|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 221 to 240 of 445 Records
-
2001 (12) TMI 483 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Ladle assembly - Classification of ... ... ... ... ..... ng 10 but it removed this machine and transported to its customer rsquo s premises in disassembled form, over a number of instalments, owing to the impossibility of transporting the complete machine at one time. 4. emsp The conclusion of the Commissioner (Appeals) that without sufficient evidence, in the nature of blue prints or diagrams or technical specifications that what was cleared was in fact identifiable as parts of complete machine in such quantity as to substitute complete machine seems reasonable. On this being pointed out to the Counsel for the applicant, he says he will produce satisfactory evidence before the Commissioner (Appeals) within two months from the receipt of this order. Accordingly, we accept this offer, allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The Commissioner shall, after considering the material that the appellant may produce, as also the material that the department may produce in rebuttal, pass orders on the issue in accordance with law.
-
2001 (12) TMI 482 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
SSI Exemption - Value of clearances ... ... ... ... ..... applying the ratio of that decision. In CCE v. Sri Kumaran Spinners P. Ltd. the question for consideration before the Tribunal was whether the first clearance should be calculated from 23-5-94, the date on which the manufacturer chose to avail of notification or from 25-4-94 the date on which the textured yarn was notified under that notification. The department had come up an appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) rsquo s order noting that the clearance should be from 23-5-94 for which he relies upon the decision of Watts Electronics. The Tribunal found this order to be correct and declined to interfere. It is the ratio of this decision which has been followed in Sellamal Spinners. 3. emsp In any event the department rsquo s claim in the appeal before us, it is from the beginning of the financial year that the clearance should be reckoned was not even an issue in the three decisions before us. 4. emsp Accordingly we find no cause for interference and dismiss the appeals.
-
2001 (12) TMI 481 - CEGAT, CHENNAI
Penalty in valuation matter ... ... ... ... ..... ous co-ordinate Benches of the CEGAT on interpretation of the statute and it was held that where there was difference of opinion between the assessee and the department on interpretation, no penalty can be imposed. The appellants have also submitted that the offence was not of the nature mentioned under Rules 173Q(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d) of the Rules ibid and the appellants have not contested the duty demanded from them. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal, in the case of Electrolux Kelvinator Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur, M/s. Samtel India Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur, M/s. Punjab Worsted Spg. Mills v. CCE, Chandigarh, and in the case of Goenka Woollen Mills v. CCE, Shillong (supra), I set aside the penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- imposed on appellants M/s. BNK Engine Parts Pvt. Ltd. and so also the penalty of Rs. 2,50,000/- imposed on appellants M/s. Pilot Liners Pvt. Ltd. Except for the above modifications, the appeals are otherwise dismissed.
-
2001 (12) TMI 480 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture - Modvat/Cenvat ... ... ... ... ..... able to grant them the benefit of Modvat credit on the rejected items which were used as inputs in the manufacture of final products. I do not see any loss of revenue as these rejects came on payment of duty under Rule 57F(2)(ii), etc. under the invoices issued under Rule 52A. rdquo 2. emsp Heard both sides. 3. emsp The contention of the Revenue is that the processes undertaken by the respondents on the goods received from their customers, do not amount to manufacture. Therefore, the provisions of Rule 173H are applicable and the respondents are not entitled for the benefit of Modvat credit. 4. emsp The Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, gave a specific finding that the processes undertaken by the respondents on the goods received from their customers are integral part of manufacture of new product. This finding of fact is not controverted by the Revenue in the present appeal. In these circumstances, I find no infirmity in the impugned order and reject the appeal.
-
2001 (12) TMI 478 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Refund of drawback ... ... ... ... ..... ment relating to property entered into in December, 1946 and whose owner had gone to Pakistan after partition. The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that Section 46 of the Evacuee Property Act which creates a bar to the Civil Court jurisdiction. According to the Supreme Court that Section bars jurisdiction of the Civil and Revenue Courts to entertain and adjudicate upon any question whether any property or any right or interest in any property is or is not evacuee property. As these issues were not involved in Ram Narayan case inasmuch as he had proved the agreement of re-conveyance the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the Civil Court has the jurisdiction. Accordingly we agree with the submissions made by the learned DR that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the present matter which relates to payment of drawback only. Accordingly we allow the Misc. Application filed by the Revenues as a consequence of which the appeal filed by the Appellants is dismissed.
