Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 291 Records
-
1990 (9) TMI 223
Set-off of duty ... ... ... ... ..... inputs remained inputs and remained entitled to claim exemption under notification in question. The learned Collector held that the articles are appliances/apparatus/equipment, that is why they cannot be treated as inputs. Considering the process of manufacture of tyres, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the inputs in question i.e., air-bags and bladders are appliances/apparatus/equipments. rdquo This view was followed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ceat Tyres of India Ltd. v. C.C.E. Bombay (Order No. 87/90-C dated 24-5-1990). 13. Having considered the submissions of both sides, we see no reason to take a different view on the issue. Accordingly, following the Tribunal rsquo s orders cited above, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. 14. Regarding adjustment of credit of duty already paid, the appellants would be entitled to adjustment in RG-23A Part II which came into effect from 1-3-1986. 15. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief.
-
1990 (9) TMI 214
Remission of duty on goods ... ... ... ... ..... ow produced) also indicates that fire is on account of internal combustion and they have settled the claim for 2779 bags. Hence we are of the view that the approach adopted by the Collector in total rejection of their claim for remission of duty is not just and proper. But then, we are not able to determine the quantity eligible for remission in the absence of proper factual data on the quantum of reprocessed sugar, which is claimed to have been cleared on payment of duty and also the details of the demand, whether it was worked out on levy price or free sale price. Moreover insurance survey report was also not available before the adjudicating Collector. Hence, while laying down the principles as above, we set aside the order of the Collector and remand the case back to him for determining the correct quantity and value thereof eligible for remission in the light of our above observation and pass orders in accordance with the law. 7. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1990 (9) TMI 213
Appeal by department - Classification of goods ... ... ... ... ..... of this entry, use of the goods becomes relevant. The goods cannot also be denied classification as printing plates merely on the ground that photographic principle is involved in its use or scientifically and technically it may be photographic plates. rdquo 10. The Collector, in the order, observed that ldquo the photopolymer plate is found to be especially developed plastic plate, made of artificial plastic, especially designed for exclusive use in the printing industry and that this plate is not kept in a dark room nor is it in the light-proof covers, but they are kept in the open day-light. rdquo In other words, the photopolymer plates are used in the printing industry. It may be that the principle on which the equipment is designed, is a photographic principle but that does not make the equipment a photographic plate. Therefore, the appropriate classification is Heading 84.34. We agree with the Collector. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed as it is devoid of any merit.
-
1990 (9) TMI 212
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... that the six pieces of Radio Cassette Recorders seized in the above case from the premises of M/s. Electrical Distributors be released in their favour. Consequently, the imposition of penalty of Rs. 5,000.00 is also set aside. Accordingly, the Appeal No. C-484/88 is allowed. As far as the appellants, M/s. Central Plaza are concerned the challan No. 017 dated 7-10-1986 issued by M/s. Sound Machine shows that they have sold to M/s. Usha Electronics 30 pieces of Stereo Radio Cassette Recorders. M/s. Sound Machine sold five of them to the appellants, M/s. Central Plaza. For the same reason which I have already discussed while discussing the case of M/s, Electrical Distributors the benefit of doubt is extended to the appellants, M/s. Central Plaza and accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the five Stereo Radio Cassette Recorders be returned to them and the penalty of Rs. 2500/- imposed on them is hereby also set aside. In the result, both the above-captioned appeals are allowed.
-
1990 (9) TMI 211
... ... ... ... ..... d on the value of the comparable goods produced or manufactured by the assessee or by any other assessee. rdquo According to Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, value of excisable goods for the purpose of central excise duty shall be deemed to be the normal price at which such goods are ordinarily sold by the assessee to a buyer in the course of wholesale trade for delivery at the time and place of removal, where the buyer is not a related person and the price is the sole consideration for the sale. The Appellate Collector has categorically observed that from the records it was seen by him that the appellants realised extra amount of Rs. 805/- per M.T. as conversion charges in addition to the price fixed under the Aluminium (Control) Order. As this amount was realised by them as part of the sale price, the same has been included by him in the assessable value. We find nothing wrong in his decision. We, therefore, uphold his order and dismiss the appeal.
