|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 332 Records
-
1994 (3) TMI 257 - SC ORDER
Writ petition vis-a-vis S.L.P. ... ... ... ... ..... e said group of matters, his writ petition was also dismissed. Therefore he had to come to this Court by way of the present special leave petition. The petitioner should have approached the High Court by way of review pointing out the said order. We, therefore, direct the petitioner to approach the High Court in review. If there is any delay the High Court will condone it. The S.L.P. is disposed of accordingly.
-
1994 (3) TMI 256 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... ractors as the manufacturer in a similar case. Incidently the same adjudicating officer has passed this order and the earlier order. The earlier order passed has not been reviewed or taken on appeal before the Tribunal and the same appears to have been accepted by the Department as reflective of the correct position of law. It is, therefore, necessary that the learned lower authority should address himself to this aspect of the issue as this goes to the root of the matter. We, therefore, hold that the learned lower authority rsquo s order is not a proper one and direct that the learned lower authority should adjudicate the matter de novo in the light of the above facts, after giving the appellants an opportunity of being heard and after taking into consideration the earlier order passed by the learned Collector referred to supra. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and that all issues are open for consideration to both the sides.
-
1994 (3) TMI 254 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... p However, we find sufficient force in the second plea of the ld. advocate. There is no dispute that ingots and bars and rods are specified in Notification No. 77/86 issued under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Therefore, MODVAT credit of duty paid on ingots used in the manufacture of bars and rods would be availbale to the various applicants. Mere fact that the applicants could not file a declaration on the ground of their plea that they were entitled to Notification No. 202/88 cannot deprive the applicant appellants benefit of MODVAT credit. Accordingly, we allow the stay petitions unconditionally. In the facts and circumstances, we remand the matters to the adjudicating authority to allow the MODVAT credit and adjust the payment of duty now demanded from them against such MODVAT credit admissible to them after verifying the duty paid character of ingots (inputs) in accordance with law. Appeals are thus allowed by remand in the light of the aforesaid directions.
-
1994 (3) TMI 253 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Money Credit Scheme ... ... ... ... ..... n filed by them in accordance with the first Notification is valid and it cannot be said that there was any violations of the rule and non-filing of a second declaration can be termed as a breach too technical in nature since there was no variation in the inputs or in the final product. Their first declaration can be taken to a valid declaration for the purpose of availing the benefit under the scheme and the appellatns are entitled to the money credit scheme as mentioned in the later Notification. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the appellants are entitled to avail the benefit under the Notification. Hence I agree with the views of the learned Member (J) (Vice President) and the appeal is accordingly allowed. 12. emsp The matter may be placed before the regular Bench for passing necessary order. Sd/- (T.P. Nambiar) Member (J) FINAL ORDER In view of the majority decision, the appeal is allowed. Sd/- (V.P. Gulati) Member (T) Sd/- (S. Kalyanam) Vice President
-
1994 (3) TMI 252 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Bail - Seizure of narcotics ... ... ... ... ..... e in the circumstances. If the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is viewed with reference to the above principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court, I am at every difficulty to identify any ground advantageous to the petitioner to enlarge him on bail. Each and every aspect has been dealt with and considered very elaborately. The respondent herein gained entry into the house of the petitioner only on authorisation by his superior officer, duly empowered and seized the contraband, a narcotic substance for the offences alleged and about the seizure and arrest, it has been duly intimated as claimed by the prosecution. Therefore, it is not at all possible to hold that there is any mandatory violation of the provision of law in this case and that any serious prejudice is made available to the petitioner herein. 3. For all the reasons aforementioned, I do not find any merit in the contentions raised by the learned counsel. Accordingly, I hereby dismiss this petition.
