplained Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... ave to come to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 6,77,505 relates to Housing Board contracts. The C.I.T(A) has already found that the net profit shown on Housing Board contracts was ex facie on the high side after excluding interest payments etc. This aspect also does not stand disputed. There is no material to show that the balance expenditure of Rs. 6,77,505 which relates to the Housing Board contracts is inflated. In the absence of any such material, it is not possible to reduce the figure relating to Housing Board contract from Rs. 6,77,505 to any lesser amount whatever be the eventual resultant net profit. This is the position with reference to the material on record before us. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion, we would hold that the assessee is entitled to a further relief of Rs. 5,77,505 the C.I.T.(A) having already given a relief of Rs. 1 lakh. The result is the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. The Cross Objection of the Department is dismissed.
-
1989 (5) TMI 145 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Assessment Year, Bad Debt, Chargeable To Tax, Income Tax Act, Interest Tax, Write Off ... ... ... ... ..... year during which it was established to have become a bad debt. In the appeal of the revenue it was contended that in the income-tax proceedings the bad debt had been allowed only in the subsequent year and, therefore, consistent with that income-tax assessment the deduction should be denied. But we find that the CIT (Appeals) has taken note of the fact that while under the Income-tax Act the ITO had a discretion to allow the bad debt in the year of write off or in another year there is no such discretion under the Interest Tax Act. We also find from the facts narrated above that the debt had actually been established or become bad in the previous year and has also been written off in the accounts before presentation to the annual general body meeting. Hence we see no reason to differ from the finding of the CIT (Appeals) and we accordingly confirm his order on this point. 11. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed.
-
1989 (5) TMI 144 - ITAT MADRAS-B
Association Of Persons, Body Of Individuals, Capital Gains, Immovable Property, Lease Rent, Let Out, Movable Property, Rental Income
-
1989 (5) TMI 143 - ITAT MADRAS-B
A Partner, Assessment Year, Closing Stock, Dissolution Of Firm, Market Value, Partnership Firm
........
|
