|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 200 of 288 Records
-
1993 (10) TMI 108 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B
Penalty, For Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... part IV of the return or by way of a note. The decision of Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in Santdass Nihal Chand s case also cannot come to the rescue of the assessee, because in that case there has been no detection whatsoever by the Assessing Officer pursuant to an enquiry and investigation. On the facts found in the instant case, the declaration of higher income was not suo motu and voluntarily but only after detection by the Assessing Officer through enquiry and investigation. Therefore, in our considered opinion, on the facts of the case penalty under section 271(1)(c) was imposable and rightly imposed by the Assessing Officer and cancellation of the same by the A/c was not correct. Levy of penalty is, therefore, upheld. 8. However, on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that maximum penalty of Rs. 6,97,270 is not leviable. The same is, therefore, directed to be reduced to Rs. 3,48,635. We direct accordingly. The appeal is allowed in part.
-
1993 (10) TMI 107 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
Penalty, For Concealment Of Income ... ... ... ... ..... se judgments lay down general principles about levy of. penalty i.e., totality of circumstances should be taken into consideration. In this case the totality of circumstances leads to the conclusion that the assessee surrendered the two amounts referred to supra after the detection by the department. In fact the judgment in K. Mahim s case relied upon by the ld. counsel supports the case of the revenue. In this case it has been held that the filing of a revised return voluntarily by the assessee when he knew that the department was conducting investigations against him will not exonerate the assessee from the liability of the penalty under section 271(1)(c). In the instant case investigations were carried through the Inspector about the different sources of the income of the assessee and the assessee had knowledge of such investigations and accordingly he offered the two amounts for assessment after detection by the department. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
-
1993 (10) TMI 106 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
... ...
... ... ..... three beneficiaries by passing appropriate orders. We would also like to make it clear that once the entire income has been held to be taxable in the hands of the trustees in their respective capacity u/s 161(1A), the inclusion of the same income in the hands of the respective beneficiaries in their respective returns and its acceptance u/s 143(1) would only be in the nature of a protective inclusion in the hands of the beneficiaries which deserves to be deleted and cancelled u/s 154 regardless of the fact that a period of more than 4 years have already passed. Such deletion of the share income from the trust in the hands of the beneficiaries will also be in consonance with Circular No. 71, dated 20-12-1971 issued by the Board u/s 119, read with sec. 154 of the IT Act, 1961. The ITO is, therefore, directed to grant necessary relief in the assessments of all the three beneficiaries as indicated above. 8 to 18. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1993 (10) TMI 105 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Duty drawback ... ... ... ... ..... and thereafter depending upon the goods actually imported the rate of drawback shall go down as indicated. Footnote to sub-serial No. 2707 envisages reduction in payment of drawback (as an exception to general Note 2(b)) to the extent indicated there in respect of inputs such as zips, buttons/snap fasteners. It does not imply that the entire rate of drawback will be allowed if inputs other than specified inputs are imported under the DEEC Scheme. Use of the words not any other item in the footnote to the sub-serial makes the position clear beyond any doubt. 6. Since in the instant case the applicants have imported items other than those listed in the footnote viz. spindle stoppers, woven lables, washing stickers, paper stickers etc. they could not have been paid drawback under sub-serial No. 2707 and their claims were rightly rejected by the lower authority. 7. In view of above Government do not find any merit in both the revision applications which are accordingly rejected.
-
1993 (10) TMI 104 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Duty Drawback ... ... ... ... ..... d that imported belts having become components of the pants by virtue of their being appended to the pants exported, it follows that the value of the belt had to be added to the value of the pants. From the scrutiny of the export invoices it is also seen that although the unit price of dollar 7.49 includes the value of belt as per cost of break down indicated on the invoice, however, the applicants contend that while working out drawback amount this value of belts has not been included. 7. As there are no findings on this aspect by the lower authorities and Government is also not aware of the calculations by which drawback amount under Section 75 ibid was worked out, it is ordered that if the Asstt. Collector finds this contention correct then he shall accordingly re-work out the applicant s drawback claim under Section 75 ibid on party approaching him within a month of the receipt of this order with necessary documents. The revision application is disposed of in above terms.
