|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 216 Records
-
1983 (7) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification list to be read with covering letter giving details, and not by itself ... ... ... ... ..... cts by CAFI. 14. We accordingly hold that there being no contumacious conduct which could be attributed to the appellant, within the purview of the proviso to Section 11-A of the Act, only the normal period of six months for the issue of show cause notice was available for purpose of examining the question of excisability of the goods or re-examining the question regarding the exemption claimed and granted under Notification No. 44/80 supra. The facts already having been disclosed to the Revenue, the show cause-cum-demand Notice dated 3rd of March, 1982 suffered from incurable infirmity and must be struck down as bad in law. We accordingly do so. Result would be that excise duty demand of Rs. 9,25,177.50 and penalty of Rs. 5000/- imposed on CAFI, and confirmed in Appeal by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, shall stand cancelled. 15. On the view we are taking in the matter, it is not necessary for us to go into the merits of classification. 16. Appeal allowed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 192 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Ship’s stores - Vessel on a foreign run ... ... ... ... ..... en the benefit of Notification No. 5/66, dated 15-1-1966. We find that the learned departmental counsel has opposed the extension of this benefit on the ground that this claim is hit by limitation as it has not been made for the first time. We find that this argument is substantially correct. This claim was not before the lower authorities and therefore the same cannot be argued in the appeal which has arisen from the decision of the lower authorities. If any benefit is now to be claimed in accordance with this notification, the proper remedy for the appellants would be to file their claim with the proper officer of the Central Excise who is the Assistant Collector. This claim would not be hopelessly time barred. In this view, it would be not proper for us to entertain it at this stage. Accordingly, we find that the prayers of the appellants are not tenable at all. We, therefore, confirm the orders of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) and dismiss the appeal.
-
1983 (7) TMI 191 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... e sludge was in fact removed and destroyed, on the accepted plea that sludge was not dutiable, whether it arose from non-dutiable oil or duty paid oil, an adjustment in the clearance of bonded receipts to the extent of the sludge actually destroyed ought to be given. In this view, duty has got paid on 39.063 MTs of bonded oil when various quantities were removed from the tank. There has, therefore, been a net removal of 9611.235 MTs. of oil and 39.063 MTs in the form of sludge. The appellant therefore, requests for refund of the duty paid on the latter quantity as it really forms part of the oil bottom. We accept this view, ignoring for the moment the infinitesimal quantity of sludge that could have formed, theoretically at least, from out of the duty paid oil bottom. Accordingly, we allow the appeal and order refund of duty paid on a quantity of 39.063 MTs of L.D.O. removed from the tank on payment of duty in addition to the refund already granted by the Assistant Collector.
-
1983 (7) TMI 190 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Dutiability of unfinished goods ... ... ... ... ..... Rule 11 would not be authorised by law. M/s. Wipro Products Ltd. and Another v. Union of India and Another - 1981 (8) E.L.T. 531 (Bom.) is the other case on point. Besides, the amendment introducing Section 11B in the Act by the Customs, Central Excises and Salt Act and C.B.R. (Amendment) Act, 1978 had not come into force. This amendment came into force only from 17-11-1980 under sub-section (5) of the newly added section, the provisions of this section apply to claim for refund of any amount collected as duty of excise made on the ground that the goods in respect of which such amount was not collected were not excisable. At the time of the claim this amendment had not come into force. Relying on the Bombay High Court Judgments and the above legal position, I would agree with the learned Technical Member, Shri K.S. Dilipsinhji that the refund should be allowed in this case which was filed beyond the time fixed under Rule 11 and within the time under the Limitation Act, 1963.
-
1983 (7) TMI 177 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... ebate of duty on excisable goods if exported outside India subject to safeguards, conditions, limitations etc., as may be specified in the notification. The respondent-company have admittedly exported grinders and drilling machines only and merely because electric motor formed a component part of grinder/drilling machine or fitted thereto, ldquo electric motors or parts rdquo could not be said to have been exported outside India within the meaning of Rule 12 read with the relevant notification. In other words, in the instant case, what admittedly has been, exported is a consignment of grinders and drilling machines fitted with electric motors. In view of this interpretation, I am of the view that electric motors fitted to other appliances and which are merely component parts are not eligible for rebate of duty under Rule 12 or the notification issued thereunder. I, therefore, set aside the order of the Central Board of Excise and Customs appealed against and allow the appeal.
