|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 220 Records
-
1991 (5) TMI 142 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Manufacture vis-a-vis processing ... ... ... ... ..... nd dispute about this. In response to a further question from the Bench, the Department could not show that the process of lsquo cutting rsquo has been specified as a process of manufacture or as a process amounting to manufacture of items falling under 5601.00. 9. Both the sides agreed that in various other Chapters, certain processes which were deemed as manufacturing processes for the purposes of excise duty have been specified in the Chapter Notes as those amounting to manufacture. 10. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We are prima facie of the view that for deciding whether a process is a process of manufacture, it is necessary to keep in mind the provisions of Section 2(f) as well as the Chapter Notes, if any process has been specified therein as one amounting to manufacture then the situation is different from the one where it is not so specified. In view of this legal position we grant the prayer for stay of operation of the order appealed against.
-
1991 (5) TMI 141 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... in common or trade parlance is understood to cover only steel alloys having the property of resistance to corrosion. 9. We, therefore, hold that the disputed Alferon wire rods were of alloy steel which could not be deemed as stainless steel. We find that this view is supported by Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of Collector of Customs v. Kinjal Electricals Pvt. Ltd. 1991 (51) E.L.T. 543 (Tri.) wherein it was held that steel wire having 20.3 chromium and 3.43 aluminium was to be classified as resistance wire. 10. Before we part with the case, we would like to state that the reference by the learned Departmental Representative Shri M.K. Sohal to the case of Shama Engine v. Collector of Customs, Bombay 1984 (18) E.L.T. 533 , is not relevant since in that case, the composition of the disputed goods was different. 11. In view of the foregoing, we set aside the impugned order, allow the appeal and direct the Assistant Collector to grant consequential refund to the appellants.
-
1991 (5) TMI 140 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - New plea at Tribunal stage ... ... ... ... ..... ic customs duty to goods which were classifiable under certain specified Heading, other than Heading 84.20(2). 7. For the purpose of C.V. duty the imported load cells were classified under Central Excise Tariff Item 45 which covered ldquo Machinery and appliances for determination of weight including parts of weigh-bridges rdquo . Since the load cells in question were parts of weigh-bridges it has to be held that for the purpose of C.V. duty they were correctly classified under the specific Item 45 of the CET in preference to the residuary Item 68 of the Tariff under which goods could be classified only if they could not be fitted under any other item. 8. Before we part with the matter we would also like to refer to the appellants rsquo claim for refund on the ground that there was an error in computation of the assessable value. Since there is no evidence of any claim on this ground having been made before the lower authorities, we do not propose to examine it at this stage.
-
1991 (5) TMI 139 - CEGAT , NEW DELHI
Demand based on average production/clearance ... ... ... ... ..... in a day and these calculations have been duly verified and certified by the authorities themselves on a day-to-day basis. However, in the present calculations adopted by the Department in the impugned order, no adjustments whatsoever have been made for the opening balance and closing balance for the period of time considered by them. (vi) It is not correct for the Department to hold that sealing of the valve and 78 and 22 is averaging for the entire day as there is no averaging involved. In fact it represents sealing of the valve to the blending chest of the two sources of pulp. The log book records show that the sealing has been done by the Central Excise Officers. 9. From the above discussion, it is seen that the calculations of the Department are based on assumptions without a reasonable basis, and, therefore, the demand is liable to be set aside. 10. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any, due to the appellants.
-
1991 (5) TMI 138 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Project Import ... ... ... ... ..... ld not be given by any circuitous process of interpretation. After all, notifications are meant to be implemented. rdquo The Tribunal in Orders No. 1064/B-83 and 1065/83-B in the case of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd., Bangalore v. Collector of Customs, Madras, while dealing with import of goods required for design and development programme has held that in view of the Government of India order accepting the claim for registration of the Project for which the subject goods had been imported the application for registration of the contract under the Project Import (Registration of Contract) Regulations should be accepted. In our view the goods are covered by Clause 1(D) of Heading 84.66. On an overall consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that the benefit of Project Import should be extended to the import of HR Coils by the appellants herein. We accordingly set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any.
