|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 401 to 420 of 468 Records
-
2003 (8) TMI 79 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... and on the same facts vide para 56 of his order, it has been observed by the learned judges as follows The above facts and circumstances shows in this case, that there is no evasion of payment of Central Excise Duty by the accused nor removal of excisable goods. Therefore, this case comes under Section 9(1)(b)(ii) of the Act in the category of in any other case as accused availed Modvat credit by submitting forged documents . This finding induces us, that there is no cause for enhancement of penalty on the respondent company in excess of Rule 173Q(1)(bb) for Rs. 5,000/- as imposed by the Commissioner, since there was no availment of Modvat credit or its utilization, and there is no evasion of duty proved or/and established. There is also no finding or plea made of overdrawal of the ineligible Modvat credit. Hence there is no case made out in the appeal filed against the respondents-company. 8. In view of our findings, the Revenues appeals are dismissed. Ordered accordingly.
-
2003 (8) TMI 78 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Valuation (Customs) - Discount ... ... ... ... ..... n the nature of commercial discount, in that it is not uniformly extended. The fact that the price list of the supplier does not specifically mention this discount does not lead automatically to its rejection. What has to be seen is whether in actual practice, such discount is extended and it is based on commercial considerations. If so, notwithstanding that it does not figure in the price list, it will be eligible for deduction. It is a well known commercial practice, domestic as well as international, for prices to be determined on the basis of negotiations, in which the quantity ordered or expected to be purchased by a person is a significant factor. Apart from the fact that the case is covered in the respondent s favour by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. CCE - 2000 (122) E.L.T. 321, we do not find anything in the department s appeal to impel us to believe that the discount was not extended in the usual course of commerce. 3. Appeal dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 69 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Poly Vinyl Alcohol (PVA) ... ... ... ... ..... Tribunal in the case of Sha Harakchand Dharmaji v. Commissioner of Customs, Madras - 1996 (88) E.L.T. 764 in a manner that actual use is not required for availing the benefit of the notification. The goods should be only capable of being used. Similar view had also been taken by the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Q-Max Test Equipment Pvt. Ltd. decided by Final Order No. 153 and 154/2003 dated 11-3-2003. Therefore, even if it is assumed that the imported goods in question were not actually used by the appellants in the leather industry but being capable of use in their factory, which fact had not been disputed, the benefit of notification referred to above, could not be denied to them in view of the ratio of law laid down by the Tribunal in the above referred cases. That being so, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be sustained and we set aside the same. All the appeals of the appellants are allowed with consequential relief if any, permissible under law.
-
2003 (8) TMI 67 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Refund - Limitation - Provisional assessment - Interest on refund ... ... ... ... ..... A, dated 2-1-2002, wherein the Board has specifically issued instructions that the bank guarantee executed in lieu of cash deposit shall be returned to the assessee, when the matter had gone in his favour ultimately. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to the refund of the amount of the bank guarantee. 5. Since, the provisions of Section 11B of the Act had been held to be not applicable in a case of bank guarantee furnished in the provisional assessment proceedings, the appellants are not entitled to interest under Section 11BB being not a duty deposited in advance but only a security furnished. 6. In view of the discussion made above, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the appeal of the appellants allowed in the above said terms with consequential relief. The authorities are, also, advised to release the money to the appellants within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 7. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
2003 (8) TMI 64 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... nterest has been paid even though he is entitled to the interest on the delayed refund of pre-deposit. 2. There will be a direction to pay interest 12 on the amount of Rs. one lakh w.e.f. the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the Final order passed by the Tribunal. To come up on 23-9-2003. On that day, respondent shall report compliance.
