|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 178 Records
-
1989 (6) TMI 247 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Oppression and mismanagement ... ... ... ... ..... ill be sold by private negotiations in the presence of the Local Commissioner appointed by this court. The Local Commissioner will ensure that the sale price received from the prospective purchasers is deposited in a scheduled bank (ii) the clients of Mr. Baldev Kapoor will intimate to the clients of Mr. Narang by registered acknowledgment due letter the offer received by them. In case those shareholders offer to purchase the buses at prices higher than the prices for which Mr. Kapoor s clients are intending to sell the buses, the buses will be sold to those shareholders. (iii) the confirmation of the sale will be made by this court and till such time, no valid title be passed to the transferee. Accordingly, Shri B. K. Gupta, Advocate, Chandigarh, is appointed as Local Commissioner. He is present in court and is directed to see that the abovesaid orders are strictly complied with by the parties. His fees are fixed at Rs. 5,000. This application stands disposed of accordingly.
-
1989 (6) TMI 238 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Detention order ... ... ... ... ..... The detaining authority has never considered that the facts disclosed by the witnesses were not to be disclosed to the petitioner detenu and that the disclosure of the same would be against the public interest. Therefore, in the facts of the case, non supply of the copies of the statement of the witnesses relied upon by the detaining authority has resulted into deprivation of the petitioner rsquo s right to make effective representation against his detention and he has been deprived of his right to know the grounds of detention. In this view of the matter, the order of detention cannot be sustained. 5. In the result the petition is allowed. The order of detention produced at Annexure lsquo A rsquo to the petition is quashed and set aside. The petitioner is ordered to be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Rule made absolute accordingly. 6. Office is directed to send a copy of the writ to the Superintendent, Central Prison, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad, immediately.
-
1989 (6) TMI 229 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... oustically designed enclosures which are ordinarily used as attachments with stereo or hi-fi systems or with radios (including transistor sets), tuners, radiograms, gramophones (including record players) and tape recorders or players (including cassette recorders or players) having in-built stereo devices. 9. emsp It is admitted that woofer and tweeter are not housed in acoustically designed enclosures. As contended by the Departmental Representative the term speaker is independent from speaker system and in that sense only it was used in Item 33F (2) and hence the condition of acoustically designed enclosure refers to speaker system only and not to the speaker, and speaker as such is classifiable under Item 33F (2) and it attracts countervailing duty. 10. emsp In the view we have taken, the impugned order is upheld and the Department is justified in bringing woofer and tweeter under Item 33F (2) for the purpose of countervailing duty and accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 227 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the discretion exercised by the High Court is legally sustainable?
Whether the accused have a special right to remain on bail merely because they have been enlarged under proviso (a) to Section 167(2) of the Code?
Held that:- The offences alleged are of serious nature. I am of the opinion that the discretion exercised by the High Court does not call for any interference.
The accused cannot claim any special right to remain on bail. If the investigation reveals that the accused has committed a serious offence and charge-sheet is filed, the bail granted under proviso (a) to Section 167(2) could be cancelled. The petitions are, therefore, rejected.
-
1989 (6) TMI 226 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... the factory of the appellants or their job workers is irrelevant and to this extent the lower authorities erred in placing reliance on Rule 57D(2) proviso. But the decision of Collector (Appeals) that the polythene bags are not intermediate products in the manufacture of the final product of the appellants deserves to be upheld for the reasons outlined by us. We accordingly reject the appeal. It may be noted that in show cause notice it was alleged that polythene bags are not intermediary products. 13. Before parting with the case we should take note of the fact that the appellants had alleged discrimination against them. They are justified in their contention. There should be uniformity of treatment for situations and products placed in similar circumstances. The authorities below may look into the matter how in similar circumstances another manufacturer has been permitted to avail of the benefit which has been denied to the appellants and take steps to rectify the position.
