|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 273 Records
-
1985 (7) TMI 282 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... le (1) of Rule 9A should apply. 5. emsp We have carefully considered the arguments advanced on both sides. We find that Shri Narayanan is right in saying that the case relating to demand of duty in the present proceedings is covered by the ratio of the previous decision. As regards the arguments advanced by Smt. Saxena, these are of a general nature and do not support the Department rsquo s case with reference to the provisions of Rule 9A at the relevant time. In the circumstances, we follow our previous decision and hold that the demand for duty on 8460 kgs. of tobacco in this case which was held as clandestinely removed would be covered by sub-rule (5) of Rule 9A. Since the duty has not so far been paid and there is now no duty on unmanufactured tobacco, we set aside the demand for duty in respect of the above mentioned 8460 kgs. of tobacco. The appeal is allowed to this extent only and in other respects we reject the appeal and confirm the order of the Appellate Collector.
-
1985 (7) TMI 281 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Import - Classification ... ... ... ... ..... rms of Section 129-C of the Customs Act. Shri Raghavachari has reported his order dated 5-6-1987. In terms of the provisions of Section 129-C, the appeal is to be decided on the basis of the majority opinion. In the majority view the imported goods are not classifiable as Ivory Board and hence the import licence tendered for the clearance is valid. Accordingly the order No. S/16-DEEC-1063/84 exem. dated 30-6-1985 passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay confiscating the imported goods under Section lll(d) of the Customs Act and permitting them to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- is set aside and the appeal of M/s. Cham Ice and Cold Storages is allowed. Since the Bombay Port Trust have sold in auction 120 bales and since the goods are not liable to confiscation as decided in this order an appeal, the Collector of Customs, Bombay is directed to give the sale proceeds of the sold goods to the appellants after deducting the expenses incurred in the sale thereof.
-
1985 (7) TMI 279 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... stainable. Appellants have all along acted in accordance with the advice and approval of the department. They have also, by and large, fully complied with the Excise procedures for the availment of proforma credit. The department has alleged that the appellants did not furnish full particulars of the raw materials imported. This charge, on the face of it, is not substantiated in view of the fact that the particulars of the goods imported were duly declared and the fact of availment of proforma credit was also duly noted in the classification list, approved by the department. 8. We also observe that the Additional Collector has imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/-. In view of the facts, recounted here, it is not understood as to what were the facts of omission or commission on the part of the appellants, which justify the imposition of this penalty. 9. In view of our above findings, we set aside the Order of the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Indore, and allow the appeal.
-
1985 (7) TMI 278 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... steel melting shops for the manufacture of steel. The lsquo hot metal rsquo is the basic material for the manufacture of steel and is taken directly to the steel melting shops. The entire process from the melting of iron ore to the production of steel is an intergrated process involving the use of Oxygen in its direct use in the manufacture of steel. Thus the petitioner was entitled to exemption form the excise duty on Tariff Item No.l4-H in respect of the Oxygen directly used in the manufacture of steel. rdquo In the presence of this decision of the Patna High Court, the facts of which are identical with these of the appeals before us, Mrs. Zutshi the learned S.D.R. was having nothing to argue on behalf of the department. 11. Following the decision of the Patna H.C. in Civil Writ Petition No. 335 of 1978 (R) titled Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. U.O.I, decided on 29-4-85, we set aside the impugned orders in appeals and allow all the three appeals with consequential relief.
-
1985 (7) TMI 273 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stamping foils ... ... ... ... ..... setting up of a Larger Special Bench. 5. ensp We have carefully considered the submissions made on both sides. We find force in the submissions of Shri Balani. In the first place, although the cash number of the bill of entry in this case pertains to 1980, no evidence has been placed before us regarding the licensing period for which the licence was issued it is not unknown for imports to be effected much after the issue of the licence. But apart from this, we find that the decision in the previous case of the same appellants was based not only on the provisions of the ITC policy but on the general trade understanding and usage. We also agree that so far as the stamping foils are concerned, the dissenting order referred to by Shri Balani does not suggest that any modification of the Tribunal rsquo s previous decision in regard to stamping foils is called for. Having regard to these factors, we allow the appeal and direct that consequential relief be granted to the appellants.
-
1985 (7) TMI 270 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Replenishment licence ... ... ... ... ..... pect of export of fruits, vegetables and meat effected between the period April 1979 to December 1979. The petitioners would also be entitled to the cash assistance in respect of this export and in respect of which 15 invoices were tendered before the respondents and the details of which are set out at Exhibits lsquo S rsquo and T rsquo to the petition. The respondents are directed to ascertain the exact amount of cash assistance payable to the petitioners and pay the said amount within a period of two months from today. The respondents are also directed to issue the replenishment licences with a period of two months from today. 7. Accordingly, rule is made absolute and the respondents are directed to issue REP licences and the cash assistance to the petitioners within a period of two months from to day. The replenishment licence and the cash assistance would be issued in accordance with the directions given hereinabove. The respondents shall pay the costs of the petitioners.