-
2003 (8) TMI 63 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Refund - Interest ... ... ... ... ..... the claim of the applicants before us for refund of pre-deposit made by them under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. The applicants, further, submit that they are entitled to interest on the amount of pre-deposit. In the light of the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Kuil Fireworks Industries v. CCE reported in 1997 (95) E.L.T. page 3 and that of the Calcutta High Court in Eastern Coils Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata reported in 2003 (153) E.L.T. 290, the prayer has to be granted. Following the ratio in the above decisions, we have directed payment of interest in other similar applications. 4. We, therefore, direct the respondents to refund the amount of Rs. one crore deposited by the applicants as pre-deposit in pursuance of our order dated 10-8-2000 within a period of four weeks. Applicants will be entitled to interest 12 from the date of expiry of 3 months from the date of receipt of final order dated 18-9-2001 till the date of payment.
-
2003 (8) TMI 62 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Reference to High Court - Deemed Modvat credit ... ... ... ... ..... ts. Duty paid on the raw materials of inputs cannot be credited to the account of purchaser of the inputs. Assessee in these cases cannot seek credit for duty paid not on their inputs but on raw materials for the inputs. Payment of duty, down the line at some earlier stage cannot go to the benefit of the assessee. 9.In our opinion, the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise v. M/s. Decent Dyeing Co. (supra) which has been followed by the Full Bench of the Tribunal is binding on this Court and the contrary view expressed by the Division Bench in Upper India Steel Manufacturing and Engineering Co. Ltd. case (supra) without considering the judgment of the Supreme Court cannot be read as paying down correct law. 10.In the premise aforesaid, we hold that the impugned order passed by the Collector and the Tribunal do not suffer from any legal infirmity and no substantial question of arises for determination by this Court. Hence, the petition is dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 61 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... deposit of the amount the only consequence thereof would have been rejection of the prayer made for interim relief on stay and to direct for recovery of amount in accordance with law. Dismissing the appeal merely on the ground that direction of pre-deposit having been fulfilled is not proper. That apart, the direction for pre-deposit has to be considered in the back drop of the financial hardship if any of the appellant. 4. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and on due appreciation of enunciation of law as laid down in the judgment referred to I am of the considered view that rejection of the appeal on the ground stated in Ann. P/1 is not proper. 5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Order Annexure-P/1 dated 26-11-2001 passed by the Tribunal is quashed. The learned Tribunal is directed to reconsider the matter in accordance with law and proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. 6. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction.
-
2003 (8) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Demand - Interest on duty ... ... ... ... ..... is to be computed would be 13-7-1991. However, since there was no change in the rate of duty between 5-7-1991 and 13-7-1991, the duty computed in the notice of demand on 5-7-1991 would be the one that would be relevant and applicable. Accordingly, interest also would become payable from 5-7-1991 itself being the date of the notice of demand. Interest cannot be charged from the petitioner for any period prior to 5-7-1991. 6.In view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned notice of demand dated 5-7-1991 inasmuch as it provides for interest for the period from 16-6-1989 to 5-7-1990 is hereby quashed and set aside. To this extent, the writ petition is allowed. On the payment of the interest amount due for the period 5-7-1991 to 13-7-1991, which the petitioner ought to do within a week from today, the bank guarantees furnished and kept alive during the pendency of the present matter would stand discharged. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 59 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... m. This writ petition challenges the said order. To my mind, in the review application petitioners had not indicated any reason for reducing the quantum of the deposit already fixed. Merely for the reason that the petitioners were incurring loss or their factory was closed at the relevant time is no ground for reducing the amount of deposit in relation to a tax liability already assessed. In the balance sheet, which showed that the petitioner-company had been incurring loss, it was indicated that they have a current asset of Rs. 66 lakhs in the form of loans and advances. If they had such an asset, which could be encashed only on a demand, there was no just reason not to deposit even the sum of Rs. 10 lakhs, which was arrived at by the Tribunal of its own by reducing the claimed amount from Rs. 25 lakhs. I, therefore, see no reason to interfere with the writ petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. 3. There will be no order as to costs. 4. Interim orders stand vacated.