-
1994 (3) TMI 251 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... aving Mills is much after the agreement for High Sea Sale. This is beyond the very concept of High Sea Sale, where the sale is effected when the goods are in transit. Here however, even the order was not placed to the foreign supplier when the alleged agreement was entered into. Further the alleged agreement for High Sea Sale opens with the words ldquo we hereby agree to import spares on your behalf rdquo . In Column ldquo Price and mode of payment rdquo there is a mention - ldquo you will pay us a consideration of 10 net on the C.I.F. value mentioned in Clause (B) above, as Service Charges towards arranging import.......... rdquo This too is contra indicative of a genuine transaction of High Sea Sale and is clearly indicative of the fact that the goods were sought to be purchased for and on behalf of the appellants under the licence issued to the ostensible importer, and the non-transferable licence appears to have been transferred under the alleged High Sea Sale agreements.
-
1994 (3) TMI 250 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Appeal - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... tor (A) is that the goods were allowed for export under AR 4 dt. 5-9-1989, but they were actually shipped on 21-10-1989 i.e. in the next quarter namely October 1989 to December 1989 and hence the refund could not have been claimed in the previous quarter, in view of the provisions of Notification No. 85/87 issued under Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules. 3. emsp After hearing both the sides, though technically and legally the claim should have been made in the next quarter as per the provisions of the aforesaid Notification, the fact that the goods removed for export under AR 4 dated 5-9-1989 have been exported is not disputed. In the circumstances, the aforesaid amount of refund in any case is eligible to them in the next quarter. In view of this, this procedural irregularity can always be rectified by filing a claim in the next quarter. I therefore allow the appeal with directions not to recover the refund of Rs. 11,153.85 already sanctioned by the Assistant Collector.
-
1994 (3) TMI 249 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Modvat credit - Declaration ... ... ... ... ..... 2. emsp Shri Subramaniam, the learned DR, referring to the annexure to the show cause notice, contended that the annexure in respect of items at Sl. Nos. 8, 11, 13, 61, 77, 92 and 97 the descriptions also were found to differ. 3. emsp When the plea of the learned DR was brought to the notice of the learned Chartered Accountant for the appellant, he did not dispute this. Therefore, on consideration of the evidence on record in respect of the aforesaid items pointed out by the learned DR in regard to which the description itself differed, we uphold the impugned order disallowing MODVAT credit and in respect of the other items, since there is only a difference in the description of the sub-heading and the main heading has been given with proper description, we hold that the appellant had substantially complied with the requirements of law and allow MODVAT credit in respect of the same. The impugned order stands modified accordingly and the appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
-
1994 (3) TMI 248 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Penalty imposable for breach ... ... ... ... ..... eived is duly communicated to the excise section for taking the appropriate MODVAT Credit or for reversing the excess credit taken, then and there within the month of the credit. Here the excess credit has been taken and has been utilised for a period of years. In the circumstances, despite absence of mala fide, the negligence on the part of the appellant is discernible and hence liability to penalty is justified. All the same, the plea of leniency cannot be dismissed altogether, because of the fact they have paid the duty amount even before adjudication. Hence we reduce the penalty to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only). 5 emsp As regards the excess payment made, it is for them to get the credit in the MODVAT account or in PLA with regard to the alleged excess payment. 6 emsp The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 7 emsp Since the appeal itself is disposed of, stay application does not survive for consideration and the same is treated as disposed of accordingly.
-
1994 (3) TMI 247 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Additional consideration ... ... ... ... ..... e being made on the basis of the invoice value, under exemption Notification No. 120/75-C.E., dated 30-4-1975. The matter related to the expenses incurred by the buyer for advertisement on his own account, and not on behalf of the manufacturer. In the case before us the assessees were raising separate debit notes and collecting additional consideration to themselves from the buyers. 27. emsp Taking all the relevant considerations into account, we confirm that part of the impugned order which relates to the advertising and publicity charges/management service charges, but vacate that part of the impugned order which relates to the transport charges, with consequential relief to the appellant, if any. In the circumstances of the case, the amount of penalty imposed on M/s. Madurai Soft Drinks Pvt. Ltd., Madurai is reduced from Rs. 2,02,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Two Thousand Only) to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only). 28. The appeal is thus partly allowed in the above terms.