-
1991 (5) TMI 137 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Quantum of - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... ceeds US 1000 per individual. This is not a case of bringing gold or prohibited/dutiable items for earning profit margin. When this omission for non-declaration of travellers cheques has been admitted and the bona fides are established, heavy fines or penalties are not called for, computing these fines and penalties in terms of value of foreign exchange not declared. Though technically and legally, the travellers rsquo cheques not declared are liable for confiscation for non-declaration, in a case like this, where the undisputed factual position reveals the bona fides, no penalty is called for (which the Collector (Appeals) has reightly set aside) and even the fine imposed may be a token one. I, therefore, propose to confirm a token fine of only Rs. 1000/- and grant consequential relief. Accordingly, the order of the Collector (Appeals) is modified to this extent and redemption fine is reduced to Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One thousand only). Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1991 (5) TMI 136 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Import - Rubber erasers, ready to use ... ... ... ... ..... uthorities on examination of the goods when found to be rubber erasers. The Import Licences produced under Appendix 3 Part (A) for synthetic rubber products, is not valid for the goods which are nothing but consumer goods being stationery articles. As regards the quantum of redemption fine and personal penalty, having regard to the nature of the goods, which are fast moving consumer items with considerable margin of profit, the quantum of fine is modified to be 100 of the declared assessable value. However, as regards the quantum of personal penalty, in view of the finding on valuation, as above, there is a case for reduction of the personal penalty which is reduced to Rs. 50,000/- in respect of the order dated 12-4-1989 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Import Air Cargo, IGI Airport, New Delhi in its Order No. 383/89. The personal penalty, in respect of consignment at ICD is also similarly, reduced to Rs. 50,000/-. The appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
-
1991 (5) TMI 135 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Sea freight ... ... ... ... ..... s rdquo . The aforesaid decision, we further notice has been arrived at by discussing the corresponding EEC Regulations and the practice which is prevalent in different countries of European Community. It is a settled rule of law that each Act has its own scheme. The concept of EEC Regulations cannot be brought in for the purpose of Customs Act while determining the scope of Section 14. Further as para 7 itself indicates that the words used in the EEC Regulations are lsquo the place of introduction rsquo rather than lsquo the place of importation rsquo . The reasoning adopted by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras in C3/2016/1982 dated 7-7-1983 mentioned supra to the effect that ldquo value of the goods as per Section 14 of the Customs Act is not affected by the mode of transport of the goods rdquo is convincing and the reasons given by the Government of India do not appeal to us. We endorse the view of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) in C3/2016/1982 dated 7-7-1983.
-
1991 (5) TMI 134 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... hether the imposition of penalty on the appellant, Shri Bidhan Ch. Dhar is justified or not? I have already held that the goods found in the Studio, which are at Part-11 of the Seizure List cannot be confiscated and therefore, the order of confiscation of the goods at Part-11 is set aside. There is nothing to show that the appellant, Shri Bidhan Ch. Dhar had allowed Shri Bikash Shome, the other appellant, to enter in this illegal business transaction in question. Further, the appellant, Shri Shome had stated in his statement before the officers in reply to Question No. 33 that he himself told his elder brother, Shri Dhar about the illegal purchases of the goods in question and Shri Dhar had told him, that what he did was a wrong thing. In such circumstances, the benefit of doubt is to be given to the appellant, Shri Dhar and accordingly, the penalty of Rs. 5,000.00 imposed on Shri Bidhan Chandra Dhar is hereby set aside. The appeals are thus partly allowed in the above terms.
-
1991 (5) TMI 133 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Refund - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... -1986. 12. It was lastly contended before me that under Sec. 23 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962 if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Assistant Collector that any imported goods have been lost or destroyed at any time before clearance for home consumption the Assistant Collector shall remit the duty on such goods. Section 23(1) speaks of remission of duty. But Section 27(1) speaks of refund of duty. In this connection, the appellants, having paid the duty are claiming a refund by virtue of the application which was received by the Assistant Collector on 7-3-1986. Therefore, the present case is governed by Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the appellants also made an application under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 and even in the appeal memorandum, there is no such ground made by the appellants stating that 23(1) is applicable to the facts of the case. 13. For all the above reasons I find that there is no merit in the appeal and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
-
1991 (5) TMI 132 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Penalty - Benefit of doubt ... ... ... ... ..... he Customs Act. But in this case, the breach, if any, flows from a bona fide belief of the appellant that the consignment contained only 42 pcs of pistons. Therefore, it is a case of bona fide belief that the appellant is not liable to act in the manner prescribed under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 by declaring the consignment as 97 pcs of pistons. They bona fide believed that it only contained 42 pcs of pistons. This was strengthened by the letter given by the foreign suppliers and there is no reason to hold that a foreign supplier will go to the extent of issuing false letter in this regard. In such circumstances, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Akbar Badruddin Jiwani, mens rea is required to be established to impose penalty on the appellants. Such a mens rea is not established in this case, and I extend the benefit of doubt to the appellants. The appeal is accordingly allowed, and the order of imposition of penalty of Rs. 1,000/- is hereby set aside.
-
1991 (5) TMI 131 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Refund filed contrary to approved classification list not maintainable ... ... ... ... ..... earlier approved the classification of Tie Bar Nuts under Tariff Item 68 has no justification for its revision is, to our mind, not tenable inasmuch as there could be no estoppel against a statute. If according to law Tie Bar Nuts fall within Tariff Item 52 the fact that the department earlier approved their classification under Tariff Item 68 will not estop it from revising that classification to one under Tariff Item 52. See M/s. Elson Machines Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise -1989 Suppl. (1) SCC 671, Para 10 at 675 1988 (19) ECR 449 SC. rdquo Therefore, it may not be absolutely essential in the facts of the present case for having a Larger Bench constituted for deciding the issue. 17. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and on a consideration of the evidence on record since we are agreed that on merits the impugned order is correct in law and is upheld, the appeal is disposed of on the basis of this finding of ours and is accordingly rejected.