-
1983 (7) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Landing charges includible in assessable value ... ... ... ... ..... ad been applied to the imported Nylon Tyre Yarn by comparing it with a different type of tyre yarn and placing it in a wrong classification in the Central Excise Tariff Schedule. Shri Ignatius stated that this was not his contention. 19. ensp This last argument of Shri Ignatius is really a round-about way of repreating his first argument, namely, that where the counterparts of certain articles are not manufactured in India, countervailing duty is not leviable on such articles. We have already rejected this argument, and we again reject it as reformulated. We may mention that in the Tribunal rsquo s order in the case of M/s. Dai-ichi Karkaria, in paragraph 21, there are detailed observations as to what could be considered as a class of articles for the purposes of levy of countervailing duty. 20. ensp In the result, we do not find any force in various contentions raised by the appellants. We, therefore, uphold the two orders of the authorities below and reject the two appeals.
-
1983 (7) TMI 175 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
CLASSIFICATION ... ... ... ... ..... is not meant for manufacture or use in connection with manufacture, thereby ruling out sub-item (2) of Heading 85.59 and by implication justifying the assessment under sub-item (1) as machines and mechanical appliances having individual functions not elsewhere specified. We agree with the departmental representative that neither of the sub-headings (16) or (25) are relevant considering the nature of the subject goods. The question of applying Item 90.28(4), namely, electrical instruments and apparatus, the non-electric counterparts of which fall under Headings 90.14 to 90.16, 90.22 to 90.25 or 90.27 will, therefore, not arise. Neither the representative of the Appellants nor the Departmental representative was able to enlighten the Tribunal as to which other heading of the Customs Tariff would cover these goods. Since Heading 85.59(1) describes these goods aptly, we find no reason to differ from the assessment done by the lower authorities. The appeal is, therefore, rejected.
-
1983 (7) TMI 174 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Customs Imports from Preferential area ... ... ... ... ..... -Trade Agreement. 3. ensp In the present appeal it is claimed that the goods are of UK origin and this ipso facto constitutes a claim for preferential rate of duty at 50 10 and a requisite certificate of origin in Form lsquo A rsquo along with the copy of the B/E and Customs attested invoice are enclosed. 4. ensp Wg. Cmdr. Tandon referred to the certificate of origin dated 21-5-1976 given on the invoice which was produced at the time of assessment. He also filed a copy of Order No. B-104/83 dated 11-3-1983 issued by this Bench of the Tribunal and stated that the present appeal was on all fours with that case. 5. ensp Shri Laxmi Kumaran was present on behalf of the Dept. It is clear from the invoice that an implied claim for preferential assessment had been made since the certificate of origin had been appended thereon, when the Bill of Entry was filed. Keeping in view the precedent cited by the Appellant we set aside the order of the Appellate Collector and allow this appeal.
-
1983 (7) TMI 173 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras, rejected an appeal against this order but reduced the penalty to Rs. 12,800/- vide his order cited supra. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Appellate Collector, the appellants filed a revision application before the Government of India which stands transferred to the Tribunal in terms of Section 131B of the Act. 4. ensp The appellants stress that there was a draught survey by Ericson and Richards (Andhra), Visakhapatnam, according to which there was slight excess landing of the order of 55 M.T. the Port Trust, Visakhapatnam, does not take custody of bulk cargo and is not competent to issue a landing certificate under the circumstances there is no shortage. 5. ensp In the absence of a tally at the time of landing by the Port Trust and the availability of the results of a draught survey, we accept that there is no short-landing in the present case. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the amount of penalty ordered to be refunded.
