-
2007 (4) TMI 774
... ... ... ... ..... ena,Adv. For the Respondent Mr. P.Vishwanatha Shetty, Sr.Adv., Mr. S.S.Aristotle, Adv.,Mr. P. Narasimhan, Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. ORDER Heard learned counsel for the parties. Appeal admitted.
-
2007 (4) TMI 756
... ... ... ... ..... ce in this regard is made to Tribunal's decision in case of TGL Poshak Corpn. reported in 2002 (140) ELT 187 (Tri.-Chennai), which has discussed the entire law on the point; Sri Jayajothi Co. Ltd. reported in 2002 (141) ELT 676 (T); Emtex Synthetics Ltd. reported in 2003 (54) RLT 526 (CEGAT-Del.) 2003 (151) ELT 170 (T). The law on the point is well settled that the charges of clandestine removal are required to be proved beyond doubt by production of sufficient and affirmative evidence and not on the basis of assumptio....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 754
... ... ... ... ..... t within the parameters indicated in the decision of this Court in the case of Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra Anr. (2002) 4 SCC 388. Hence, the Curative Petition is dismissed.
-
2007 (4) TMI 740
... ... ... ... ..... re entitled for benefit of notification. In these circumstances, we find that as the applicant produced invoices as well as certificate from M/s. BEML to show that the goods manufactured by the applicants were supplied to M/s. BEML and further used in the manufacture of goods which were supplied to the Min. of Defence. Therefore, the amount already deposited is sufficient for hearing of the appeal. Pre-deposit of remaining amount of duty and penalties are waived. 3. The evidence now produced by the applicant to show that M....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 723
... ... ... ... ..... he Supreme Court decision in Laghu Udyog Bharati s case (supra) amendments were carried out in terms of section 116 of the Finance Act, 2000 making recipient of the clearing and forwarding service liable for payment of service tax for the period from 16-7-1997 to 16-10-1998. The Chennai Tribunal in the cited decision supra, has exhaustively dealt with the issue and has held that the Parliament has authorised the collection only up to 16-10-1998 and the revenue cannot assume authority to collect such tax from the service re....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 717
... ... ... ... ..... facts, we do not wish to interfere. The Civil Appeal is dismissed.
-
2007 (4) TMI 716
Cenvat credit - failed to maintain separate inventory and accounts for receipt and consumption - Interest u/s 11AB r/w Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, demanded - Manufacture of both dutiable final products and exempted goods - whether M/s. MRPL the appellant has to pay an amount equal to 10% of the total price of the exempted goods viz., SKO and LPG charged by them at the time of clearance from the factory - HELD THAT:- This bench in a large number of cases has followed the ratio of the decision in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Wires Pvt....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 709
... ... ... ... ..... ve order of the Commissioner (Appeals), inasmuch as there is nothing on record to show that the goods were not entered in RG-1 with an intention to remove the same by clandestinely. For non-entry of goods in the statutory records, the Commissioner (Appeals) has already imposed maximum penalty of ₹ 2,000/- in terms of Rule 226 of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules. 3. In view of the above, I find no merits in the appeal and reject the same. (Dictated in Court)
-
2007 (4) TMI 707
... ... ... ... ..... the appellants cites a decision of the Tribunal in the similar case of M/s. Central Cables Ltd. vs. CCE reported in 2006 (74) RLT 767 (CESTAT-Mum.) 2006 (196) ELT 157 (T), wherein it has been held that when the final goods are supplied under Chapter X procedure, the credit is not deniable following the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of Escorts Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise reported in 2004 (64) RLT 227 (SC) 2004 (171) ELT 145 (SO. He also states that the decision of the Tribunal....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 706
... ... ... ... ..... ade regarding entitlement to abatement of duty for the period for which the factory was closed. 4. We have considered the submissions. We find that all the show cause notices and order-in-original referred to annual capacity of production as determined by the Commissioner vide his letter dated 29.09.1997. This capacity was determined on provisional basis and even after the direction of the Hon ble Bombay High Court, the matter was left open till the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court. No final order has been passed as y....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 702
Valuation - includibility - cost of advertisement/publicity expenses borne by the dealers and franchisee shops of M/s Kinetic and M/s Raymond on account of advertisement through press and other means and supply of calendar etc. - amendment to section 4 of CEA - Held that: - advertisement cost and pre-delivery inspection and after sales service charges which are sharable between the manufacturer and the dealer cannot be included in the assessable value even after 01.04.2000 as the advertisement promoted the sale of the dealers also and therefor....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 699
Penalty u/s 76 - payment of tax before issuance of SCN - Invocation of section 80 - Held that: - Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly invoked the provisions of section 80, as in this case it is on record that the respondent was not aware of the levy of service tax on services rendered by him - penalty not warranted - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
-
2007 (4) TMI 696
... ... ... ... ..... ) dated 02.06.2003, clearly held that demands cannot be raised for delay in transfer of accounts from Principal Chief Controller of Accounts to the Central Board of Excise and Customs. (2) THE learned Counsel refers to this order and prays for remand of the matter to the original authority by allowing the appeal and giving a direction to the authority to apply the ratio of this judgment. (3) THE learned JDR reiterates the departmental view. On a careful consideration, we notice that the issue involved in the appeal has bee....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 692
... ... ... ... ..... te submits that even if it is held that amortized value of such dies and moulds is added in the value of the parts, and such total value stands recovered from their customer, the same would not establish unjust enrichment on the part of the appellant in as much as refund in question relates to the original duty payment of dies and moulds, which were never cleared from their factory and the cost of which was never recovered from their customer. In as much as there was no sale of dies and moulds to M/s Ashok Leyland Ltd., th....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 688
... ... ... ... ..... ny consideration. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and more particularly, what is stated by the opponents in Paragraph-5 of their affidavit-in-reply, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if the opponents are restrained from alienating the movable and immovable properties belonging to them, without permission of this Court or the Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs-III, Custom House, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad, during the pendency of the petition. For the foregoing reasons,....... + More
-
2007 (4) TMI 686
... ... ... ... ..... dingly dismissed. However, it is made clear that the assessee would be entitled to refund, if any, in accordance with law.
-
2007 (4) TMI 684
Whether The Jammu and Kashmir Distillery Rules 1946 does not have the statutory backing? Whether Rule is in excess of the rule making power in Section 25 of the Act and suffers from excessive delegation? Whether Rule seeks to get breweries to pay for the salaries and costs of the government officials involved in revenue collection and it is manifestly unjust and arbitrary?
-
2007 (4) TMI 683
... ...
... ... ..... dy, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
2007 (4) TMI 680
... ... ... ... ..... te is not excisable for the reason that for the period in dispute viz. prior to 1-3-1997 there was no classification heading in the Tariff for Ready Mix Concrete. The dispute is prior to 1-3-1997. Therefore, the ratio of the above cited order is applicable in all fours to the facts of the present case. Following the ratio thereof, we set aside the impugned order by which duty demand has been confirmed and penalties imposed upon the company as well as on two officers and allow the appeals.
-
2007 (4) TMI 675
... ... ... ... ..... Further more Shri T.C. Nair, Advocate for the respondents points out that Shri Amarnath is not a competent person to give any such statement since the stock register is maintained by store in-charge Shri Sanjeev Srivastav. Further, it is also submitted that Shri Sanjeev Srivastav also gave his affidavit to that effect and copies of the stock register showing use of inputs in the exempted goods very much available on record. In view of this rival contentions it is felt expedient that the matter be adjudicated once again in ....... + More
