|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 520 Records
-
2004 (5) TMI 504 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... ood as lsquo mosquito repellents rsquo by the assessee themselves and others dealing with product and there is no material on record to bring in the alleged new understanding of the product as a lsquo mosquito killer rsquo in the market. The coverage under notification is prima facie found to be established under the residency entry lsquo others rsquo . The issue raised will have to be gone into and decided at the final hearing, at this prima facie stage we are of the opinion that the appellants should be placed to terms of deposit since no case for full waiver of pre-deposit is made out. It is ordered that a pre-deposit of Rs. 20 lakhs to be made and compliance reported on 17-6-2004 would meet the requirements of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. If compliance is reported on 17-6-2004, the matter would be taken up on that date for regular hearing granting the plea of early hearing made. 4. emsp Stay application and early hearing application disposed in above term.
-
2004 (5) TMI 503 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Steel structurals - Dutiability of ... ... ... ... ..... s also challenged on limitation. 6. emsp We have carefully considered the rival contentions. It is not disputed that the goods are fabricated in the factory first and thereafter transferred to the respective site. Hence the ground of ldquo manufacture at site rdquo was erroneously applied by the Commissioner (Appeals) to set aside the order of the adjudicating authority. Therefore the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable. However, we also note that the respondents also advanced very substantial grounds to challenge the liability to duty confirmed by the adjudicating authority. We accordingly hold that, this matter needs to be remanded back to the adjudicating authority for passing fresh orders on merits. 7. emsp Accordingly we allow the revenue appeal by remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority for passing fresh orders, after following the principles of natural justice. The orders of the lower authorities are consequently set aside.
-
2004 (5) TMI 502 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Redemption fine ... ... ... ... ..... quested of the redemption fine imposed. No waiver of redemption fine imposed could be granted under Section 129E. The application is dismissed. Matter to come up for hearing in due course. Application disposed off accordingly.
-
2004 (5) TMI 501 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... quarely stands covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Tribunal in Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut v. Tin Manufacturing Company, 2000 (119) E.L.T. 290 (T-LB) wherein the defective duty paid metal containers were remade into new metal containers. The defective metal containers were used as inputs by the assessee in the manufacture of new metal containers. The Tribunal observed that once these were used as inputs, the duty paid on them could be taken as Modvat credit in terms of Rule 57A read with C.B.E. and C. Circular No. 263/45/89-CX. 8, dated 7-8-1989. No judgment contrary has been brought to our notice by the Department. Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowing Modvat credit on the duty paid rejected goods used as inputs by the appellants, for the manufacture of the final products, cannot be legally sustained and is set aside. The appeal of the appellants stands allowed with consequential relief, if any, permissible under the law.
-
2004 (5) TMI 500 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... No. 6, Nandini Industrial Estate, Amli, Silvassa and took 50 of the total Cenvat credit of CVD paid on capital goods amounting to Rs. 4,67,584/-. This credit is sought to be denied on the ground that they have not fulfilled the condition of Project Import Regulation, 1986 and therefore not entitled to the credit. Credit cannot be denied on the ground of violation of Project Import Regulation, 1986. At best, Central Excise authorities should have informed the Customs authorities for appropriate action for the said violation. There is no justification for denying the credit on these grounds. 3. emsp The appeal is allowed. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside.
-
2004 (5) TMI 499 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Deemed Modvat credit ... ... ... ... ..... of Notification 7/2001 reads as under - ldquo In respect of a composite mill, the provisions of this notification shall apply only to processed fabrics manufactured from unprocessed fabrics not woven in the same mill, subject to the condition that no credit has been taken in respect of the declared inputs contained in such unprocessed fabrics under any rule or notification. rdquo This would imply that unprocessed fabrics woven in same mill subject to the condition that credit on inputs contained thereon no credit was obtained would also be eligible to deemed credit and only unprocessed fabrics woven in the credit claim in the same mills were to be excluded, as they would be covered by other provisions of law. Unprocessed fabrics in the present case are woven by independent weavers on being sent ldquo duty paid yarn rdquo . Goods are not woven on job work under Credit Rules. The deemed credit is thus available on such unprocessed fabrics. Order is set aside and appeal allowed.
-
2004 (5) TMI 498 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Demand and penalty - Clandestine removal of goods ... ... ... ... ..... e to mistake on their part and as a law abiding citizen they are willing to pay the central excise duty liability. The above statement cannot be construed as statement of admission on the part of the company as having cleared the goods without payment of duty. No question were put to him as to who were the buyers of clandestinely removed goods and how the same were removed. No statement of any other employee dealing with the removal of the goods or responsible for maintaining excise records was recorded. As has been held in the decision referred (supra) the charges of clandestine removal are required to be proved beyond doubt by production of sufficient evidences. In these circumstances, I extend the benefit of doubt to the appellants. In asmuch as no evidence has been produced in the present case to support the clandestine processing and removal of the fabrics in question and set aside the impugned order and allow both the appeals with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
2004 (5) TMI 497 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... ure and clearance of goods clandestinely. There is no admission made by any officers of the appellant company and that there is no evidence of excess stock or shortage of inputs found in the premises of the appellant. The shortage found was, according to the Advocate, pertaining to the intermediate product and the investigating officer is said to have been cross-examined and the Counsel has submitted that nothing was revealed in the investigation to show that there was manufacture and clearance of goods. In view of the appellant industry, having been taken over by KSFC and prima facie appellant having shown a good case on their part, therefore the stay applications are allowed granting waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts. As the amounts are huge, the appeals are required to be taken for hearing out of turn. The appeal to come up for hearing on 4th October 2004. Both the sides to file complete sets of paper books and relied upon documents before the case comes up for hearing.
