|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 261 to 280 of 354 Records
-
2003 (6) TMI 148 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation (Central Excise) ... ... ... ... ..... by the sellers of those raw materials. 3. We have perused the records and have heard the learned Advocate for the appellant and SDR for the Revenue. The only material in support of the Revenue s case is the statement of Shri S.S. Chowla. The evidence produced by the appellant disproves the statement that differential amount went towards insurance of finished stocks, raw material, etc. In the case of Baroda Electric Meters Ltd., the Apex Court held that the differential amount between equalised freight charged from buyers at uniform rate and amount actually paid is not required to be treated as part of the value of the goods and subjected to duty. What is true of equalised freight is true of equalised insurance also. The appellants are therefore, right in their submission that the impugned orders are contrary to settled law. 4. In view of what has been stated above, the impugned orders are set aside and appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appellants.
-
2003 (6) TMI 147 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Modvat on capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... ave considered the submissions of learned Senior Departmental Representative and perused the records. The respondents had installed weighing bridge on 31-5-97 and have taken the Modvat credit of the duty paid thereon. Subsequently, when the respondents came under the purview of the Compounded Levy Scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, they had changed the boundary of their factory premises and weighing bridge came to be outside the factory premises and was used for commercial purpose. It is thus apparent that the weighing bridge has now been removed from the factory and in view of the provisions of Rule 57S of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 the duty is payable by them. We agree with the learned Senior Departmental Representative that the decisions of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Raghuvar (India) Ltd. and Ashok Iron and Steel Fabricators are not applicable as the facts are entirely different. We, therefore allow the Appeal filed by the Revenue.
-
2003 (6) TMI 146 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Assessment (Customs) - Valuation (Customs) - Future import ... ... ... ... ..... n the facts of the present case, it is obvious that appellant had got a lower price than M/s. Rasandik Engineering Industries Ltd. on account of their long term imports and the quantity contracted for. As the Apex Court observed in Basant Industries case, the Customs Authorities should have realised that relationship between supplier and importer has also be to kept in mind because it is a matter of common knowledge that a price which is offered by a supplier to an old customer may be different from a price which the same supplier offers to a totally new customer . The impugned order of assessment has come to be passed because the lower authorities overlooked this common knowledge . 11. In view of what has been stated above, the appeals are allowed after setting aside the impugned orders. The goods shall be assessed at the transaction values and any amount paid in excess of the duty payable on the basis of the transaction values, shall be returned to the appellant forthwith.
-
2003 (6) TMI 145 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Refund - Limitation - Delay in filing ... ... ... ... ..... issioner of Customs, ICD, Faridabad. The refund claim in Form No. 102 under Regulation No. 2 pre-supposes awareness of the claimant that the claim ought to be filed with the Assistant Commissioner of Customs at ICD, Faridabad. The cause of action for refund had arisen as early as on 13-6-98, when Notification No. 35/98-Cus. was issued limiting the applicable rate of Special Additional Duty of Customs to 4 ad valorem. There is no valid explanation in this case for the delay between 13-6-98 and 2-12-98. Had they acted with a little diligence, the refund claim would have been submitted in time to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs at Faridabad in terms of Regulation No. 2. The appellants have to suffer on account of their own negligence and laches. The refund claim submitted to the competent authority on 22-12-98 is clearly beyond the period of six months from the date of payment of duty. The authorities below have rightly rejected it as time barred. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2003 (6) TMI 144 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Inputs ... ... ... ... ..... after feeding into silo. Revenue has not controverted the averment made by the Appellants that the entire quantity of inputs in the factory premises of the Appellants are taken in the process of manufacture. The learned Advocate for the Appellants has also explained in detail the process of manufacture undertaken by them. The loss of quantity of inputs occurs during the process of manufacture. Once the loss of inputs takes place in the process of manufacture it cannot be claimed by the Revenue that the inputs have not been used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. It is also apparent from the statement of Shri K.D. Sharma, Chief Manager (Technical) who in reply to a question answered that the loss happened during the course of processing and it is therefore process loss. It is also not the case of Revenue that the inputs which have been shown as lost have been cleared as such out of factory. We, therefore, set aside the impugned Order and allow the appeal.