-
2001 (12) TMI 477 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... facie, the decision relied upon by the ld. Counsel does not come to the aid of the applicant as that decision is applicable to legitimate clearance from 100 EOU to DTA and in this case not only is the charge of clandestine removal based on shortages, but also it is supported by the admission of the proprietor of the applicant rsquo s unit. Further, the Commissioner has given a clear finding regarding procurement of raw material from other 100 EOU. Having regard to these factors and also the plea that the unit has been closed down, we direct pre-deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs (Rupees Five lakhs) towards duty and on such deposit being made within a period of eight weeks from today, the requirement of pre-deposit of balance duty and the entire penalty shall stand dispensed with and recovery thereof stayed pending the appeal. Failure to comply with this direction shall result in vacation of stay and rejection of appeal without prior notice. 4. emsp Compliance to be reported on 7-2-2002.
-
2001 (12) TMI 476 - CEGAT, CHENNAI
Classifiaction ... ... ... ... ..... of Colour Scanner Pvt. Ltd. (supra) have referred to earlier Larger Bench judgment of the Tribunal in the Scan Electronics (supra) and which relied on the Bombay High Court in the case of Metal Box Ltd. v. CC (supra). We also notice that the Larger Bench in the case of Light Publications v. CC (supra) upheld the classification to master maker - printing plates under Chapter Heading 90.10 solely on the basis of item working on the principle of photography. We notice even if both the headings are appropriate in terms of Rule 3(o) of Interpreting Rules, the latter heading is required to be adopted. Therefore, viewing from all sides the appellants do not have a case and matter has been rightly determined by the lower authorities in the light of the judgment cited. The judgment of the Larger Bench rendered in the case of Light Publications also clearly applies to the facts of the case. In that view of the matter there is no merit in this appeal and hence, the appeal is rejected.
-
2001 (12) TMI 475 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appellate order ... ... ... ... ..... dra Joshi, Narayana Prasad Kothari and Shamboo Dayal Agarwal verbatim (total 7 frac12 typed pages). It does not contain any discussion or the analysis of the evidence before the adjudicating authority. The impugned order is non-speaking and is passed without application of mind. This order, therefore cannot be sustained. The order is accordingly set aside and the matter remanded to the original authority for passing a de novo order as per the provisions of law. It is further observed from the record that the appellants did not file any reply to the show cause notice, nor did they appear for personal hearing before the adjudicating authority. Since the matter is being remanded, the appellants shall file their written reply to the show cause notice within six weeks of the receipt of this order. The Commissioner shall fix the matter for personal hearing and afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant parties. The appeals are thus allowed by remand in these terms.
-
2001 (12) TMI 442 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Inland Air Travel Tax - Recovery of arrears of Tax - Natural justice - Hearing ... ... ... ... ..... e person or authority, who undertakes the carriage of a passenger on an inland journey and includes any agent, representative or other person acting on behalf of such person or authority must be one who would be a carrier within the meaning of the provisions thereof, the petitioner herein comes within the purview of the aforementioned definition. He could be proceeded with as being a carrier in terms of the definition, but for the said purpose, it was obligatory on behalf of the respondents to show that he had been acting on behalf of the person or authority undertaking the carriage of a passenger on an inland journey. 11. emsp The conditions precedent for proceeding against the petitioner on the ground that he is also a carrier having not been satisfied, we are of the opinion that the impugned order of attachment cannot be sustained. It is quashed accordingly. 12. emsp This writ petition is allowed to the extent mentioned hereinabove, but there shall be no order as to costs.