-
2004 (5) TMI 496 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Clandestine manufacture and removal ... ... ... ... ..... part of the computer and even could be used without computer. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) had reversed the findings of the adjudicating authority regarding the non-manufacture of the computers by the appellants without providing sufficient grounds. He appears to have been influenced by the fact that since JCL 6000, data system had all the characteristics of a computer, could be termed as computer itself. He has ignored the documentary evidence referred to above produced by the appellants and from which it is quite evident that the computers were bought out items of the appellants which they supplied along with 6000 JCL, to the buyers on demand otherwise they were only manufacturing/assembling JCL 6000 data system. 6. emsp In the light of the discussion made above, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be sustained and is set aside. The order-in-original of the adjudicating authority is restored. The appeal of the appellants stand accordingly accepted.
-
2004 (5) TMI 495 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
EXIM - Project Import Regulations - Benefit of ... ... ... ... ..... nd perused the records. 3. emsp We find that in the case of CC, Mumbai v. NRB Bearing Ltd. 2003 (159) E.L.T. 755, the Tribunal has held that the benefit of project import is specific to unit and location as per the Regulations and since the goods were found installed in a unit other than at the location approved under the contract registered, the benefit was not available. The ratio of the above order is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, even though in this case the appellants aver that DGTD permission had been obtained for a new plant at Nagpur, We uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.
-
2004 (5) TMI 494 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... he input to the office of the concerned excise officer. In the course of this transit if the duplicate copy of the invoice is lost, manufacturer should establish the same to the satisfaction of the concerned Assistant Collector. On the Assistant Collector rsquo s satisfaction regarding the loss of the duplicate copy in transit, the manufacturer can take credit of the duty paid on inputs received in the factory on the basis of the original invoice. rdquo 6. emsp In this case, obviously the said invoices had never been produced before the range office of the Central Excise. Therefore, the loss can be construed to have occurred in transit as analysed by the Larger Bench of the CEGAT in the judgment cited above. The same principle also applies to the challans under Rule 57F. Following the judgment of the CEGAT cited above, the appellants are entitled to take credit on the basis of the original copy of the invoices. 7. emsp Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same is allowed.
-
2004 (5) TMI 493 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
HDPE Fabrics - Exemption under Sl. No. 37 of Notification No. 14/92- C.E. ... ... ... ... ..... d as under - (i) such articles are made out of goods falling under heading Nos. 39.01 to 39.15, on which the duty of excise leviable thereon under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) or the additional duty of customs leviable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), as the case made be, has already been paid and no credit of such duty is availed of under Rule 57A of the said Rules or (ii) such articles are produced out of scrap of plastics. There is no stipulation in the above entry that the article in question should be made exclusively out of goods falling under specified heading numbers. There is no merit in the other contentions also. It is well settled that when goods, which originally escaped assessment, are subjected to duty, the total price realized should be taken as cum-duty price. The appellant rsquo s claim to Modvat Credit also is in terms of settled law. 3. emsp In view of what is stated above the appeal fails and is rejected.
-
2004 (5) TMI 492 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ence exchanged as regards the effort and price for the damaged soda ash. The offer and acceptance are in writing and on record filed. The absence of a written contract would not ipso facto set aside the sale price of Rs. 4,000/- per MT not to be contractual. (b) The test reports of the actual goods have been ignored. (c) There is no provision under the Central Excise Law that only written contracts should be accepted for determining the valuation. An offer and its acceptance and performance thereafter establish a sale effected on contracted prices. Therefore, the under material in the form of offers and acceptance and test measures has to be considered and thereafter valuation arrived. In this view of the matter the order is set aside and matter remitted for de novo determination of duty demands, if any, and penalty thereafter. The appellants are at liberty to argue the other points e.g. factual errors made before us. No finding therefore is arrived and other issue left open.
-
2004 (5) TMI 491 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... certificate it is specifically mentioned that the inputs in question were manufactured by Steel Authority of India and also mentioned particulars regarding payment of duty. On the back of the invoice issued by Chandigarh Industrial and Tourism Development Co-operation Limited also contains of the particulars regarding payment of duty of the inputs received by the appellants. In these circumstances, the denial of credit is not sustainable, hence set aside. Appeal is allowed.