-
2003 (6) TMI 140 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Valuation (Customs) - Used machine - Import of ... ... ... ... ..... ears old, and that too when such parts were necessary for working of the machinery, cannot be held to be in contravention of the import policy. In the present case before us, the appellants have imported certain old parts accessories along with the machines necessary for the working of the machines on importation into India. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that confiscation of the whole lot of machinery involved in these appeals which have been certified to be not more than 10 years old by the foreign Chartered Engineer, just because certain parts/accessories found in the main machinery was found to be more than ten years old, was not warranted and we set aside the order of confiscation, levy of fine and so also imposition of penalty. In this view of the matter, we set aside all the orders impugned and allow the appeal with consequential relief if any. The Cross-objection filed by the department also stands disposed of accordingly.
-
2003 (6) TMI 139 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Recovery of sum due to Government - Attachment of defaulters property ... ... ... ... ..... the earnest money was received, the appellant by any means could not have known that the money was to be tendered or illegally obtained. There is in fact nothing to suggest that the appellant knew that the money was out of the drawback fraudulently received. The conduct of the appellant that the Commissioner relies upon only took place in fact after the appellant came to know the fraud. The liability of Bangad and his company to repay the money of drawback that has received arose only after the order of 11-6-1998 of the Assistant Commissioner. The sum that the appellant had received prior to this date therefore would not fall within the scope of the order passed under Rule 4 and hence, recoverable in terms of the rules. The sum had been paid by the purchaser received by the appellant long before any notice was issued. We therefore do not find it possible to uphold the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals). 10.The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside.
-
2003 (6) TMI 138 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Modvat on capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... odvat credit is not available. 10.We find that Ion Exchanger is used in de-mineralisation plant for de-mineralization of boiler feed water. The Ion Exchanger is the part of plant, therefore, is entitled for the benefit of Modvat credit. The appeal of the Revenue in this respect is dismissed. 11.In respect of the benefit of Modvat credit as capital goods in respect of steel structure of Air Conditioner, UPS and paints, there is no finding that these are used with machine or machinery. Therefore, we find that the matter requires re-consideration by the adjudicating authority in the light of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore v. Jawahar Mills Ltd. (supra). Therefore, in respect of these items, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication. The adjudicating authority will decide after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondents. The appeal is disposed of as indicated above.
-
2003 (6) TMI 137 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Job work ... ... ... ... ..... f the Notification No. 84/94-C.E., dated 11-4-94 is reproduced below It has been decided that the aforesaid circular shall apply mutatis mutandis to those cases also where inputs are supplied to a job worker under the instructions of another manufacturer. In such a situation the consignee will be the job worker and Invoice under Rule 52A, in addition to the prescribed details including the consignee s name and address will also bear the name and address of manufacturer on whose instruction the goods have been so dispatched. The duplicate copy the manufacturer s invoice under Rule 52A will serve as a cover for transport and for availment of Modvat by the input user (job worker). 8. In the present case the invoices issued by the manufacturer are in the name of the appellants and the consignee is the job worker. Therefore, in view of the above circular, the appellants are entitled for the benefit of the Modvat credit. The impugned order is set aside and the appeals are allowed.
-
2003 (6) TMI 136 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Rate of duty - Additional duty of customs ... ... ... ... ..... as common for Lucky Star International and Varsha Exports cases. Apart from this, is the Circular dated 19th February, 1998 of the Ministry. The Circular clarified as under 2. Board have examined the issue carefully and find that the duty leviable under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act is to be calculated after giving effect to the exemption notifications. Therefore, goods produced in EOUs/EPZs cannot be charged to duty at Tariff rate. 3. Normally duty leviable would be read with notification for the time being in force. Even in absence of such words in the notification, the duty leviable would be effective rate of duty only. Even in Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, the words used are leviable for the time being in force. 4. It is clear from the above that the issue raised in the present appeals remains settled in favour of the appellants. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appellants after setting aside the impugned orders.