-
1991 (5) TMI 130 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... owever, as regards the seized 40 coils of copper weighing 5420.500 kgs., the Additional Collector rsquo s finding that the goods were liable for confiscation under Rule 173Q(1) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the appellants were liable for penalty is confirmed. In respect of these goods, we only confirm the order requiring appropriation of cash security of Rs. 25.000/- in terms of the B-11 Bond and set aside the order requiring the recovery of further sum of Rs. 50,000/- from the appellants. The order confirming the demand for the recovery of duty on 1,947.100 kgs of copper wire found short with reference to the book balance is also confirmed. We also confirm the finding of the adjudicating authority that the appellants were liable for penalty under Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we reduce the penalty imposed from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 50,000/- only. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1991 (5) TMI 129 - ITAT MADRAS-D
Deemed Gift, Stamp Duty ... ... ... ... ..... poses of gift-tax assessment. What has been transferred in the case before us is right to property circumscribed by rights of re-conveyance and pre-emption. The net value of the property transferred (bereft of these rights) would certainly be far lower than the real value. 13. The fact that the valuation by the registering authority was not contested cannot be held against the assessees. This does not and cannot preclude the assessees from bringing out the correct facts before the Income-tax Department and claiming that there was no element of gift involved. 14. Respectfully following the Madras High Court decision in Indo Traders and Agencies (Madras) (P.) Ltd. s case, we have no hesitation in finding that the consideration for the sale is reasonable and adequate. It follows, therefore, that the provisions of section 4(1)(a) would not apply. Hence, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and cancel the gift-tax assessments made. 15. The assessees appeals are allowed
-
1991 (5) TMI 128 - ITAT MADRAS-D
A Partner, Assessing Officer, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Reference To Valuation Officer, Valuation Report
-
1991 (5) TMI 125 - ITAT JAIPUR
A Partner, Deemed Gift, Registered Valuer ... ... ... ... ..... ssment under the Gift-tax Act on 27-2-1986. Moreover, in view of the decision of the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Brig. B. Lall those reports of the Valuation Officer cannot be relied upon in the gift-tax proceedings initiated in 1984 and completed in 1986 particularly when not even an opportunity had been given to the assessee to raise his objections before the Valuation Officer in the proceedings under the Gift-tax Act. In these circumstances, the valuation of the plots has to be taken at Rs. 82,000 which was the valuation given by a Registered Valuer along with reasons and justification for taking that value. Since the value of the plots has to be taken at Rs. 82,000, the provisions of section 4(1)(a) and section 4(1)(c) of the GT Act are not attracted. Accordingly, we hold that no gift chargeable to gift-tax arises from the impugned transaction and hence gift-tax assessment order framed by the GTO is cancelled and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
-
1991 (5) TMI 124 - ITAT JAIPUR
Carrying On Business, Earlier Decision, Partnership Deed, Res Judicata, Speculative Transactions, Tax Authorities
-
1991 (5) TMI 123 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A
Assessment Proceedings, Orders Prejudicial To Interests, Tax Authorities, Valuation Report ... ... ... ... ..... d of a proceeding before the ITO and, therefore, cannot be taken support of by the CIT for issuing notice and exercising his jurisdiction under section 263 of the IT Act. It is needless for us to quote the ratio of the several decisions cited for the proposition that valuation report obtained subsequent to the closure of a proceeding cannot form the basis of reopening under section 17 of the WT Act. In our opinion, the ratio of the cases, decided under the WT Act can equally apply to income-tax proceedings also. Therefore, we find sufficient force in these contentions of the assessee and we are of the opinion that since the valuation report dated 21st Nov., 1988 has been made the basis for issue of notice under section 263, the order of the CIT cannot be allowed to stand. Hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. The order of the CIT under section 263 is set aside and consequently the assessment order framed under section 143(1) dated 28th July, 1986 stands restored
-
1991 (5) TMI 122 - ITAT GAUHATI
Retrospective Effect ... ... ... ... ..... acts are basically required to be brought out particularly so when the assessee itself has obviously no control over the utilisation of such funds for the approved programme for rural development etc., as its required by the section. We consider, therefore, that it will be fair to both the sides if the matter is looked into by the Assessing Officer in respect of this point after bringing correct and basic facts on record and after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard in view of the requirements of the section and in view of the letter dated 28-3-1984 issued by the prescribed authority to the Secretary of the above society intimating that certain schemes have been approved and the authorisation would be valid so long as the approval to this institution, i.e., the society granted under section 35CCA, remains operative, copy of which is available at page 5 of the assessee s paper book. 19 to 22. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
-
1991 (5) TMI 121 - ITAT GAUHATI
Speculation Business ... ... ... ... ..... cost was at Rs. 380. At the same time, as held by the various courts in many decided cases, few of which have been discussed by us above, various facts are to be brought on record and that too after examining the transaction and the parties involved, so that a proper conclusion of fact can be made. 17. Thereafter, it would be necessary for the authorities below to consider that such loss, whether business or speculative loss, as the case may be, could be allowed as deduction or could be allowed to carry forward for set off to latter assessment years. Thus, in the circumstances narrated above, we consider that this dispute as raised by the assessee in the first three grounds of appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh disposal and after giving the assessee opportunity of being heard. Both the sides will be at liberty to bring fresh material and facts for proper consideration. 18 to 20. These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.
........
|