-
1989 (6) TMI 225 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Exemption to S.S.I. Units ... ... ... ... ..... ngful. In this context, therefore, we observe that for a manufacturer who is registered with the D.G.T.D. and is not holding a Small Scale Unit Industries registration certificate, the benefit of notification will be available only if the clearances in the previous financial year have not exceeded Rs. 7.5 lakhs and the current financial year rsquo s clearances are also not likely to exceed Rs. 7.5 lakhs. The effect of this would be that for such non-registered Small Scale Units, will be eligible for the benefit only when their clearances are upto Rs. 7.5 lakhs in the previous financial year and also in the current financial year. It appears to us that the proviso has been provided to enable the licensees to get the Small Scale Industries registration done and the breather given for the purpose is till the clearances upto Rs. 7.5 lakhs have been made. In view of this, we hold that there is no infirmity in the order of the lower authority and accordingly the appeal is rejected.
-
1989 (6) TMI 224 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Import - Misdeclaration as to description ... ... ... ... ..... remand the matter to the Collector for de novo consideration as to whether the machine as such conforms to the description as given in the licence and whether its value is acceptable for the purpose of assessment after taking into consideration the evidence on record including the Engineer rsquo s certificate produced as also any other evidence that the Collector may choose to rely upon. Collector can also call upon the appellants to produce whatever evidence is within their reach. We are doing this reluctantly as we find that the Collector has passed the order without going into other aspects regarding the acceptance of the value and the declaration as given by the appellants. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Collector by remand to decide the matter de novo in the light of what we have held above after giving the appellants an opportunity of hearing and to produce evidence in support of their pleas. The appeal is thus partially allowed by remand in the above terms.
-
1989 (6) TMI 223 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... ubts have been expressed regarding the correctness of the instructions contained in Board rsquo s letter F. No. 15/19/86-CX. 1, dated 5-6-1986 by some Collectors. 2. The matter has been examined in the Board. The said instructions dated 5-6-1986 were issued with reference to the unamended Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as it existed prior to its amendment vide Central Excises and Salt (Amendment) Act, 1985. These instructions are not relevant after the aforesaid amendment of Section 11A. Therefore, at the threshold we hold that the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise is without jurisdiction and is sustainable in law. In this view of the matter, we uphold the impugned order appealed against and dismiss the appeal. At this stage Shri Narasimhan, the learned counsel for the respondent sought leave to withdraw the cross-objection. Leave is granted and the cross-objection is dismissed as withdrawn. The appeal has been disposed of accordingly.
-
1989 (6) TMI 222 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Plant and machinery - Capital investment ... ... ... ... ..... (iv), there are no details as to the nature of these electrical installations and to what these are relatable i.e. whether for the transformer alone or for other purposes also. Since this issue is connected with the question of inclusion of the cost of transformer, the question in this regard will have to be decided based on the findings as to whether the cost of transformer can be included or not. Regarding the inclusion of the cost of anodes we hold that the electrolysis cells can be said to be complete only with the anodes fitted thereon. Since the anodes are not consumable the value of the same has to be included as held by the learned Collector. In view of what we have held above, the matter is required to be re-examined and therefore we remand the case to the lower authority for de novo consideration in the light of what we have held above after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants to adduce evidence in this regard. The appeal is thus allowed by remand.
-
1989 (6) TMI 221 - CEGAT, MADRAS
MODVAT credit ... ... ... ... ..... the credit actually availed of is in respect of the lacquered sheets which is the declared input. There was no need for the lower authorities for having gone into the question of availment of credit in respect of the plain sheets in the facts and circumstances of this case. We, therefore, direct that the lower authorities should go into the question de novo and decide the matter after taking into consideration what we have set out above by correlating the duty paid towards the plain sheets which have gone for lacquering and which can be correlated with lacquered sheets. It will be for the appellants to establish with documentary evidence their case in this regard before the lower authorities. We, therefore, set aside the order of the lower authority and remand the matter to the Assistant Collector for deciding the case de novo after giving the appellants an opportunity to substantiate their claim in the light of what we have stated above. The appeal is thus allowed by remand.