-
2003 (6) TMI 132 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Confiscation - Demand and penalty - Modvat - Precedent - Judicial discipline ... ... ... ... ..... provisions of Section 11AC, Shri Chattopadhyay, learned Consultant has argued that the period in the instant case being prior to introduction of the said Section, the same cannot be invoked for imposing the penalty. We agree with the above contention of the learned Consultant for the appellants. However, in the show cause notice, there is a proposal to impose penalty under the provisions of Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Commissioner has not invoked the said Rule by observing that the mandatory penalty has been imposed under Section 11AC and as such, no penalty was further imposed under the provisions of Rule 173Q. However, the said Section is invocable and we hold that the appellants company is liable to penalty under the said Section. Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the penalty is reduced from Rs. 11,51,089.00 to Rs. 3.00 lakh (Rupees three lakh). 3.5 The appeal is thus partially allowed and partially rejected in above terms.
-
2003 (6) TMI 131 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Redemption fine and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... ommissioner (Appeals) have in the matter of M/s. Globe Marketing and M/s. Bright Exports in the matter of M/s. Verismo Impex, Chennai have consistently been imposing the redemption fine to the tune of 10 of the value and the penalty to the tune of 10 of the redemption fine. We also find that in this case demurrage charges and detention charges to the tune of Rs. 3 lakhs have also been paid by them. Keeping all these factors in mind and in view of the consistent decisions taken by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) imposing redemption fine to the tune of 10 of the CIF value in respect of similar goods viz. used colour monitor and of imposing penalty to the tune of 10 of the redemption fine we are convinced that there is a case for reducing the redemption fine and penalty. We, therefore, reduce the redemption fine from Rs. 2,50,000/- to Rs. 70,000/- and penalty from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 7,000/-. But, for the above modification, the appeal is otherwise rejected. Ordered accordingly.
-
2003 (6) TMI 129 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation (Central Excise) - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... accordingly. In respect of other moulds, there is no dispute raised in this appeal and therefore the amortisation as determined in the impugned order and the demand of duty on such amortised value are affirmed. 12.As the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act has been held to have been rightly invoked in this case on the ground of suppression of facts by the assessee with intent to evade duty, the appellants are liable to pay interest under Section 11AB on the duty evaded and are also liable to be penalized under Section 11AC. The penalty of Rs. 18,36,340/- imposed by the Commissioner is, however, set aside consequent to our order setting aside a part of the demand of duty. It will be open to the Commissioner to determine the quantum of penalty afresh after requantification of the demand of duty. Needless to say that the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard on all the remanded questions. 13.The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
2003 (6) TMI 128 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Valuation (Central Excise) ... ... ... ... ..... ucturals Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai-II reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. 678 (T) 2002 (52) RLT 334 has held that inspection charges for inspection by the third party at the request of the buyer is includible in the assessable value. The said judgment of the Tribunal is distinguishable from the various judgments cited by the assessee inasmuch as in the case of Southern Structurals, the inspection charges Rs. 2,400/- per wagon were collected by the assessee therein from the Railways who were the buyers of the goods and it was in that circumstances that it was held that the inspection charges are to be included in the assessable value whereas in the present case, the inspection charges were paid by the Railways to the RITES who had carried out the inspection at the instance of the Railways. 6. In view of the above, respectfully following the ratio of the various judgments cited supra, we hold that the impugned order is not legal and proper and we set aside the same and allow the appeals.
-
2003 (6) TMI 123 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Valuation (Central Excise) - SSI Exemption - Brand name - Modvat - Inputs ... ... ... ... ..... sessee did not keep informed the department of the nature of the markings that is put on the goods. There is no satisfactory rebuttal to this claim. The Commissioner does not say that the samples were not sent at all or incorrect samples were sent. Therefore, insofar as clearances after the receipt of these letters are concerned, the extended period of limitation would not be available. 10.We also accept the contention that the Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of goods, on which duty now is demanded, would be available to the appellant, subject to duty having been paid on them. In calculating the value of the goods for assessment the element of duty also has to be abated. These calculations are required to be done by the Commissioner. The quantum of the penalty under Rule 173Q, will also have to be redetermined. 12.The matter accordingly is remanded to the Commissioner. 13.The appeal is accordingly allowed, and the impugned order set aside.