-
2003 (8) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Export rebate - Fraudulent claim - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... ly in the year 1996 or thereafter in spite of the knowledge in September, 1995 that these Officers had issued bogus/incorrect certificates. We are told that in view of the retirement, no action can be taken against those Officers. Inaction on the part of the higher authorities in the Central Excise Department to initiate prompt action in such cases is bound to send wrong signal to the officials working at the lower level. In fact, inaction on the part of the higher authorities in the Excise Department to take prompt action in such cases, would embolden the lower officials to indulge in such activities with a view to defraud the Revenue. Inaction on the part of the higher officials in such cases is nothing short of shielding unworthy employees to say the least. Therefore, it is high time that the Excise Authorities take immediate and prompt action in such cases to ensure that such cases do not recur again. 19.For all the aforesaid reasons, the petition is dismissed with costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 57 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Demand - Limitation - Writ jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... Courts on numerous occasions held as above that when six months period will be available for the authority and when the period can be extended for five years. Even two or three such cases placed before this Court are factually similar and the words suppression of the facts or wilful misstatement are the subject matters. I cannot deviate from such ratio following the same taking an independent view as I have observed at the very beginning of the judgment. 14.Therefore, taking into totality of the matter I am of the view that writ petition should be succeeded and accordingly succeeds. Interim order passed hereunder stands confirmed. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. However, no order is passed as to costs. 15.Prayer for stay is made, considered and refused. 16.Xeroxed certified copies of this judgment will be supplied to the parties within seven days from the date of putting requisites for drawing up and completion of the order and certified copy of this judgment.
-
2003 (8) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH
Writ jurisdiction - Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... at the applicants have not been able to make out a prima facie case on merits for total waiver of duty and penalty. 10. In regard to the decision of the Tribunal on the scope of reliance to be placed on information supplied to the bank we note that the facts in each case differs and therefore, case law has to be applied strictly based on the facts of a particular case. 11. In regard to financial position we note that since the allegation is of clandestine removal, statutory figures etc. maintained by the applicants in their records will not show any entry in regard to sale proceeds of these goods. 3. The amount has been ordered to be deposited in the aforesaid manner. In my opinion, the order passed by the CEGAT is just and reasonable. As stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner fastens to Rs. 51 crores, the amount as ordered to be deposited is meagre as compared to the liability. I find no ground to make interference in the writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Export - Rebate claim - Limitation - Interpretation of statutes - Amendment ... ... ... ... ..... o decide this matter on independent interpretation of Section 11B of the Act. 45.Alternatively, once it is held that the limitation under Section 11B is procedural, then any amendment to such procedural law can be said to have retroactive effect if not the retrospective effect. The amended Section 11B, without affecting the existing substantive right, merely enables an expanded remedy period. In other words, even if the amendment is not to have retrospective effect, it would nevertheless have retroactive effect and in that view of the matter, the case of the petitioner s would be covered within the amended period of limitation and thus the petitioners would be entitled to rebate of duty. In the light of the view taken, for the reasons recorded, we do not think it necessary to dwell upon other contentions raised by the petitioners. 46.In the result, petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of the prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the petition with no order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 54 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Remand - Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Delay in disposal ... ... ... ... ..... elivery of judgment by itself is sufficient to set aside the impugned order passed by the CEGAT to the extent it is challenged by the petitioner arising out of Appeal Nos. C/500 of 1988 and C/614 of 1988. 12.In the result, petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside to the extent it is challenged and the appeals being Appeal Nos. C/500 of 1988 and C/614 of 1988 are restored to the file of the CEGAT with direction to rehear of the said appeals filed at the instance of the petitioner and decide the same afresh with a reasoned order dealing with all contentions raised and canvassed on its own merits. All the rival contentions are kept open for being decided by the CEGAT on its own merits. Petition stands disposed of in terms of this order with no order as to costs. 13.Copy of this order be sent to the President of the CEGAT for action in accordance with the directions issued therein and for reporting compliance thereof within three months from the receipt of this order.