-
1989 (6) TMI 217 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... K. Prakash Anand, Member (T) and agreed to by Shri I.J. Rao, Member (T), I in order to complete the judgment would like to add that the photo-copy of the advice given by the Indian Plywood of the judgment is on record and reads as follows - Indian Plywood Industries Research Institute Date 16-3-1987 ldquo ...... The samples sent by you do not conform to the definition of rdquo Decorative Plywood . According to Indian Standard Specification IS 707, decorative plywood should be made of decorative face veneers which have attractive appearance due figure, colour, green, lustre, etc. In IS 1328, species of timber commonly used for decorative veneers or decorative plywood are given. The face veneers of the samples sent by you do not belong to any of the species listed in IS 1328 and they do not have marked lustre, grain or any other characteristic conforming to decorative veneer. In view of this, the samples sent by you cannot be termed as ldquo decorative plywood rdquo ..........
-
1989 (6) TMI 216 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ve to be established. And, even if established, the principle that would apply is laid down in the judgment of the S. C. in Mis. East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta -1983 (13) E.L.T. 1342 (S.C.) A.I.R. 1962 S.C. 1893, namely, that a licence obtained by fraud is voidable and is good till avoided. Therefore, goods imported prior to its avoidance are validly imported. 6. The petition, therefore, succeeds. Clearance of the goods having already been allowed at the admission of the petition, no order in that behalf need be made. Clearance was allowed on the furnishing of a bank guarantee. That bank guarantee must now stand discharged. 7. Mr. Bulchandani for the respondents applies for leave to take appropriate proceedings against Hindustan Trading Company and the petitioners. The respondents shall be free to adopt such proceedings, if any, against the petitioners are available to them under the law. 8. Rule absolute accordingly. 9. No order as to costs.
-
1989 (6) TMI 215 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Order - Finality ... ... ... ... ..... urisdiction, therefore, the impugned order suffered on this count also and becomes bad in law. 25. For this very reason, the impugned Order-in-Appeal against the aforesaid order is also not sustainable. 26. That apart, the submission of the Learned Counsel to the effect that once the Assistant Collector had dropped the proceedings thereafter no further order could be passed on the basis of same show cause notice, as rightly held by the Appellate Collector in his first order dated 25-9-1982 is also correct and in view of this position, the department rsquo s contention that the Show Cause Notice survives cannot be upheld. On this count also, therefore, the impugned Order-in-Original suffers - having been passed without a Show Cause Notice and for the same reasons the Learned Collector rsquo s order also cannot be held as proper. 27. In view of the above discussion, the orders of the lower authorities are set aside and the appeal is accepted, as already announced in open Court.
-
1989 (6) TMI 211 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... to it unless it results into any legal complication or it jeopardise any legal interest of the respondent. Prima facie, the respondent has not been able to show us any such complication or injury. At the same time, we make it clear that, for the present, what we are to do is to allow the applicants to be joined as co-appellants so that they can be enabled to agitate this matter and put-forth their case. We do not say anything regarding their right or their claim vis-a-vis the goods confiscated by the department and it will be open to both sides to raise any legal pleas on this issue or any other issue at the time of hearing of the appeal. So, this order is without prejudice to legal contentions of the party, whatever they may be. So we pass the following order This application is allowed. The applicants shall be joined as co-appellants. The amendment shall be carried out immediately by the appellants. 6. The appeal is listed for hearing on 26-9-1989. No notice may be issued.
-
1989 (6) TMI 210 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Import - DEEC Book ... ... ... ... ..... clusions and penalise the appellants which is unfair. The action of the Department as well as the Addl. Collector in imposing the penalty appears on face of the record and on the facts of the case to be harsh, unjustified and unreasonable. On mere venial breach or clerical error such penalty cannot be imposed as has been observed in the ruling of the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court relied by the appellants in the case of Hindustan Steels Ltd. (supra). There is no mis-declaration in this case and the Department has not proved its charges. The contentions of the appellants that there was a clerical error in filling the shipping bill is acceptable in view of overwhelming other supporting documents produced by them. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside by allowing this appeal. The appeal is allowed and the appellants are entitled to refund of the penalty paid by them. The same should be refunded within three months from the receipt of this order by the respondents.