-
1993 (10) TMI 103 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Duty Drawback - Switchgears ... ... ... ... ..... ame bulletin Switching device is a device designed to make or break the current in one or more electric circuits . Likewise para 7.8 defines Circuit breaker (mechanical) as a mechanical switching device,.... 5. In short, a Switchgear is a switching device and latter is a device that makes or breaks current i.e. it is a circuit breaker. Conversely too a circuit breaker is a switching device. Hence, view reached by Collector (Appeals) is correct. 6. The applicant Collector s arguments that relevant ISI specification is IS 2516 and not 1885 is unwarranted as it assumes that the two are mutually exclusive or contradictory. In any two entries, there can be overlapping also as is the case here. 7. In view of above, since switchgear is listed under sub-serial 4609 of drawback schedule. Government see no infirmity in the impugned order-in-appeal holding respondents eligible for drawback. 8. In the result, the review proceedings are ordered to be dropped and order-in-appeal is upheld.
-
1993 (10) TMI 102 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
... ...
... ... ..... view Government is sure that when Collector (Appeals) lays down a time limit it is done taking note of all the relevant factors including the remaining visa period available with the appellant and or there is some urgency. An order of Collector (Appeals) has to be extended the respect it deserves and not indirectly frustrated, as in this case, by taking a stand that no review certificate is not yet received. If one felt so strongly about the order-in-appeal emergent steps could be taken to get the certificate or otherwise initiate the process of review. In this case no review has been filed till now by Collector, Chandigarh. Prima facie also there is nothing perverse in the order-in-appeal. Therefore, while rejecting the party s application for reducing the re-export fine or personal penalty it is hereby ordered that the order passed by Collector (Appeals) should be implemented forthwith by the Assistant Collector on party approaching him and Government informed immediately.
-
1993 (10) TMI 101 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Confiscation of smuggled goods ... ... ... ... ..... es) belonging to the applicant Musir Ahmed is set aside. It could be that the goods have already been disposed of. If that be so, the applicants should be compensated to the extent of sale proceeds of the goods. Party s plea that they should be compensated to the extent of market price is, however, not accepted because the case law quoted by the learned consultant (AIR 1976 SC 1414) providing for payment of contracted price was awarded as damages for breach of contract (of delivery of the goods by Railways) and not in the matter of redemption of goods seized and proceeded against under the Customs Act. While taking the view that the sale proceeds will be relevant quantum Government adopts the rationale of certain decided cases Collector of Customs, Madras v. T.D. Adiyapatham - 1988 (33) E.L.T. 514 (Tribunal) and S. Rajendran v. Collector of Customs and Excise, Cochin -1988 (33) 371 (Tribunal) . 9. In the result, the revision application succeeds and is allowed in above terms.
-
1993 (10) TMI 100 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Penalty for involvement in smuggling activity ... ... ... ... ..... 112 of Customs Act, 1962 is available in more than sufficient measure. 6. Apart from above it is also on record that statements were recorded inter alia from Shri Jamaludin R. Khan and Shankar Jaya Dowale first under Section 107 of the Customs Act and then later under Section 108 ibid. Statement under Section 108 being subsequent and before a gazetted officer are apparently made in an objective ambiance and are thus are not impeachable. In both of these statements Yusuf Kadar the applicant, has been clearly incrimiated by the defendants for his role in landing of goods. This corroboration to contents of his own confessional statement dated 26-7-1976 clinches the case against him. 7. For the aforesaid reasons and on independent appreciation of the evidence Government hold that imposition of penalty on the applicant was fully justified in this case. Therefore, revision application being devoid of merit is rejected and the order-in-appeal is upheld. 8. It is ordered accordingly.
-
1993 (10) TMI 99 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Import - Classification of goods for ITC purposes ... ... ... ... ..... BEC imposed only token fines no penalty was imposed at any stage. 9. It is clear from the above that not only Thiamine Mononitrate was classifiable as a permissible item against the said licences as per Indian Pharmacopoeia, some imports of the same items were in effect allowed against the licences which were not export-linked. It is, therefore, considered view of the Government that in the event of such a doubt and difference between foreign standards and Indian standards, it is the Indian standard which should prevail. Therefore, and since the facts clearly reveal that during the relevant time there was some confusion in the Customs House as regards to the legality of import of Thiamine Mononitrate against non export-linked import licences. Government order that benefit of doubt be extended to the applicants. The orders imposing fine are accordingly set aside and licences held valid for the imports. 10. In the result, revision application succeeds with consequential relief.
