|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 192 Records
-
1993 (12) TMI 139
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... rganic compound under Chapter 29. In this regard we find that ldquo Lanolin (Anhydrous) rdquo has numerous uses, one of which is the use as base for ointments. Since it is by itself only a base for ointments and does not have any therapeutic value, in our view its classification as a medicament under Chapter 30 would be ruled out. As regards the appellant rsquo s claim that the ldquo Lanolin (Anhydrous) rdquo would be classifiable under Chapter 30, we find that apart from the fact that the product is more specifically covered by sub-heading 15.01, its classification under Chapter 30 would be ruled out in terms of Note 2(a) Chapter 30 which is reproduced below ldquo 2. This Chapter does not cover (a) Goods of heading No. 15.01 or glycerol (heading No. 15.06) . 8. emsp In view of the above discussion, we confirm the finding of the Collector (Appeals) that the product Lanolin (Anhydrous) rsquo is classifiable under sub-heading 15.01. The appeal, therefore, fails and is rejected.
-
1993 (12) TMI 138
Bronidiol - Broad spectrum anti-bacterial agent used as a preservative ... ... ... ... ..... se purposes. 24. I, therefore, agree with learned Member (Technical) in this respect. 25. emsp However, in so far as the question of remand is concerned, I am of the opinion that it was not necessary as the Tribunal itself was competent to decide the classification finally. 26. The reference replied in the above terms and the file may now be placed before the original Bench for a final order. Sd/- 3-12-1993 (S.K. Bhatnagar) Vice President FINAL ORDER 27. emsp In view of the majority opinion, it is held that the product Bronidiol rsquo is not classifiable under sub-hdg. 3801.20 CETA, 1985 and it is further directed that jurisdictional Assistant Collector should decide its classification as between headings 29.02 and 29.05 in accordance with law and after giving the appellants all the materials on which such classification is sought to be done by the Department. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (S.L. Peeran) Member (J) Sd/- (K.S. Venkatramani) Member (T) Date 17-12-1993
-
1993 (12) TMI 137
Variable Speed Drive ... ... ... ... ..... goods cannot be treated as only rectifiers or static converters changing A.C. into D.C. It is seen that fixed D.C. value is further changed to variable speed values of the D.C. This is not the function of inverters, as per the definition relied upon by the respondents. Inverter changes A.C. into D.C. It does not change the D.C. value to variable values of D.C. There is sufficient force in the pleas of the learned SDR that the goods control motor speeds and helps in the effective functioning of the various machines and machine tools with which it works in conjunction. The function of the goods, therefore, is specific irrespective of the goods with which the goods are used its function remains the same. It is, therefore, a complete appliance by itself having an individual function. In our view, therefore, Tariff Heading 85.18/27(1) CTA, 1975 is more appropriate than Tariff Heading 85.01(1) CTA, 1975. Hence the appeal of the Revenue is allowed with consequential effects thereof.
-
1993 (12) TMI 136
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... ap as raw materials. Again, in the case of Indian Organic Chemicals cited by the appellants, the Tribunal in the context of Notification No. 16/82 dated 14-2-1982, has held that unless the relevant notification specifically provides for it, it is not correct to read such notification as confirming the exemption of product made entirely rsquo , exclusively rsquo or only rsquo from the specified material. They thus held that the final product if manufactured out of specified material along with use of other materials, would be eligible to the exemption. Taking into consideration the wordings of the condition in Notification No. 180/88, explanatory notes of Chapter 76 which stipulate use of other materials for the manufacture of Aluminium Alloy, and the ratio of the Tribunal decisions discussed supra, Aluminium Alloy Anodes manufactured by the appellants are eligible for the exemption under notification ibid. The impugned orders are, therefore, set aside and the appeals allowed.
-
1993 (12) TMI 135
... ...
... ... ..... nd (d) are capable of identification on re-exportation. but does not include identical articles brought in by the same individual, or sent to a single consignee, in such quantity that, taken as a whole, they no longer constitute samples under ordinary commercial usage. 4. emsp Notification 185/76 exempts samples of the goods which are exempt from import duties under and in accordance with the International Convention to facilitate the importation of commercial samples and advertisement material drawn up at Geneva and dated 7th November, 1952, from the whole of Customs duty and Additional duty leviable. The Notification is not restricted to goods falling under Article II of the Convention. We therefore, hold that the appellants are entitled to the benefit of notification. Further, the goods have been permitted to be re-exported and therefore, the demand of duty is no longer sustainable. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief.