-
1990 (9) TMI 210
Appeal - Locus standi ... ... ... ... ..... cumstances, we have no other option but to reject the appeal from the revenue. 20. In the result, both the appeal from revenue and cross objection from the respondents fail. 21. Before parting, we are constrained to observe that in this case, notwithstanding the availability of course of action under Sec. 48 of the Customs Act, goods are permitted to be kept in the Customs area without clearance for home consumption or for warehousing for nearly a period of 5 years and the investigation done by the Department has not been carried to its logical conclusion by way of issue of show cause notice during this long period of hibernation but all of a sudden the request for waiver of show cause notice is entertained personal hearing granted and adjudication done, ignoring totally the extent of interest of the respondents over the goods as admitted by them in their statements. Because of this strange course of action (or inaction - as we may call it), such a situation has been created.
-
1990 (9) TMI 209
MODVAT Credit ... ... ... ... ..... ss No. 001/6-7-1988 does not indicate that the goods have been reprocessed. His main contention is that it is supplied as replacement. Had it been a replacement, then duty would have been definitely paid. The fact that these goods have come under Rule 173H indicates the reason why no duty payment particulars have been indicated in the Gate Pass. Secondly, all the documents produced clearly reveal that the appellants had received the goods, taken credit, subsequently a portion was sent back as rejected and credit reversed to that extent. Credit was, once again, taken after the goods were brought back after reprocessing. The Assistant Collector rsquo s finding that the Gate Pass and the delivery challan are from two different locations is easily explained by the fact that the supplier M/s. Samitan Electropowers Pvt. Limited, Ranchi, had shifted their factory from Ranchi to Bangalore. Under the circumstances, I set aside the order of the Assistant Collector and allow the appeal.
-
1990 (9) TMI 208
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... d any knowledge or reason to believe that the vehicle will be used or is likely to be used for transport of contraband goods. 25. Coming to Section 115 of the Customs Act again the most important thing is knowledge or connivance. Again no evidence has been led to show that the appellants had been knowingly concerned with or connived in transporting of goods in violation of the Act or Rules. The Collector has mentioned in his Order that the appellants had failed to take precaution against the use of the Car for transportation of non-duty paid goods but how they had failed had not been indicated. 26. On the contrary the learned counsel had submitted that the appellants had placed the car at the disposal of the M/s. Ruby Textile Mills for bona fide use in good-faith and there was nothing to show to the contrary. 27. In view of the above position, it was apparent that the appellants could not be held liable to penalty. 28. Hence, the order is set aside and the appeal is accepted.
-
1990 (9) TMI 207
... ... ... ... ..... tory (5 years from 19-8-1979, in this case) or 5 years from the date of publication of the notification in the Gazette (5 years from 24-4-1981, in this case) whichever is later (i.e. upto 23-4-1986 in the present case). The appellants are entitled to duty concession for the full period of 5 years from the date of publication of Notification No. 108/81 i.e. 24-4-1981. The period for which refund has been claimed is from 9-8-1984 to 8-11-1984 which falls within the said period of 5 years. In this view of the matter, the appellants are entitled to refund of the excess duty paid during the said period from 9-8-1984 to 8-11-1984. We do not have on record any material to show that the duty had been paid under protest. The claim has not been examined from the limitation point of view. Subject to the claim being within the period of limitation under Section 11B of the Act, the Assistant Collector is directed to grant refund consequent on this appeal being allowed by us on its merits.
-
1990 (9) TMI 206
... ... ... ... ..... ew of three learned Members, we follow the ratio of the Special Bench ruling in the Delhi Chemicals case and hold that the respondent is entitled to the refund amount in question. In this view of the matter, we uphold the finding of the lower appellate authority in the impugned order and dismiss the appeal. We would also like to note that the judgment of CEGAT Special Bench in ldquo Modi Rayon and Silk Mills v. Collector of C. Ex., Meerut 1987 (27) E.L.T. 933 , has been expressly overruled by the Calcutta High Court in the decision cited supra. The Special Bench of the Tribunal on a number of occasions has taken the same view similar to the one taken by the South Regional Bench in the case of rdquo M/s. Mysore Acetate and Chemicals referred to above. A similar view has also been taken by the Bench in a situation where the Department resorted to the recovery proceedings under Section 11A. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.