-
2003 (8) TMI 53 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Penalty - Imposition - Seasoned smuggler ... ... ... ... ..... elling abroad. (d) Compulsory prison for a repeater. (e) The authorities may also consider creating a special cell if not already done for closer supervision/surveillance on these repeaters in the interest of commerce and economy in this country. 15.These few thoughts gathered in my mind and these thoughts are reflected in this judgment to brighten Indian Economy without smuggling. I am firmly of the view that unless smuggling is curbed with an iron hand, Indian economy is bound to suffer and a poor country like India cannot suffer any adverse effect on its economy on account of unchecked smuggling at the cost of Nation. 16.With these concluding remarks, I deem it proper to dismiss both these petitions on the facts of this case. I further deem it proper to direct the registry to send a copy of this order to the Cabinet Secretary - Government of India, Secretary - Finance Department, for appropriate remedial legislative measures in the larger interest of the country. No costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 52 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Refund - Interest ... ... ... ... ..... or to 2001. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to grant 9 and, instead I deem it proper to grant 5 from the date of the application, which in my view, would meet the ends of justice. Courts of law have consistently ruled that even in the absence of any provision of interest, Courts can grant interest under Art. 226 of the Constitution Reference - 1991 (52) E.L.T. 165 2000 (119) E.L.T. 279 (M.P.) 2000 (90) ECR 452 . Interest in terms of this order is to be settled within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9.Respondents Counsel argues that Annexure-N is an appealable order. A reading of Annexure N would show that it is not an adjudicatory order, and it is only an endorsement. Therefore, no appeal would lie as argued by the Counsel. 10.Petition is allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents to settle the interest at 5 within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order, from the date of the application till the date of payment. No costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 51 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
Appeal - Restoration of ... ... ... ... ..... rect in holding that if the counsel for the petitioner had been unable to obtain instructions his duty was to give up the case or to argue the case to the best of his ability. According to us, the material on record constituted sufficient cause for non-appearance before the Tribunal on the date of hearing. The impugned Order, therefore, of the Tribunal, dated 25th January, 1999, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner and the impugned Order, dated 31st August, 2001, insofar as it dismissed the application of the petitioner for restoration of Appeal No. E/4388/95 are wholly unsustainable and are liable to be quashed and set aside. 7.We, therefore, allow the Writ Petition and quash and set aside the impugned Orders as indicated above and direct the Tribunal to decide the Appeal of the petitioner No. E/4388/95 afresh within 12 weeks from today with due notice to the petitioner of the date of hearing of the Appeal. Rule made absolute on the above terms, with no order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 50 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the extracts were goods for the purpose of the Central Excise Act and if so, whether they were classifiable under Chapter 13 or 30 of the Act?
Held that:- Whichever way we look at it the reasoning of the Tribunal cannot be sustained. That the circular is binding on the Revenue Authorities cannot be disputed in view of the well established law summarised in Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara v. Dhiren chemical Industries reported in [2001 (12) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. Since the concurrent finding of act is that the liquid extracts used by the appellant in the manufacture of the medicines had therapeutic value, then they can, according to the CBEC circular be classifiable only under Tariff Entry 30.30 and not 13.03. In favour of assessee.
-
2003 (8) TMI 49 - SUPREME COURT
SSI Exemption - Brand/Trade name - Held that:- no document has been shown that the subsequent assignment in favour of M/s. Vikshara Trading & Invest. P. Ltd. was registered as contemplated under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. This aspect was taken note of by the Tribunal that the trade mark need not necessarily be in respect of all goods unless registration has been so acquired and it is therefore, permissible in law to have same brand name for different classes of goods owned by different person, and in that background found in favour of the respondent and held that the Notification No. 223/87-C.E., dated 22-9-1987 was applicable. When as a matter of fact it is held that there was an assignment in favour of the first respondent and that fact was not in serious dispute the mere fact that the assignment was not registered could not alter the position - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
....
|