-
1993 (12) TMI 134
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... . Mehta, Executive Director of the Appellants rsquo Company that the circuitry of the T.V. had been modified to enable the cassette recorder to be combined with the T.V. 11. It is also seen from the catalogue of the said Madhur Model T.V.s that the same has been advertised as ldquo Stereo Sound Television rdquo Stereo HI FI Play Back Audio Amplifier. In the picture of the T.V. Madhur Model (51 cm T.V.) the Stereo cassette player has been fitted in the same housing and two speakers have been displayed on each side of the T.V. As pointed out in the Order-in-Original as the T.V. transmission in India is not on stereo system, the description of the T.V. as ldquo Stereo Sound Television rdquo can only be due to incorporating the stereo cassette player. 12. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the Orders-in-Original which are correct in law and based upon the facts of the case. The appeals are, therefore, liable to be rejected and are accordingly hereby rejected.
-
1993 (12) TMI 133
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... il of exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. for the same goods particularly, if the combined clearances of the two units exceed the maximum prescribed unit, says Rs. 30 lacs in the present appeals. 32. In view of the foregoing, the various issues are decided as follows Epoxy Cast Components are classifiable under Heading 85.47 and the value of clearances of such components will be includible in the combined value of clearances of the two units for the purpose of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. and the units will not be eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 175/ 86-C.E. as their combined value of clearances including, inter alia, that of Epoxy Cast Components had exceeded Rs. 1.5 crores/2 crores respectively in the two financial years and also because one of the two units had availed of MODVAT. 33. Hence, the first five appeals filed by the Department are allowed and the sixth appeal filed by the assessee is rejected. All the six appeals are disposed of accordingly.
-
1993 (12) TMI 132
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... onsideration and applying the ratio of the Supreme Court decision (supra) I am firmly of the view that the grinding wheel as well as grinding belts are in the nature of manufacturing equipment and are not in the nature of essential ingredients used in the ldquo manufacturing process rdquo as distinct from lsquo manufacturing apparatus rsquo . 32. I, therefore, agree with the Hon rsquo ble Vice President that the Modvat Credit is not admissible to the said items as these have been wrongly declared as ldquo raw materials rdquo the longer period has been rightly invoked. The appeals are, therefore, liable to be rejected as proposed by the Hon rsquo ble Vice President. Dated 8-12-1993 Sd/- (S.D. Mohile) Member (T). FINAL ORDER In view of the majority opinion, it is held that Modvat credit was not admissible and the longer period of time has been rightly invoked. The appeals are, therefore, rejected. Sd/- (Jyoti Balasundaram) Member (Judical) Sd/- (S.K. Bhatnagar) Vice President.
-
1993 (12) TMI 131
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ave the capability to attract or repulse a property which identifies with magnates. This property may be present but that by itself it will not make the components as parts of electro-magnetics. The reason being that these components are being used as a final device for which it is made as a component part in TV, Radio, Radar, Radio Navigational Equipment and Radio Reception Apparatus for the purpose of deflection Yokes, low Power, High Frequency transformer. Therefore, from the reading of the entire literature and the certificate produced by the assessee, it is very clear that the components in question are not parts of electro-magnetics and their classification under 8505.00 is not appropriate. The classification adopted by the Ld. Collector (Appeals) under Tariff sub-heading 8529.00 is more appropriate and requires to be upheld. The reliance by the Revenue on Note 2(a) of Section XVI is not appropriate and also HSN Explanatory Notes. In the results, the appeal is rejected.