-
2004 (5) TMI 490 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Inputs ... ... ... ... ..... ted in 2000 (121) E.L.T. 247 (Tribunal-L.B.). 4. emsp The Revenue reiterated the finding of the lower authorities. 5. emsp In this case the credit was denied only on the ground that the description of inputs given in the declaration and in the GP-Is are not the same. I find that now Rules 57G and 57T have been amended by Notification No. 7/99-C.E. (N.T.) dated 9-2-99 to the affect that credit shall not be denied on the ground that the declaration does not contained to the details required to be contained therein or the manufacturer fails to comply with any other requirement under sub-rule (1). The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Kamakhya Steels (P) Ltd. (supra) held that this amendment is applicable to the pending cases also. The Revenue is not disputing the facts regarding payment of duty in respect of the inputs received by the appellants. In view of the above discussion and the decision of the Tribunal, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
2004 (5) TMI 489 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Reversal of ... ... ... ... ..... plication in the instant case because, the mandate in the case of Polar Industries (supra) applied only to a situation prior to 29-6-95, whereas, the present dispute relates to post 29-6-95. Therefore, the Polar Industries Ltd., case will also not assist the Revenue to support their contentions raised in the appeal. Besides as contended by the ld. Counsel for the respondents, even if the rule had not undergone the amendment dated 29-6-95, in terms of the Larger Bench judgment of the CEGAT in the case of CCE, Vadodara v. Asia Brown Boveri Ltd., (supra), reversal of the amount of credit equivalent to credit taken at the time of receipt of inputs was in accordance with the provisions of Rule 57F(1)(ii) which is pari meteria to Rule 57S(1)(ii). Therefore, the case of the Revenue that there was a short levy has to be rejected. 6. emsp In the light of the above discussions, the appeal of the Revenue is rejected, and the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is hereby affirmed.
-
2004 (5) TMI 488 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... value of clearance in respect of the final product which is manufactured out of the inputs on which no credit has been taken. 3. emsp The contention of the Revenue is that in the month of June, 1997 as per the provisions of Rule 57CC of the Central Excise Rules, the manufacturer has to pay 8 of the value of the goods cleared under Exemption notification or which are liable for Nil rate of duty. In this case, we are concerned with the clearance of rectified spirit cleared by the appellants in the month of June, 1997. Admittedly appellants were working under the Modvat Scheme and were availing the credit used in the manufacture of their final product which were cleared on payment of duty as well as on which no duty liability. In this situation, the appellants are liable to pay 8 of the value of the goods cleared without payment of duty as per the provisions of 57CC of the Central Excise Rules. In these circumstances, I find no merit in the arguments and the appeal is dismissed.
-
2004 (5) TMI 487 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Demand - Clandestine removal ... ... ... ... ..... e facts that 675 kgs of PP granules were found in the vehicle on 18-3-1996, concealed under cut pieces of fabrics being transported in vehicle No. AP 28 T 5351. Therefore demand on duty on PP granules is correct in law. Further, we find that regarding 8,000 pieces of PP cut fabrics/sacks which were found in excess, as against the balance in the register maintained by M/s. Ruchi Enterprises and explanation given by the Supervisor of M/s. Ruchi Enterprises that it was that due to variations at the time of receipt and dispatches, is not corroborated by any evidence that the same were unaccounted fabrics of M/s. Ashok Polymers Ltd. only. Therefore, we do not find that any case has been made out in respect of 8,000 pieces of PP cut fabrics/sacks. We, therefore, set aside the confiscation and duty demanded on 8,000 pieces of PP cut fabrics/sacks. Consequently, we reduce the penalty to Rs. 20,000/- on M/s. Ashok Polymers Ltd. With this modification, the appeal is otherwise rejected.
-
2004 (5) TMI 486 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat on inputs - Molasses - Natural justice - Demand ... ... ... ... ..... emand and penalty raised in the impugned order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. 5. emsp It is brought to our notice that even before the expiry of statutory time limit for filing appeal against the impugned order, the lower authorities adjusted part of the demand (Rs. 73,06,098/-) amount from rebate claims due to the appellant. This is a clear violation of the assessee rsquo s statutory right to file appeal and obtain stay of recovery. In the present case, the impugned order dated 17-11-2003 was received by the appellant only on 12-12-2003. The statute allowed time of three months from 12-12-2003 to file appeal. But recovery was effected on 31-12-2003. An action clearly in breach of the statute. Such high handedness cannot be allowed. It is, therefore, directed that amount already recovered shall be returned to the appellant forthwith, and in any case, within a period of two weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order.
-
2004 (5) TMI 485 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... khs on M/s. Bullows Paint and Equipment Limited, both under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 are allowed as the applicants have made out a strong prima facie case on the basis of CBEC Circular No. 6/92 dated, 29-5-1992 which inter alia states that each limited company is a manufacturer by itself and will be entitled to separate exemption limit for the purpose of arriving at aggregate value of clearances under Notification 175/86-C.E. and 1/93-C.E.
............
|