-
1993 (10) TMI 98 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Prosecution - Stay of criminal proceedings ... ... ... ... ..... inasmuch as they had removed DHCR yarn without payment of duty under improper gate pass and maintained improper daily stock account. The penultimate paragraph, which is also relevant, reads as follows The complainant, therefore, states that the accused firm has indulged in manufacture and clearance of DHCR yarn by misdeclaring the same as DHPR yarn and thus evaded payment of Central Excise duty and thus rendered themselves liable for punishment under Section 9(1)(ii) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 .... From the above, it would be clear that the adjudication made by the Collector has nothing to do with the criminal proceedings, which has been independently referred to. So, even if the appeal is allowed by the Tribunal, it may not have any relevance with regard to the conduct of the criminal proceedings. 10. In view of the above, I am unable to accept the submission made by Mr. Jawahar Sundaram. This petition based on that submission fails and shall stand dismissed.
-
1993 (10) TMI 97 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
Dutiability - Classification - Natural justice ... ... ... ... ..... t be said to be very specific and even the Assistant Collector was not of a firm view as to whether the tobacco dust/powder under seizure was obtained by deliberate crushing of tobacco leaves or it arose during the course of manufacturing bidi patti. 4Considering this position, it is considered. proper to send the matter back to the Collector, Central Excise and Customs for first determining the exact nature of the item which has been seized from the premises of the petitioner and thereafter decide whether it is liable to payment of duty or not. Before proceeding to do so, he shall furnish a copy of the report of the Assistant Collector to the petitioner along with the copies of the documents which have been relied upon in the case as mentioned in the show cause notice. 5.With these directions, this writ petition is disposed of and till such time as the matter is decided by the Collector, Central Excise and Customs, the goods in question shall not be disposed by confiscation.
-
1993 (10) TMI 96 - HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Appeal - Maintainability of ... ... ... ... ..... d before the Board and if any of the parties was aggrieved of the order of the Board, it could move an appeal against the said order of the Board, before a proper forum. 10. In no manner, any illegality or impropriety has been done by the learned Single Judge in passing the impugned order which has been passed on the consent of parties. Within the provisions of law and, therefore, it does not lie good for the counsel for the appellants to say that the order of the learned Single Judge was not a consent order. The propriety of the consent order could not be allowed to be challenged by any of the parties, who are bound by the consent order, which is in concept and thought passed in accordance with law and does not require any interference. 11. Hence both the Letters Patent Appeals are dismissed for being not maintainable and sustainable under law, alongwith its connected CMPs. However, the appellants shall be at liberty to seek clarification from the learned Single Judge also.
-
1993 (10) TMI 95 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... the petitioner, the appeal itself should be finally decided at an early date without insisting for payment of pre-deposit which has been fixed at Rs. 75,000/- by the Tribunal. 3. In view of the said fact, we direct the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi to decide the appeal of the petitioner within one month from the date of presentation of a certified copy of the order of this Court which the petitioner shall present before the Tribunal within one week from the date of its issue according to law. By the impugned order the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 75,000/- on or before 30-9-1993 which date has already expired. Since we have directed the appeal to be heard on merits without pre-deposit of the amount by the petitioner, the recovery shall remain stayed till the disposal of the appeal. With these observations the petition stands finally disposed of. A copy of this order may be given within 24 hours on payment of usual charges.