-
1990 (9) TMI 205
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... d in the finished goods lying on 1-3-1988 and only after repeated reminders, the assessee furnished part information on 22-8-1988 and full information on 18-10-1988 and his act of not furnishing the information amounts to suppression of facts with an intention to evading duty. We are unable to appreciate this stand for the following reasons It is not although the Department could not have collected the information on their own by reference to RG-23A, Part I and also from RG-1 register regarding stock of inputs and finished goods for purpose of issue of notice in time. Moreover, the argument of the learned Advocate that even after furnishing the information, the Department has taken nearly two months for issue of show cause notice and the delay on the part of the Department is not explicable, has considerable force. In view of this, purely on the ground of time-bar, the demand is not sustainable, so also the penalty imposed. We, therefore, allow the appeal on both the grounds.
-
1990 (9) TMI 204
Export - Benefits flowing therefrom ... ... ... ... ..... on these interim orders cannot be maintained. The benefits claimed by petitioners must flow from the subsisting orders or be based on some law, but in this case it is not so. 19. The Writ of Mandamus is not a writ of right. In fact the entire writ jurisdiction of the High Court is extraordinary which cannot be put to use in an ordinary way. It constitutes the Court as a trustee of high power for the high purpose of maintaining equilibrium between the two antithetical offspring rsquo s of Jus Nationale, the summum Imperium of the State and the Jura Naturalia absolute. So it does not authorises a Court to issue writs, directions and orders as a matter of course. But in this case as already observed above no right of the petitioners has been infringed nor any legal right as prayed is created in their favour on account of the interim orders passed by the Single Judge. The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. There shall be no orders as to costs.
-
1990 (9) TMI 203
Warehoused goods - Interest ... ... ... ... ..... of appeal No. 233/90. We do not have any finding of the Collector (Appeals) on this point. Even the Asstt. Collector has not discussed this aspect in his order. Hence, while holding that in the case of both the consignments of the appellants warehoused prior to 13-5-1983, interest is payable at 6 per annum, we would deem it proper to remand the case back to the Asstt. Collector for looking into the alleged calculation error committed in both the cases at the time of confirmation of the demands. The appellants shall produce their work sheet along with other documents for establishing the calculation error before the Asstt. Collector. The Asstt. Collector shall pass orders in accordance with law. With these observations we set aside the orders of the authorities below and remand the case back to the Asstt. Collector to look into the limited question of calculation error, while confirming the demands for interest chargeable at 6 . The appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
-
1990 (9) TMI 202
... ... ... ... ..... ord to hold that the appellants were manufacturing Concrete Shuttering Plywood and the findings of both the authorities below on this point appears to be based on presumption and conjectures. Even otherwise, in view of the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Sudershan Plywood Industries Ltd., Supra, it cannot be held that the Shuttering Plywood or Concrete Shuttering Plywood would fall in the category of Structural Plywood so as to direct higher central excise duty at the rate of 30 on the real value. In this view of the matter, we are not called upon to decide the alternative contentions raised by the learned consultant for the appellants. 6. In the result, the impugned order passed by the authorities below is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. The cross objections which are in the nature of reply to the grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal also stands disposed of by this order accordingly.
-
1990 (9) TMI 201
Valuation - Best Judgment Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... ears after purchase. The price paid by the appellants at the time of purchase of the car cannot be said to be transaction value. As the transaction value could not be determined for these cars, their value could not be determined under Rule 4 read with Rule 3 of the Valuation Rules. Value could not also be determined under Rules 5 and 6 as there was no import of identical or similar cars. Value could not also be determined under Rule 7 as there is no material on record to show that the circumstances stated in this Rule did exist in the present cases. In the circumstances, Rule 8 was correctly applied by the lower authorities while determining the assessable value of the cars. The orders of the Assistant Collector and the Collector (Appeals) show that they have given sufficient deductions on account of trade discount and depreciation considering the condition of the cars. I do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders. I, therefore, uphold the same and dismiss the appeals.