-
1993 (12) TMI 130
M.S. Rolls manufactured ... ... ... ... ..... oduct does not suffer. According to the Chamber rsquo s Twentieth Century Dictionary the word lsquo maintenance rsquo implies ldquo to keep in working order rdquo . We are, therefore, inclined to agree with the appellants rsquo that M.S. Rolls manufactured by machining in the workshop in their factory out of unmachined rolls received from other parties, for being used in the same factory, have to be deemed as having been used for repair and maintenance of the machinery namely. Rolling Mills installed in the factory. 9. In view of the above discussion we follow the Tribunal rsquo s Order No. E/301/93-B1, dated 14-10-1993 in the case of Partap Steel Rolling Mills (1935) Ltd. and hold that M.S. Rolls manufactured by the appellants rsquo out of rough or unmachined rolls for maintenance and repair of lsquo Rolling Mills rsquo would be eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 281/86. 10. In view of the foregoing, we allow the appeals with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1993 (12) TMI 129
Modvat credit ... ... ... ... ..... ent from the Assistant Collector. Hence these appeals. 2. We have heard Shri D.A. Dave and Shri Jitender Singh, learned Advocates and Shri K.N. Gupta, learned SDR. 3. We find that in terms of the Explanation to Rule 57A, inputs includes packaging materials and it is not the case of the Department that the value of the HDPE bags has not been included in the assessable value of the cement manufactured and cleared by the appellants. Therefore, in view of the specific inclusion of the packaging materials as inputs, in Rule 57A, it cannot be said that HDPE bags are not inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products i.e. cement. We further find that the declaration under Rule 57G appears to have been acknowledged on 17-4-1989 and, therefore, even a penalty is not warranted. We, therefore, hold that the HDPE bags are inputs within the meaning of Rule 57A, set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals with consequential relief, if any, to the appellants.
-
1993 (12) TMI 128
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ses of Heading 55.11 as well as non-wovens for technical uses, of Heading 55.11 as per exclusions mentioned under Headings 56.02 and 56.03 respectively. 15. In view of the admitted industrial use of the product, the Heading 59.11 which is specific for textile products and articles of technical uses, indicated under chapter note 7 thereof, comes into play. 16. As the issue whether chapter note 7 covers only textile products lsquo in piece rsquo or lsquo cut to length rsquo or lsquo cut to shape rsquo or could be taken to cover fabric in length as well has already been settled by earlier orders of the Tribunal referred to by Hon rsquo ble Member (J). Heading 59.11 prevails. 17. Even otherwise, when goods are prima facie classifiable under two or more headings they are to be classified under heading which occurs last in numerical order among those which equally merit consideration. 18. In view of the above discussion the appeal is rejected as already announced in the open Court.
-
1993 (12) TMI 127
Central Excise Officers - Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... roceed to re-calculate the demand and redetermine the quantum of penalty, if any, and pass a speaking order in the matter. 42. As a result, while upholding the Order-in-Original in so far as the design and engineering charges are concerned and rejecting the contentions made by the assessee in respect of the other points, other than those relating to erection and commissioning charges, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed partly by way of remand on the limited question of erection and commissioning charges and recalculation of duty liability and redetermination of quantum of penalty, if any, keeping in view the observations made by us in para 40 above. 43. In so far as the 3 appeals filed by the revenue along with three Cross Objections filed by the assessee are concerned, as they cover the same period as the above appeal filed by the assessee, no separate orders thereon are required to be made and those appeals along with Cross Objections are merged in the above order.
-
1993 (12) TMI 126
SSI exemption - Value of parts ... ... ... ... ..... ed 1-3-1986 which exempted room heaters from the whole of Central Excise duty and Notification 124/88-C.E. dated 1-3-1988 which similarly exempted electric toasters or the Notification 155/86-C.E. which wholly exempted centrifugal power driven pumps are hit by the qualifications under Explanation III. 25. In view of this, reading both the Explanations II and III together the interpretation put by the lower authorities on the Explanation III is not, in my opinion, in order. 26. On this view of the matter and for the detailed reasons given by the learned Sister Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Hon rsquo ble Member (J) with whom I am in agreement, both the appeals deserve to be allowed. FINAL ORDER 27. In view of the majority opinion, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if-any, due to the appellants. Dated 6-12-1993 Sd/- emsp emsp emsp (P.C. Jain) emsp emsp Technical Member Sd/- emsp emsp emsp emsp (Jyoti Balasundaram) Judicial Member
-
1993 (12) TMI 125
Accountal of goods ... ... ... ... ..... ption of the goods being removed by them and leave it with the gate keeper from whom the chits were recovered, if the goods were removed without the knowledge of the Management. The charge of clandestine removal, therefore, remains uncontroverted. However, in the absence of any evidence on record to establish suppression of production by the appellants during previous period, the extended period of limitation is not available to the Department. We, therefore, hold that the demand on this count is time-barred beyond the normal period of limitation of six months. Otherwise we uphold the charge of clandestine removal. 6. To sum up, we hold as follows (a) Duty on excess glass and glassware shall be paid at the time of removal after entry in the statutory records. (b) The charge of clandestine removal is upheld. (c) The demand under the above heading is restricted to a period of six months prior to the date of the show cause notice. 7. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1993 (12) TMI 124
Modvat credit - Packaging material ... ... ... ... ..... nt of MODVAT Credit for the duty paid thereon, even when they are converted into tin containers, without the aid of power, so far as those tin containers go in the packing of vanaspati, which is declared to be the final product and is also recognised as a final product for the purpose of availment of MODVAT Credit. It is also held that in the factual position as indicated, the tin containers, which are recognised as excisable product and are exempt from payment of duty because of their manufacture without the aid of power, would fall within the ambit of Rule 57D of the Rules, and the claim for availment of credit would not stand hit by the provisions of Rule 57C. 27. When the issue is being decided on merits in favour of the appellants, the issue of demand being barred by the limitation prescribed for raising the demand, need not be examined. 28. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The demand raised and penalty imposed are set aside. Consequential relief, if any, to follow.