-
2001 (12) TMI 441 - CEGAT, CHENNAI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... bove. The parimateria HSN explanatory notes clearly bring within its ambit the industrial vacuum cleaner as already noted and therefore the claim of the appellants is required to be extended. Further, prima facie, the findings have already been expressed by the Tribunal in the previous final Order No. 77/2000 dated 12-1-2000 2000 (120) E.L.T. 207 (T) while remanding the matter, and while granting stay and waiver of entire amounts in this case by Stay Order Nos. 340 and 341/2001, dated 17-8-2001. We have no doubt, in our mind, that appellants have established that the item is understood in the trade and as per the commercial parlance only as industrial vacuum cleaner. In both the invoices, they have produced as well as the manual which proves the appellants rsquo case. Revenue has not established that the item is of a kind commonly used for domestic purposes and therefore the impugned order is set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law.
-
2001 (12) TMI 440 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat - Duty paying documents ... ... ... ... ..... he authorities below. 6. emsp I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and also the learned SDR. I note that there are two issues. The first issue is whether Modvat credit can be taken on the strength of restructured Bill of Entry. I note that the issue is squarely covered by the two decisions of this Tribunal - one, in the case of Klockner Supreme Pentaplast Ltd. and the other in the case of Shree Products cited and relied upon by the appellants. 7. emsp I further note that taking of Modvat credit on the strength of endorsed Bill of Entry is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Jaipur v. Indian Polytex (P) Ltd. in favour of the assessee. 8. emsp Following the ratio of the above decision I hold that Modvat credit taken on the strength of endorsed Bills of Entry or reconstructed Bills of Entry will be admissible to the appellants. 9. emsp The appeal is allowed in the above terms with consequential relief, if any, in accordance with the law.
-
2001 (12) TMI 439 - CEGAT, CHENNAI
Valuation - Enhancement of value ... ... ... ... ..... must be clear in their meaning and there should be no doubt or ambiguity about the alleged admission. The law itself has laid down that quotation cannot be the basis to enhance the value when it is not known the admission made in the present case was that and the letter and quotation have been given on the next day. However, the quotation itself bears the date which is prior to the date of quotation. Therefore, the law laid down by the Apex Court that admission should not have any doubt or ambiguity is required to be applied. In the present case, there is clear and the Investigating authorities have not completed their evidence and further Investigating authority have not produced further evidence of contemporaneous import. Hence, appellant rsquo s plea that the value cannot be enhanced on the basis of quotation is required to be accepted in the light of well laid down judgment of the Apex Court and hence applying the same, the impugned order is set aside and appeal allowed.
-
2001 (12) TMI 438 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
EXIM Policy ... ... ... ... ..... tes that it is available as ldquo trihydrochloride, phosphate, or sesquisulfate. rdquo It is clear therefore that streptomycin as a base is different from streptomycin sulphate which appears to us to be a salt, which is either a salt or a derivative. Both salt and derivatives are freely importable. 4. emsp The contention of the appellant with regard to amikacin that it falls in the category of sub-heading ldquo other rdquo of the main heading ldquo other rdquo in 29419001 is acceptable. Amikacin is not specified in any of the sub-heading 2941 and therefore would fall in the entry of ldquo other rdquo which can be freely imported. 5. emsp The departmental representative adopts the reasoning in the Commissioner rsquo s order. We have already considered them 6. emsp There was thus no basis for confiscation of the goods under clause (d) of Section 111 of the Act and imposition of penalty on the appellant. 7. emsp The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside.
-
2001 (12) TMI 437 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS (APPEALS)
Variable Drive ... ... ... ... ..... 00 in the Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of Siemens. Ltd. and therefore, remanded the case back for classification of the item AC/DC Drive to Original Authority to decide de novo in the above light. 7. emsp However, the Original Authority has brushed aside the Tribunal rsquo s decision in the Siemens Ltd. case holding that the case was perhaps are not argued fully before the Tribunal. I am afraid it is not for the lowest sub-ordinate, adjudicating authority to pass judgment of this nature. The Hon rsquo ble Tribunal has held the item AC Drive system as a static converter classifying it under 8504.00. The decisions of the Hon rsquo ble Tribunal are binding on sub-ordinate, semi-judicial authorities and the issue having been settled by the Hon rsquo ble Tribunal rsquo s decision cited above, I direct that the classification of the same under Heading 8504.00. 8. emsp In the light of the Tribunal rsquo s decisions, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
2001 (12) TMI 436 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Machine - Sealing plus score cutting machine ... ... ... ... ..... onsidered the submissions. Sr. No. 56 covers all goods falling under Heading 84.79 other than those falling under sub-heading Nos. 8479.89 and 8479.90 as well as machinery for production of a commodity. It is the contention of Shri Visvanathan, ld. Counsel for the appellant that as long as the importers are subject to satisfy the Bench that the goods imported was machinery for production of a commodity, it would be entitled to the benefit of notification in terms of second part of the entry of Sr. No. 56. We, however, are unable to agree with him in view of the exclusion, in the first part of the relevant entry, to goods falling under sub-heading 8479.89 under which the appellants have accepted the classification. In view of this specific exclusion of goods falling under 8479.89 we hold that the benefit of exemption under Notification 61/94 in terms of Sr. No. 56, thereof is not available to the goods in dispute. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.