-
1983 (7) TMI 172 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
CLAASIFICATION ... ... ... ... ..... eading 84.11(4) of the Customs Tariff, in the contrary, speaks specifically of exhaust fans and blow-airs of not less than 65 cms. sweep. 7. ensp In terms of Rule 2 A of the Rules for the interpretation of the First Schedule of the Import Tariff, any reference in a Heading to an article shall be taken to include a reference to that article incomplete or unfinished provided that as imported the incomplete or unfinished article has the essential character of the complete or finished article. 8. ensp The Impeller Rings in the instant case, it was contended, are incomplete/unfinished parts as per the drawing and since the finished or complete part is also in the form of a ring the unfinished part has the characteristics of finished part. 9. ensp Admittedly, the Impeller Ring in question is component part of draught fans. In view thereof, we are of the opinion that the assessment should have been made under Heading 84.11(4). 10. ensp The appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 171 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
CLASSIFICATION ... ... ... ... ..... ised to recover monomer out of it before anything could be formed out of it. This assertion of the appellants has not been controverted by the Department. The Department rsquo s representative instead relied on the earlier Tribunal Order No. 222-229/1983-C. On perusal of this Order, we find that it related to cellulose acetate scrap and not to acrylic scrap. The goods being different in that case and the one before us now, no reliance could be placed on the earlier Order unless it was shown that properties of cellulose acetate scrap and acrylic scrap were identical which has not been done. Since the appellants rsquo contention that acrylic scrap did not possess plasticity remains uncontroverted, we agree with the earlier Bench Order at 1983 E.L.T. 845 that acrylic scrap could not be considered a plastic material. 4. ensp In the result, we reject the appellants rsquo claim in regard to basic customs duty but allow it with consequential relief in respect of countervailing duty.
-
1983 (7) TMI 170 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... h flux material, are excluded from Heading 83.15, which, inter alia, covers certain types of electrodes. He argued that the electrodes in question are also not part of the furnace but are in the nature of accessories. Even if broadly covered by Heading 85.11(1) as parts of industrial electrical furnace, they are specially covered by Heading 81.01/04(1) as held in the impugned order. 6. ensp The Tribunal has carefully considered the matter. According to the literature furnished, the subject goods are guaranteed purity to a limit of 99 minimum molybdenum and it is also indisputable that they are in the category of lsquo articles rsquo . We, therefore, are in the agreement with the reasoning of the Collector that they fall more specifically under Heading 81.01/04(1) as articles of molybdenum. As observed in his order, the rate of duty being the same as that under Heading 85.12, no benefit accrues to the appellants. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order and reject this appeal.
-
1983 (7) TMI 147 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Smuggling - Detention of detenu for dealing in smuggled goods ... ... ... ... ..... ention. The failure in this case on the part of State Government to forward the detenu rsquo s representation to the Central Government has deprived the detenu of the valuable right to have his detention revoked by that Government. The continued detention of the detenu must therefore be held illegal and the detenu set free. rdquo 10. emsp The facts of the present case are similar. Failure in this case on the part of the State Government to forward the detenu rsquo s representation to the Central Government has deprived the detenu of the valuable right to have his detention revoked by the Government under Section 11 of the Act. The continued detention of the detenu must therefore be held illegal and the detenu set free. 11. emsp As a result of the discussion aforesaid this petition is allowed. The continued detention of the detenu Sharadchandra son of Dattatriya Bhandari is illegal and he should be set at liberty forthwith. There shall be no order as to costs of this petition.
-
1983 (7) TMI 143 - ITAT PUNE
Original Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... section 147(b). 22. For the reasons discussed above in the present cases after completion of the assessment orders, the ITO had information in his possession. After considering such information he has reason to believe that there was escapement of income as a result of the original assessment orders. The ITO after considering such material applied his mind and he has reason to believe that on the basis of the information in his possession there was escapement of income. Thus, we are of the view that initiation of proceedings under section 147(b) made by the ITO was quite correct. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) was wrong in holding that proceedings under section 147(b)/148 were bad in law. Consequently, the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) deserved to be cancelled. Accordingly, it is cancelled. As a result of this order the matter shall go back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the appeals on merit. 23. In the result, all the appeals are allowed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 142 - ITAT PUNE
Beneficiaries Unknown, Interest Income, Representative Assessee ... ... ... ... ..... payments or distribution would be made pro rata and the term pro rata was clearly explained in the scheme as The term pro rata occurring in this paragraph and elsewhere in this scheme shall mean in proportion to the respective amounts remaining due at the time of the payment or distribution . On these facts it would, in our view, be wholly erroneous to hold that the shares of the beneficiaries in respect of the interest due on the collection accounts were indeterminate or unknown. We, therefore, find that the assessee s case is fully covered under section 160(1)(iv) read with section 161 on the basis that the interest on the collection accounts was specifically receivable on behalf of the beneficiaries and that their shares were determinate and known. The provisions of section 164 have, therefore, wrongly been applied by the ITO and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). His order on this point is, therefore, set aside. 11. In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 138 - ITAT NAGPUR
... ...