-
1993 (12) TMI 123
Stock-taking shortages and excesses ... ... ... ... ..... hatnagar, Vice President , - I observe that the Department was able to show that the appellants had not maintained their stocks and accounts properly and their explanation about the TV sets found in excess as well as those found short was not satisfactory. Therefore the appellants were liable to pay duty fine and penalty. The mere fact that the TV sets had been released provisionally does not in any way mitigate their responsibility or liability. 9. Normally the offending goods available are confiscated but if released provisionally pending decision, the redemption fine which would have been leviable on the goods, had they been produced before the officer could always be ordered to be realised from the bank guarantee/bond and the Collector having ordered such realisation, the appellants do not stand to gain from this technicality. 10. Hence I agree with the conclusion of the learned Member (Judicial) that the appeals are liable to be dismissed. They are dismissed accordingly.
-
1993 (12) TMI 122
Modvat credit not admissible in respect of additional customs duty ... ... ... ... ..... ins several independent transitional provisions. Rule 57H(2) is one such provision and it overrides the provision of Rule 57A as specifically provided therein. Since Rule 57G only provides a procedure to be observed by the manufacturer for availing of the Modvat Credit admissible in-terms of Rule 57A, the provisions for Rule 57H(2) will also override the provision of Rule 57G. As the duty has admittedly been paid prior to 31-1-1986, the Modvat Credit has rightly been held as inadmissible by the lower authorities. It is also not their plea that the said input were covered by Rule 56A before the introduction of the Modvat Scheme w.e.f. 1-3-1986. 4. The second plea on behalf of the appellants is also not tenable since the Modvat provisions apply specifically to Central Excise duty as well as to the additional duty of Customs under Section (3) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (popularly referred to as countervailing or CV duty). 5. In view of the foregoing, the appeal is rejected.
-
1993 (12) TMI 121
Exemption and Modvat credit ... ... ... ... ..... in the light of inter alia of the various Board Circulars that an assessee could opt in or opt out of the Modvat during the same financial year and further that he could forego the exemption, for availing of Modvat, subject to reversal of Modvat credit availed of, I do not agree with the finding that there is no short levy which is recoverable under Law. 11. The Notification 75/87 clause(a) granted exemption from whole of the duty to the first clearance of the Rs. 5 lakhs and clause (b) gave an exemption to the extent of 40 to the next Rs. 15 lakhs. 12. If the assessee wants to forego the exemption for the first Rs. 5 lakhs, he will have to pay the whole of the duty on this value since there is no provision for granting 40 exemption for the first Rs. 5 lakhs. He can not club the first two slabs of Rs. 5 lakhs and Rs. 15 lakhs as done by him in this case. 13. In my opinion therefore, the appeal was required to be remanded for de-novo ascertainment of the quantum of short levy.
-
1993 (12) TMI 120
Writ Jurisdiction - Existence of alternative remedy ... ... ... ... ..... y, the same will be considered on merits but we have no manner of doubt that the Additional Chief Controller will condone the delay by invoking the provisions of Indian Limitation Act. 7. Proviso to the said provisions of Indian Limitation Act also empowers the Additional Chief Controller to condone the delay if he is satisfied with the bona fides of the petitioners as regard the delay. 8. As regards the stay granted by this Court in terms of prayer (c) vide order dated 19th September, 1984 the said interim order to continue for a period of 8 weeks. We hope the Additional Chief Controller would dispose of the stay application within 8 weeks from the date of filing of the same. In the event if the stay application is decided against the petitioners, the same may not be given effect to for a period of four weeks from the date of service of the said order on the petitioners. 9. Rule to stand disposed of in the above terms. In the circumstances there will be no order as to costs.
........
|