-
1993 (10) TMI 94 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Interim orders - Appellate Tribunal is competent to pass ... ... ... ... ..... ctor confiscating the goods and permitting redemption on payment of redemption fine, is challenged before the CEGAT and the writ petition is filed seeking a direction to release the goods, without going into the merits of the decision rendered by the Collector. Now that we have held that the Tribunal has got the power to pass appropriate interim orders including an order directing to release the goods, is open to the respondent if it is deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case is open to the respondent/writ petitioner to approach the Tribunal for appropriate relief. 11. For the reasons stated above, this writ appeal is allowed. The order dated 27-9-1993 passed in Writ Petition 16738 of 1993 is set aside. It is also further declared that the decision rendered in the aforesaid writ petitions cannot be considered as laying down any law or binding precedent for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in a matter like this. No order as to costs.
-
1993 (10) TMI 93 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Iron and steel products - Bars and flats ... ... ... ... ..... sel for the petitioners further states that even if the appeal filed by the Department against the decision of the CEGAT is dismissed, the petitioners shall not claim any refund from the Department. In this situation, there should be no difficulty whatsoever with the Department in accepting the excise duty at a higher rate. The only result would be that the state exchequer would get more money and the petitioners would be saved the avoidable botheration. It would not harm any of the parties. 10. Accordingly, it is held that the petitioners in these three writ petitions shall pay excise duty as is prescribed for the product - Flats and not for Bars . Instructions issued by the Department calling upon them to pay excise duty leviable for Bars or for giving any undertaking cannot be sustained in view of the admitted position. The instructions are, accordingly, set aside. 11. The writ petitions are allowed. In the circumstances of these cases, there would be no order as to costs.
-
1993 (10) TMI 92 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Car specially designed for handicapped persons imported by petitioner ... ... ... ... ..... equest under Section 25(2) of the Act for grant of adhoc exemption and pass appropriate orders. Liberty is given to the petitioner to make additional representation to the concerned authorities setting out such circumstances on which he may place reliance for the purpose of consideration by the authorities under Section 25(2) of the Act. The petitioner is directed to send such additional representation if any, within eight weeks from this date. The first respondent shall consider the representations of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. The first respondent shall give a personal hearing to the petitioner. The bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner pursuant to the interim order of this Court in W.M.P. No. 709 of 1985 shall continue to be in force till final orders are passed by the first respondent on the representation of the petitioner. The writ petitions are allowed on the above terms. No costs.
-
1993 (10) TMI 91 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Classification - Re-classification at appellate stage - Precedent - Principles of Judicial Discipline
-
1993 (10) TMI 90 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYD.
Modvat - Loss of original gate-pass during transport of goods ... ... ... ... ..... ke that because he was not concerned directly with the grant or refusal of Modvat credit to the consignee, who is the final manufacturer. The validity of Trade Notice, which is in terms of or in compliance with Rule 57G(4), cannot, therefore, be assailed by the petitioner, which has discharged all its duties and obligations by transporting the manufactured goods on 29-4-1993, which, according to petitioner, was accompanied by the original G.P. 1 gate pass and which is said to have been lost. 7. We find that the petitioner is not a person aggrieved either by the Trade Notice, or by the provisions contained in Rule 57G(4) of the Central Excise Rules, or by refusal by the concerned authorities to grant certified/authenticated copies of G.P. 1 gate pass in terms of Rule 224B of the Central Excise Rules. 8. For the above-mentioned reasons, we do not find any justification to grant any relief, which the petitioner seeks in this writ petition. The same is hereby dismissed. No costs.
-
1993 (10) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SSI exemption - Value of clearances ... ... ... ... ..... e all excisable goods . Therefore, there is no substance in that argument. 15. In the result, W.P. Nos. 8885 and 9766 of 1985, 5484 and 7333 of 1988, 5484 of 1988, 7333 of 1988 and W.P. Nos. 8 and 1539 of 1989 are dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. W.P. No. 7533 of 1986 16. The petitioner challenges the constitutional validity of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Notification No. 175 of 1986 dated 1 -3-1986, and prays for a declaration that they are ultra vires the provisions of the Central Excise Act and Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Admittedly, identical question has already been answered in favour of the Department - vide order of Kanakaraj, J. in W.P. No. 1940 of 1981, etc. batch (referred to supra) and approved by Division Bench in Writ Appeal Nos. 233 to 236 of 1991 - judgment dated 13-3-1991 (referred to supra). In view of the Division Bench judgment (referred to supra), this writ petition has to be dismissed, and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
............
|