-
1985 (7) TMI 267 - CEGAT, MADRAS
refund application ... ... ... ... ..... ion 35G of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 for referring the following question said to be of law and arising from the Order of the Tribunal ldquo Whether the refund application addressed to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise but presented to the Range Superintendent, within 6 months which was later forwarded to the jurisdictional Assistant Collector after the lapse of 6 months is to be treated as a valid claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act7 3. We have heard both sides. As a result of discussion, it has been decided that the following mixed question of fact and law be referred to the Hon rsquo ble High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore and is accordingly referred ldquo Whether in the circumstances of the case, a refund application addressed to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise but received by the Superintendent can be treated as having been made in conformity with the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. rdquo
-
1985 (7) TMI 264 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... hing process was carried out and therefore the said process amounted to manufacture of a new excisable commodity distinct from the parent product and falling under Item 22-F CET. This classification is also consistent with the decision of this Tribunal on the classification of asbestos fluff in Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur v. M/s. Sri Pratap Commercial Co. (P) Ltd., Bhilwara reported in 1984 ECR 1877 and on the classification of asbestos powder in Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur v. M/s. Leo Minerals and M/s. Multi Mineral Processing Industries. Order Nos. 509 and 510/87-D dated 29-6-1987 in Central Excise Appeals Nos. 49 and 50/1983-D . 7. Accordingly we hold that the orders of the Assistant Collector were right and that the orders of the Appellate Collector setting aside orders of the Assistant Collector were incorrect. Accordingly these appeals are allowed, the orders of the Appellate Collector are set aside and the orders of the Assistant Collector are restored.
-
1985 (7) TMI 261 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Period of limitation computable from the date of receipt of the communication by the Collector
-
1985 (7) TMI 257 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Imports under OGL - Import of components of tractors invalid ... ... ... ... ..... y the Group. Therefore, this argument does not help the appellants. 73. I would answer the point for difference formulated by Brother Shri Dilipsinhji as follows - ldquo On the facts and circumstances of the case the two imports offend import control policy and the action taken by the Additional Collector of Customs is correct. rdquo FINAL ORDER 74. The point of difference in this appeal was referred by the President in terms of Section 129-C (5) of the Customs Act to third member Shri S.D. Jha, Vice-President (J) who has now recorded his opinion. 75. emsp As per Section 129-C (5), the appeal is to be disposed of in terms of the majority view. Accordingly, the import of the 2 consignments is held to violate the Import Trade Control Regulations. The order of the Additional Collector is accordingly confirmed and the appeal of M/s. Espi Industrial Corporation is rejected. Sd/- (K. Gopal Hegde) Member (Judicial) Bombay, 30th July, 1986. Sd/- (K.S. Dilipsinhji) Member (Technical)
-
1985 (7) TMI 256 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Proforma credit ... ... ... ... ..... to the quasi judicial functioning of original/appellate authorities. 5. ensp Quite apart from the above, we notice that Rule 56A requires the removal of partially processed goods from such factory to the second factory for various purposes. Raw materials received have not been shown to be partially processed in any manner before their removal to the second factory. Even from this angle the request of the respondent could not have been allowed. 6. ensp In the result we find that the request for permission to send goods such as alkali refined linseed oil and refined castor oil, received in the factory of the respondent to be taken to another factory for the manufacture of alkyd resins and the receipt of alkyd resins back in to the factory of the respondent for being used in the manufacture of paints and varnishes has been correctly refused by the Assistant Collector. Accordingly we set aside the order of the Collector (Appeals) and restore the order of the Assistant Collector.
-
1985 (7) TMI 250 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Glass - ‘Other glass’ ... ... ... ... ..... the facts and law and that the orders of the Appellate Collectors with reference to which these review show cause notices were issued are liable to be set aside. It further follows that where the Appellate Collectors themselves had held the classification as under T.I. 23A(4) the said orders are to be upheld and the appeals against the said orders are to be dismissed. So far as Appeal No. 497 of 1980 is concerned, it relates to a refund claim which was admittedly preferred beyond the period prescribed under Section 27 of the Customs Act. The rejection of the said refund claim was, therefore, justified on that ground itself and hence that appeal also deserved to be dismissed. 16. Accordingly Appeal Nos. 1335/80-D, 1429 to 1437 of 1986 D, 1012 of 1980-D 1425 to 1428 of 1986-D are allowed, setting aside the orders of the Appellate Collectors and restoring the orders of the Assistant Collectors in these matters. Appeal Nos. 923 of 1981, 242 of 1981 and 497 of 1980 are dismissed.
-
1985 (7) TMI 247 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
TVC films and sheets - Proforma credit ... ... ... ... ..... excisable goods do not fall under the same tariff item. But then having regard to sub-clause (b) of clause (2)(ii) of the proviso to Rule 56-A (2) credit cannot be denied even if the inputs and the finished excisable goods fall under different Tariff items, if the Central Government has specifically sanctioned remission or adjustment of duty paid for the inputs. The authorities below have totally ignored this provision of the rules. By Notification No. 75/71 duty has been remitted on the inputs that the appellants used in the manufacture of excisable goods. 11. emsp In the circumstances stated above the authorities below in our opinion had committed an error in holding that proforma credit cannot be allowed to the appellants because inputs and the finished excisable goods fall under different Tariff items. We, therefore, set aside the orders passed by the authorities below. 12. In the result this appeal is allowed and the orders passed by the authorities below are set aside.