-
1994 (3) TMI 246 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Reference to High Court - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... ppreciated to come to the conclusion that a quantity of 2.890 M.Tons has not been cleared from the Customs area, even though the end use bond might have been executed for the entire manifested quantity. Even as per the provisions of Section 23 of the Customs Act, if any quantity is lost or destroyed before clearance of the goods for home consumption, duty leviable on such quantity lost or destroyed is liable to be remitted. Here, quantity of 2.890 M.Tons has been established to have been short-delivered from the Customs area as per the evidences considered. Hence the liability to account for this quantity even in terms of the bond executed cannot be fastened on the importers overlooking the provision of Section 23 of the Customs Act. Since the statutory provisions are clear and the short delivery has been established on appreciation of evidences on factual position, there is no question of law arising from the order of this Bench. Hence the Reference Application is dismissed.
-
1994 (3) TMI 245 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Appeal - Restoration ... ... ... ... ..... y the office clerk of the applicants rsquo Advocate, hearing date was not noted in the new diary for the year 1994 and hence the advocate missed the hearing. He, therefore, pleaded that the reference application, which they seek to pursue, may be restored. 2. emsp After hearing Shri Mondal, the ld. SDR, we restore the reference application which may be listed for hearing, in view of the request for adjournment received from the Advocate.
-
1994 (3) TMI 244 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... is requirement was subsequently deleted. However, the question arose as to whether during the aforesaid period, the units operating without the registration certificate of the Director of Industries can be denied the small scale exemption or not. He refers to the news item appearing in 1993 (68) E.L.T. 119, wherein it has been reported that the Finance Ministry is contemplating issue of Notification under Section 11C for waiving the duty payable by non-registered S.S.I. units from 1-4-1992 to 21-5-1992. In view of the aforesaid position we grant stay and waiver of recovery of the duty amount.
-
1994 (3) TMI 243 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Reference to High Court ... ... ... ... ..... e is a direct decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Ponds (India) Ltd. referred to above on this point of law and this decision has also been adopted by the Larger Bench. Reference is called for only, when there is no authoritative pronouncement by the High Court available on the specific point of law. There are no contra judgments of High Courts on this issue. 5. ensp As regards the relaxation granted for Rule 51 in respect of wires and cables we are to observe that irrespective of whether a relaxation is given or not, Rule 51 contemplates marking on the excisable product on the outer packings. Hence this is the normal statutory requirement to be complied with in respect of excisable goods manufactured. Moreover, in this case, the customers have specifically demanded such markings, without which they will not accept the goods. Hence there is no wrong appreciation of the factual position as pleaded by the Collector. The Reference Application is therefore dismissed.
-
1994 (3) TMI 242 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Modvat Credit - Stay and waiver of pre-deposit grantable ... ... ... ... ..... the Company and Shri K.M. Mondal, the ld. SDR for the department. 4. emsp The same issue in relation the demand raised for the earlier period has already been placed before this Tribunal. This Tribunal vide their Order No. 2358/93/WRB, dt. 2-11-1993 has held the same to be a triable issue and accordingly has granted unconditional stay and waiver. There is no ground available to take a view different from the same. Under the circumstances, the appellants are granted stay and waiver against recovery of the duty amount. This appeal may be kept with Appeal No. E/642/43 and 643/93 so that all the appeals having the same issue, can be decided simultaneously.