-
1989 (6) TMI 209 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... redients of overt action on the part of the applicants. There could be a bona fide belief that they had given the correct description of the input as lsquo re-rollable scrap rsquo in respect of ship breaking scrap. 7. Having regard to the foregoing, we direct the applicants M/s. Tigranic Metal and Steel Industries to furnish a bank guarantee for Rs. 3.23 lacs reportedly being the appropriate duty involved for the period after 1-3-1986. The direction for furnishing the bank guarantee for this amount instead of cash deposit is in view of their submission that the Government, is considering waiver of recovery of duty under Section 11C. On furnishing the bank guarantee as above, there shall be stay and recovery of the duty and penalty amounts from all the three applicants. The applicants are granted eight weeks time from the date of communication of this order for compliance and they shall report compliance within nine weeks, failing which their appeals are liable to be rejected.
-
1989 (6) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... Of course, the purpose of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act being to exercise rigorous control over the manufacture of drugs and related substances, the definition is much wider than in the Central Excise Tariff Schedule. But in so far as a substance fits in with the definition in the Drugs and Cosmetics Act as well as the definition in the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, there is no good reason to discard the evidence in the shape of the drug manufacturing licence granted to the respondents which shows the subject goods as drugs as prima facie evidence of the fact that they are drugs for the purpose of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule also. Order per S.V. Maruthi Member, (J) . -I agree that the products merit classification under Item 14E of the Tariff Schedule. However, I am of the view that in the light of the classification of the products under Item 14E of the Tariff Schedule the question of considering the classification under Item 68 of the Tariff Schedule does not arise.
-
1989 (6) TMI 207 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Packing of Cement ... ... ... ... ..... adesh High Court in the case of Birla Jute Manufacturing Company Limited v. Union of India and Others 1980 (6) E.L.T. 593 (M.P.) , as well as the ruling of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Keso Ram Cements v. Union of India and Others reported in 1982 (10) E.L.T. 214 (A.P.). The Larger Bench has also referred to the ruling of Karnataka High Court in Writ Petition Nos. 13625/77,16563 and 16564/79 in case of Bagalkot Udyog Limited v. Union of India and Others. We also note that Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Begalkot Udyog Limited reported in 1989 (41) E.L.T. 647 (Tribunal), has taken the same view following the ratio of the ruling referred to above. Therefore, following the above rulings, we hold that cost of packing material is not includible in the assessable value of the Grey Portland Cement. In this view of the matter, the impugned order appealed against is set aside and this appeal is allowed with consequential relief.
-
1989 (6) TMI 206 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Gold control - Confiscation ... ... ... ... ..... ts and the connected records and found them to be in order (iv) that the gold ornaments under reference were not entered in the Register or Bahi Khatas of the firm that the same were purchased by his father who looked after the business. (v) that it was not possible to prepare itemwise list of the recovered ornaments due to paucity of time. 19. From a perusal of the above gist the only incriminating facts which can be considered relevant for the purposes of Section 27 are - (i) the said gold ornaments were purchased by the appellant from a person coming from outside about whom he had no knowledge and (ii) he did not hold any certificate recognising him as a goldsmith nor did he have a gold dealers licence to deal in gold and gold ornaments. These two facts are not sufficient to constitute contravention of Section 27(1) of the Gold Control Act in view of the interpretation of the scope of the term lsquo business rsquo as already stated earlier. 20. Hence the appeal is allowed.
-
1989 (6) TMI 205 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ding 38. He has produced a copy of the order of the Tribunal (Collector of Customs, Bombay v. CEAT Tyres (I) Ltd. And J.K. Industries - Order Nos. 961-976/87-C, dated 18-12-1987 printed in 1989 (44) E.L.T. 333 (Tribunal). He submitted that this decision of this Tribunal, not having been set aside by the Supreme Court, may be followed. 3. Shri Sunder Rajan, learned Departmental Representative accepted that the Tribunal rsquo s earlier order cited by the learned Advocate fully covers the issue involved in this case. He, however, reiterated the arguments of the Revenue advanced in the matter before the Bench (Collector of Customs, Bombay v. CEAT Tyres (I) Ltd. And J.K. Industries), to which Shri Haksar referred. 4. On perusal of the Tribunal rsquo s order, we see no reason to depart from the same. Following it, we allow these two appeals and order that the insoluble sulphur be classified under heading 25.01/32(10) CTA and consequential relief should be granted to the appellants.
........
|