-
1985 (7) TMI 246 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Reference to the High Court - Refund ... ... ... ... ..... rd to ad hoc exemption under Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 will have retrospective effect? ii. emsp Whether any claim for refund made for the duty paid clearances, prior to the issue of the above mentioned order of the Board, that too well after the stipulated period of six months as required under the old Rule 11 ibid will have its validity? 4. emsp We have heard both sides. As a result of discussion, it has been decided that the following question of law will be referred to the Honourable High Court of Judicature, Karnataka at Bangalore and is accordingly referred - ldquo Whether Order No. F 350/6/78-TRU, dated 17.1.79 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, in exercise of the powers under Rule 8(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could be given effect to by way of grant of a refund to the assessee, when the relevant goods in respect of which the Order has been issued have already been cleared on payment of Central Excise duty rdquo .
-
1985 (7) TMI 245 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Reference Application - Contraband goods ... ... ... ... ..... agraph 8 to 10 of the order of the Bench of this Tribunal, to which one of us was a party, deal with the identical questions raised by the applicants in those appeals. It will be seen that these are questions of fact only. No question of law therefore survives for reference on these five points. 7. emsp Taking up question (c), though this has been dealt with by the above mentioned earlier order of the Tribunal, it is felt that we may still refer rsquo this question to the Hon rsquo ble Madras High Court under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, in the following form ldquo Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, where the adjudicating authority is satisfied that the contraband goods recovered from the ship are of such a nature and quantity as could not be without knowledge of its Master, the non-framing of rules contemplated under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act could be pleaded as a valid defence against action against the vessel under that Section rdquo .
-
1985 (7) TMI 238 - SUPREME COURT
Offence under Section 302/34, IPC for causing murder of the deceased, Raghumani Singh
Held that:- We are satisfied that in the instant case the learned Sessions Judge has exceeded his jurisdiction in making a local inspection. These are the main reasons given by the learned Sessions Judge for having acquitted the accused and rejecting the testimony of PWs 1 and 2 who were independent witnesses.
For the reasons given above, we are satisfied that the judgment of the Sessions Judge is perverse and based mainly on surmises and conjectures without any attempt to appreciate the evidence in a proper and scientific manner. We are also satisfied that this is not a case where two views, on the evidence, could be reasonably possible. We, therefore, find no merit in these appeals. We uphold the convictions and sentences imposed by the High Court and dismiss the appeals.
-
1985 (7) TMI 237 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Reference to the High Court - Seized account books claimed by appellant to be fictitious and entries therein imaginary
-
1985 (7) TMI 236 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Confiscation and penalty quashable ... ... ... ... ..... y 20. emsp On consideration of all the aspects we are satisfied that the appellants were not given a reasonable opportunity to effectively put forward their defence and were also not given an opportunity of being heard in the matter. We, therefore, set aside the order passed by the Additional Collector. Since we had rejected Shri Rajagopal rsquo s contention that there should not be any remand and since we had not heard Shri Rajagopal on mertis and as we are setting aside the order for non-compliance of the rules of natural justice, we direct the Additional Collector to consider the case afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity both in the matter of furnishing of copies of the documents or inspection of the documents and of granting personal hearing to the appellants. 21. emsp In the result we allow this appeal, set aside the order passed by the Additional Collector and remand the matter for consideration afresh in the light of the observations contained in this order.
-
1985 (7) TMI 230 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Refund of duty paid under protest ... ... ... ... ..... . But then the claim would be governed by the limitation prescribed under the rules in force at the relevant time. The refund has to be claimed within a period of 6 months from the date of payment. Therefore, there should be no legal objection to the refund of duty paid for the period of 6 months immediately prior to the date of claim viz. prior to 24-7-1980. The Central Excise authority shall consider as to whether cotton blankets removed by the respondents were not chargeable to duty under Tariff Item 68 at the relevant time and if they are satisfied that no duty was chargeable and if they are further satisfied that the respondents had paid the duty under the said Tariff Item, they shall order refund of the duty paid for the period of 6 months immediately prior to 24-7-1980. 13. emsp In the result, this appeal is allowed, the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Assistant Collector for the purposes mentioned in paragraph 12.
-
1985 (7) TMI 229 - COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS)
Winding Wires ... ... ... ... ..... g wires are made by the appellant are, in fact made from the wire rods and are the intermediate products without passing through which the wires of the required thickness for making winding wires cannot be obtained. The benefit of notification should, therefore, be extended to the appellant. With regard to the explanation it is clear that the liability is on the department to prove that the wire rods are non-duty paid and not for the appellants to prove that they are in fact duty paid. In this case, however, the appellants have agreed to provide proof of payment of duty on the copper wires, made from wire rods and from which they were making winding enamelled wires. 5. emsp In the result, the appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The order of the Asstt. Collector dated 16-11-1984, appealed against, is set aside with the direction to accord approval of the classification list for permitting concessional rate of duty 5 under notification No. 47/84, under serial No. 1 (i).
........
|