-
1990 (9) TMI 200
Appeal - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... appeal is allowed by way of remand. 13. Assent per Shri V.P. Gulati, Member (T) . - I agree with learned Brother Shri Harish Chander that the appeal has to be remanded for the reason recorded by him. However, I would like to observe that learned Brother while he has disallowed the admission of additional evidence as mentioned in List 1, List 2 and List 3 in para 4 of the order except for documents at Sl. No. 2 and 3 of List 1, he has observed in the operative portion of the order that both the sides are at liberty to file any fresh evidence to substantiate their case in accordance with law. By way of clarification I would like to add that while we have disallowed the admission of the documents as above for the purpose of the appellate proceedings before us, the lower authority is free to decide the request of the appellants for admission of any additional evidence, as held by learned Brother, on merits as per law for the purpose of de novo adjudication proceedings before him.
-
1990 (9) TMI 199
... ... ... ... ..... influence the mind of the Detaining Authority one way or the other and, therefore, it was necessary on the part of the Sponsoring Authority to have placed new provisions before the Detaining Authority and/or Detaining Authority itself should have apprised himself of the new provisions which were brought into force on 27-2-1990. In the present case, we are concerned with the situation of non-placement of relevant provisions having bearing upon subjective satisfaction one way or the other. Having regard to the return filed on behalf of the Detaining Authority we are satisfied that the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority is vitiated on account of non-placement of amended provisions of para 125 of Chapter IX (Import of cars and vehicles). On this short ground, in our opinion, petition must succeed. In the result, writ petition succeeds. The detenu is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case. Rule made absolute. No order as to costs.
-
1990 (9) TMI 198
S.S.I. exemption ... ... ... ... ..... stered as an SSI Unit with the competent authority under the provisions of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. This was also stated in the trade notices issued by Calcutta II Collectorate, Belgaum Collectorate and Madurai Collectorate. In this case, it is seen that the appellants were in possession of SSI Certificate. It cannot be held that in the time lag between the date of the expiry of the temporary certificate and the issuance of a permanent certificate the industry ceases to be an SSI Unit. This inference drawn by the Assistant Collector is not correct. The appellants have been registered as SSI Unit from 22-10-1987. Their production started on 22-8-1988 and they obtained a permanent certificate on 5-7-1989. In the permanent certificate, the date of production is indicated. It is, therefore, evident that all along the unit has been an SSI Unit. The order of the Assistant Collector is set aside and the appeal allowed with consequential reliefs, if any.
-
1990 (9) TMI 197
MODVAT credit ... ... ... ... ..... is the Gate Pass not being endorsed in their favour. The Superintendent correctly advised them to obtain a letter from the consignor stating that as instructed by M/s. ET and T, the consignment was diverted to Keonics Video Colour Division. The credit is permissible even if the duty paying documents accompanying the goods are not in favour of the assessee. The only fact of relevance is that it should have been charged to duty at appropriate rate. This has not been disputed. The point in dispute is whether the non-endorsement of the Gate Pass in favour of the appellants would be sufficient to deny the credit. Here, the redeeming feature is that the appellants have obtained a letter from the consignor, M/s. M.R. Electronic Components Limited, Madras, that the consignment was diverted as per the instructions from M/s. ET and T and so no endorsement on the original Gate Pass was made. Under the circumstances, I set aside the order of the Assistant Collector and allow the appeal.
-
1990 (9) TMI 196
Refund - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... 173(I). 33. In other words in such cases even a refund application was not called for and the action was required to be taken by the Superintendent to implement the Assistant Collector rsquo s order irrespective of whether a request to that effect was made or not made by the assessee. There is however no bar for an assessee to draw attention of the authorities towards this requirement by way of a letter or application for refund or otherwise by way of assisting and reminding the authorities but if the assessee does not do so the duty of the Superintendent and the department own....... nevertheless to perform the same in accordance with the rules and adjust the amount by allowing necessary credit or debit as per the prescribed rules and proceedings. 34. In the instant case in any eventuality the refund application was admittedly filed within six months from the date of assessment. Hence it was within time. As such the appeal is rejected as already announced in the open court.
........
|