-
2001 (12) TMI 435 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Benefit of Notification No. 275/88-C.E. not available ... ... ... ... ..... of the items in dispute namely SG iron castings and Spacer rings are items of castings on which even proof-machining is not carried out and therefore, the benefit of exemption under Notification 275/88 should be held to be available to these goods. We find that this plea was raised by the appellant in the appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and has been noted in the order, but no finding has been recorded thereon. Since we are not in a position to categorically hold as to whether any proof-machining was carried out on SG Iron castings and Spacer rings, we remand the issue as to whether any proof-machining was carried out on SG Iron castings and Spacer rings to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner and if on verification it is found by him that the claim of the appellants that no proof-machining is carried out on these two items is correct, then the benefit of Notification 275/88 shall be extended to these goods. 4. emsp The appeal is disposed partly by remand.
-
2001 (12) TMI 434 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Cocoa liquor - Words and Phrases ... ... ... ... ..... ding 1804.00 being akin to the contested product, the excisability stands established. We have examined this claim. Heading 1804.00 covers ldquo other food preparation containing cocoa. rdquo The very phrase indicates that the product falling thereunder must be a ldquo preparation rdquo . This description is not attracted where cocoa is the only substance in the mass. We have also seen the sub notes to Heading 18.06 in the HSN which was split into Heading 1803 and Heading 1804 in the Central Excise Tariff. The illustration given for the phrase ldquo other food preparation containing cocoa rdquo would cover sugar confectionary such as chocolate nougat, sweetened cocoa powder, spreads etc. The notes do not support Shri Jain rsquo s argument. 5. emsp Since we have held in favour of the appellants .on the non excisability of the product, we are not going into the aspect of marketability of the product or in other issues. 6. emsp In the result, the appeals succeed and are allowed.
-
2001 (12) TMI 394 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Clandestine removal - Invoices - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... m the factory premises of the appellants, whereas the appellants have contended that a part of the goods have been loaded from their factory premises and a part from their C and F premises. It has been contended that the driver was an illiterate person and was made to sign on the statement written in English. As such no evidentiary value should be attached to it. I find that based upon the statement of the driver, the Revenue has not made any efforts to contact their C and F agents for arriving at the true position. Statement recorded from their C and F agent would have clarified the issue. In any case the goods were duly covered by the invoices issued by the appellants and the charge of clandestine removal, which is a serious charge, cannot be arrived at on the basis of the contested statement of the driver. As such I am of the view that the impugned orders are not sustainable. The same are accordingly set aside and appeal allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
2001 (12) TMI 393 - SUPREME COURT
Conviction under NDPS Act on the sole testimony of police witness not justified - Seizure - Recovery of contrabands
-
2001 (12) TMI 378 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... taken that there were sufficient materials before the authorities to have a reasonable doubt about the truth or accuracy of the value declared. Apart from referring to the fact that during the period of 120 days prior to the import of the impugned consignments import from Russia were made at the rate of US Dollar 1.75 per kg. there was not even a statement in the adjudication order, that the value declared by the appellant was not true or accurate. We also find that the difference in price is so marginal, which by itself cannot be a reason to create a reasonable doubt in the mind of the authorities as to the truthfulness and accuracy of the value declared. On the other hand, it would show that there was a price variation of the relevant goods during this period, and the appellant rsquo s transaction value cannot be treated as something, which is not within the normal course of variation range. In the light of the above, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals.
............
|