... ... ..... ing aside the assessment which has been validly made under the Act. According to him, the Commissioner (A) should have up-held the assessment by confirming the additions made by the assessing officer. Shri D.P. Kotak, the ld. representative for the assessee, on the other hand, supported the order of the Commissioner (A), on the grounds stated therein. 3. We have considered the contentions of both the parties, as well as the facts on record. In our opinion, the Commissioner (A) was quite justified in doing what he had done. The fact that the assessee had filed a revised return before the assessing officer completed the assessment has not been disputed before us. The Commissioner (A) is undoubtedly armed with the power of setting aside the assessment if he deems it fit to do so, as per the provisions of s. 251 of the Act. Under the circumstances, we do not see anything irregular or improper in his order, and so we decline to interfere. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 135 - ITAT NAGPUR
Capital Computation ... ... ... ... ..... s. To our mind the correct legal position has properly been explained by the Department of Company Affairs in their communication dated 19-1-1977, namely, that such declaration was not void. Only the payment was restrained for the time being. Some restriction on the payment temporarily did not extinguish the liability. The liability was always there and had to be met as soon as the statutory restriction was removed. For meeting this liability, the shareholders had created a provision at the annual general meeting. Since this amount was a provision for an existing liability, in our opinion, the lower authorities were justified in deducting the amount from the balance standing in the general reserve for determining the capital of the assessee-company for the aforesaid four dates, namely 1-1-1974, 1-1-1975, 1-1-1976 and 1-1-1977, respectively. 8. This para is not reproduced here as it involves minor issue. 9. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 132 - ITAT NAGPUR
Assessment Year, Plant And Machinery ... ... ... ... ..... se of T. S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Bros. 1971 82 ITR 50 (SC). We have considered this contention, but we do not find any force in the same. A mere reading of the provisions of sections 32A(5), 155(4A), 34(3)(b) and 155(5) clearly shows that when the plant and machinery is sold or otherwise transferred, then the allowance of investment allowance or development rebate, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have been wrongly made for the purpose of this Act . Hence, we do not find any room for doubt or debate when the language of the section is so clear. There is no dispute or doubt that the plants and machineries have been transferred along with other assets and such a situation, according to the provisions of the Act, shall be deemed to be a mistake. Hence, we reject this ground. 10. For the above reasons, we vacate the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and restore the orders of the ITO for both the years under consideration. 11. In the result, the two appeals are allowed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 130 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Registration Entitlement ... ... ... ... ..... ree partners and one of the partners died. The assessee claimed that the firm was the same throughout the year and filed a single return. It is on those facts, it was held that what is contemplated in the Act is registration of the firm for the entire assessment year if there is only one assessee during the whole year. In fact, in that case it was observed that where a firm ceased to exist or is succeeded by a different firm it may be permissible to grant registration for the assessment year in relation to the part of the previous year during which it existed. This decision, in fact, helps the assessee. In the instant case, since one of the partners died on 9-3-1978 out of the two, the firm ceased to exist. Hence, it is permissible to grant registration to the part of the previous year during which it existed. Thus, we uphold the order of the AAC with the observation that the firm is entitled to registration up to 9-3-1978. 4. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
-
1983 (7) TMI 128 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Income Tax, Sales Tax Act, Supreme Court ... ... ... ... ..... tered dealer himself or by any one else. Therefore, it was held that second sub-clause of section 8(3)(b) would clearly cover a case where a registered dealer manufactures or processes goods for a third party on a job contract and uses in the manufacture or processing of such goods, the materials purchased by him against his Certificate of Registration and the declaration in Form C so long as the manufactured or processed goods are intended for sale by such third party. 5. Applying the aforesaid ratio to the assessee s case and in view of the admitted fact that the labels manufactured by the assessee for sister concern were meant for sale by it along with beedis, we find that there is no violation of section 8(3)(b) and the levy is no more penal in nature. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, we hold that the authorities were not justified in rejecting the claim made by the assessee and, accordingly, it has to be allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
........
|