-
2003 (6) TMI 121 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Valuation (Central Excise) - Abatement ... ... ... ... ..... on where excisable goods are not sold. It can, therefore, have no application where the goods are partly sold as in this case and therefore, the provision for adjustment provided under the said rule cannot be applied. In the scheme of things provided under Section 4, when an assessee partly sells his goods and partly clears for captive consumption, the assessments for the latter have to be necessarily done on the basis of available ex-factory price for similar goods in terms of the said Section 4(1)(a). 9.In view of the settled legal position, the 8195 assessment done applying Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on the basis of ex-factory price of similar goods is in order. However, considering the over all facts of the case, we do not find that imposition of penalty to the extent of Rs. 39,24,434.99 equal to the duty demand is justified and we reduce the same to Rs. 5 (Five) Lacs. 10.The appeal is dismissed except for reducing 8195 the penalty as indicated above.
-
2003 (6) TMI 120 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Modvat on inputs - Demand - Limitation - Penalty and Interest ... ... ... ... ..... Rules does not arise for consideration by us. We, however, agree with the learned Advocate that penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act cannot be imposed as the amount payable under Rule 57CC is not duty of excise. The penal provisions under Rule 173Q are wide in their scope as it provides for imposition of penalty for removal of excisable goods in contravention of any of the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 1944. However, taking into consideration all the facts of the case and the fact that the appellants had paid the entire amount on being pointed out by the Central Excise Department, this is not a fit case for imposing any penalty under Rule 173Q. We, therefore, set aside both the penalties imposed on them under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. Interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act will also not be chargeable as the amount involved is not a duty. The Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
2003 (6) TMI 119 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation (Central Excise) - Sales tax - Incentive ... ... ... ... ..... ble and instead of the cash incentive being paid to the manufacturer, is credited to State Government account as payment towards sales tax by the manufacturer. After accepting the advise of Law Ministry in the matter it is made clear that in such a situation the sales tax is deductible from the wholesale price for determination of assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act for levy of Central Excise duty. 6. We find that the Commissioner has erred in denying the claim put forward by the assessee. In the result, we set aside the order impugned and allow the appeals. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had already deposited an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs during investigation and the further amount of Rs. 8 lakhs as pre-deposit pursuant to the interim order passed by this Tribunal. We hold that the appellant is entitled to refund of the above amount which will be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
-
2003 (6) TMI 118 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Intermediate product - Dutiability - Marketability ... ... ... ... ..... item was marketable. What emerges from all these and other decisions cited by the Counsel is that it is not the mere coverage of intermediate product under specific Tariff heading or the mere factum of its having a long shelf life but its marketability that determines its exigibility to duty of excise. The compounded rubber intermediates of the present appellants have passed this test inasmuch as it has been found by the lower authority on the basis of evidence that the goods are capable of being transported to, and sold in, the market conceptualized in the case of A.P. State Electricity Board (supra). 10. Having found that the compounded rubber in question had enough shelf life and was marketable and in view of the specific tariff entry coverage of the goods, we hold the product to be excisable and affirm the demand of duty on the clearance of this product, effected by the appellants during the period of dispute. The impugned order is upheld and these appeals are rejected.
-
2003 (6) TMI 117 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Penalty - Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... I find force in the above submissions of the appellant and the appellant has admitted that the car was attached with the Travel Agency, M/s. Warsi Travels on hire at 11.15 A.M. on 11-1-1999. The said Car was used till 5.15 P.M. Thereafter, the same was released. It has also been contended that the Car Duty Slip bearing No. 374 is forged and fabricated. Therefore, I find that the entire case against the appellant herein is based upon the statement of the driver, which is in the nature of uncorroborated statement of a co-accused and cannot be made the sole basis for penalising the appellant herein. There is no other evidence on record to show the appellant s involvement in transportation of ball bearings in question. 9. Accordingly, I extend the benefit of doubt to the appellant and set aside the personal penalty of Rs. 1.00 lakh (Rupees one lakh) imposed upon the appellant. The appeal is allowed in above terms. Miscellaneous Application and Stay Petition also get disposed of.
....
|