-
1994 (3) TMI 241 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Reference to High Court - Modvat credit ... ... ... ... ..... period should be taken as correct. He submits that this decision is given in relation to the provisions of Rule 12 of the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties ) Rules, 1956 and the ratio does apply to the facts here. He submits that in this view of the matter, the reference is not called for. 5. emsp Considering the submissions made and going by the record, earlier, a view has already been taken on this particular aspect of the case and as it held that the same has given rise to an issue of law and is required to be considered by the High Court for finalisation of the issue and now taking a different view would be against the judicial propriety. The judgment of the Supreme Court does provide a guideline for appropriate determination of the issue. All the same, the finding on the interpretation of Rule 57B is called for. In that matter, the question formulated by the appellant is referred to the High Court of Bombay. The Registry should draw the statement of facts.
-
1994 (3) TMI 240 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ive agents used in the manufacture of subject products had already suffered the duty or the same were purchased from the open market after 20th day of January, 1968. To the contention of the appellants in their Memorandum of Appeal that since the benefit of the said Notification was extended with respect to the future clearances of the same product, it was the answer of the learned JDR that for the subsequent it was found that the appellants have satisfied the said condition of the Notification, and therefore the benefit was extended. Considered. We find that the benefit of the said Notification was rightly denied. As regards the time-bar, we find that since there was mis-declaration on the part of the appellants, the demand for the extended period was rightly confirmed. 5. In the result, we uphold the classification of the subject products under Tariff Item 15-AA and also the findings of the two authorities below. Consequently, we reject the appeal being devoid of any merit.
-
1994 (3) TMI 239 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Penalty - Short levy ... ... ... ... ..... iving directions to work out the assessable values on notional manufacturing cost and profit. The Deptt. have not accepted these judgments and challenged them before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in their judgment in the case of Bombay Tyres International and Others have set at rest all these misconceptions and clearly held that duty is payable on the actual sale price prevalent at the factory gate to any independent buyer. In view of this, the case calls for leniency. We feel that there is no justification for imposing a penalty of Rs. 3.25 lakhs, especially when the duty demand was not confirmed but to be dealt with on the outcome of the decision of the Supreme Court. Had the appellant declared the sale prices or given the invoices from time to time, they would not have faced this penal consequent. Even the interest on the evaded amount is reported to be only Rs.1 lakh. Having regard to all these aspects, we deem it proper to reduce the penalty to Rs. one lakh only.
-
1994 (3) TMI 238 - CEGAT,, BOMBAY
Penalty - No mala fide or evasion of duty involved ... ... ... ... ..... oceedings were initiated and in the aforesaid order, the Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 2,52,259/- has been ordered reversal and a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- has also been imposed. 3. emsp Shri Parakh, the ld. Advocate, pleads that once they pay this amount they will be entitled to get back the credit, which can be utilised for payment of duty on springs or they could get the refund because of the fact that 80 of their production had gone for exports. Accordingly, they have already approached the dept. who are agreeable to allow the credit on payment of this duty. In view of this he is only seeking for setting aside the penalty and is not contesting the demand for duty. 4. emsp After hearing both the sides, we find that there is no challenge with regard to duty demand. Having regard to the fact that there is no mala fide and no apparent revenue evasion is seen in this availment of credit, we set aside the penalty. Both the stay application and appeal are disposed of accordingly.
-
1994 (3) TMI 237 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Modvat Credit permissible ... ... ... ... ..... in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product. They are not part of machinery or an input for maintenance or functioning of the machine. These are consumable gases used for purpose of chilling monoethylene glycol for ensuring proper chemical reaction to take place. Hence its usage is directly in relation to process of manufacture of the final product. These gases are analogous to acetylene gases used through the medium of flame tourch (a tool) and in the case of Mukund Iron and Steel, we have allowed Modvat benefit in respect of acetylene gases. Moreover, the view taken by us in the case of Kopran Ltd. vide our Order No. 615/616/93-WRB, dt. 19-4-1993 since reported in 1993 (67) E.L.T. 377 (Tri.) in the case of Nitrogen gas used for creating an inert atmosphere in the reactor vessel for enabling reaction to take place would also apply in this case. We therefore allow the appeal and direct the authorities to restore the Modvat credit in respect of these two inputs.
........
|
