|
Advanced Search Options
Central Excise - Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 246 Records
-
2007 (4) TMI 416 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... en prima facie, even under Rule 4(5)(b) by the appellant and in this view of the matter, the decisions in Supreme Industries v. CCE, Pune reported in 2004 (169) E.L.T. 283 (T) 2004 (60) RLT 350 (CESTAT-Mum.) and Philips India Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara reported in 2005 (191) E.L.T. 1028 (Tribunal-Mum.), which have been relied upon by the applicant cannot assist the applicant. 6. emsp The applicant has, therefore, not made out any case for total waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts payable under the impugned order. It is, therefore, directed that on the appellant rsquo s depositing Rs. 2,93,414/- being the confirmed duty demand, within eight weeks from today, there shall be waiver of the pre-deposit of the penalty amount during the pendency of the appeal. If the pre-deposit of the duty amount is not made, the appeal will stand dismissed. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. Post the matter for compliance report on 21-6-2007. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
-
2007 (4) TMI 412 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... cation under Heading 90.27 by relying upon clause (c) and (o) to Chapter Heading 90.18 to HSN which excludes laboratory, pharmaceutical or hygienic glassware from the coverage of Heading 90.18 and instruments and appliances used in laboratories to test blood, tissue fluids, urine etc. whether or not such tests serve in diagnosis and come to the conclusion that the description of the goods and their utility indicate that they are used for the purpose specified herein above. Prima facie, end use of each of the items which was submitted to the Commissioner after the remand order of the Tribunal does not show that any of the items is used for testing either blood, tissue fluids or urine etc. and, therefore, prima facie, classification under Heading 90 27 cannot be sustained. We, therefore hold that the demand under this heading is, prima facie, not sustainable and therefore, waive the requirement of pre-deposit of the duty and penalty and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.
-
2007 (4) TMI 410 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... restrictive meaning can be carried from the definition of lsquo capital goods rsquo to the definition of lsquo inputs rsquo in the context of the said Explanation 2. 5. emsp As regards Clean Flo, the learned Counsel has referred to the decision of the Hon rsquo ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in CCE, Chandigarh v. J.C.T. Limited reported as 2003 (151) E.L.T. 508 (P and H), in which it was held that, ldquo Clean Flo rsquo rsquo was to be regarded as input used in relation to manufacture of final products and eligible for Modvat credit. 6. emsp The applicant has, therefore, made out a, prima facie, case for waiver of pre-deposit of the duty and penalty amount payable under the impugned order. Interim stay is accordingly granted, during the pendency of the appeal, by waiving pre-deposit of the duty and penalty amount. This application stands disposed of accordingly. The appeal will now come up for final hearing in its due course. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
-
2007 (4) TMI 408 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Clandestine removal - Penalty, personal penalty - Imposition of ... ... ... ... ..... Appeals). 9. emsp So, the impugned order against the appellant company are upheld. However, I do not find any reason of imposition of penalty upon Shri Dharmendra Singh, Store Keeper as he is an employee of the company and acted under the instructions of Shri Sandeep Jain Appellant No. 2. As such, penalty imposed on Shri Dharmendra Singh is set-aside. Further, I do not find any material on record lo impose penalty upon Shri D.C. Jain, Managing Director and Shri Chandra Mohan Khurana. Director of the appellant company and the same are also set aside. But, there is clear admission on the part of Shri Sandeep Jain, Director and the penalty imposed upon him is upheld. 10. emsp In view of the above, the appeals of the appellant company and Shri Sandeep Jain appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are rejected and the appeals of Shri D.C. Jain, Dharmandra Singh and Chander Mohan Khurana appellant Nos. 3, 4 and 5 are allowed with consequential relief. (Order pronounced in the open Court on 4-4-2007)
-
2007 (4) TMI 407 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Clandestine removal ... ... ... ... ..... ble for the benefit of exemption from payment of duty. We, therefore, waive pre-deposit of the duty and penalties and stay recovery thereof pending the appeals. 3. emsp Since the duty involved exceeds to Rs. 8 crores, we fix and direct the appeals to be listed for final hearing on 4th June 2007. ANNEXURE Sr. No. Appeal No. Name of Applicant Duty Penalty 1. E/137/07 M/s. Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd. Rs. 8,91,58,843/- Rs. 8,91,58,843/- 2. E/138/07 Shri Ajit Jain, Director - Rs. 20,00,000/- 3. E/139/07 Shri S.V. Patil, Executive Director - Rs. 20,00,000/- 4. E/140/07 Shri D.I. Desarda, Manager-Co-Ordn. - Rs. 20,00,000/- 5. E/141/07 Shri C.A. Ponnappa, Marketing Manager - Rs. 20,00,000/-- 6. E/142/07 Shri T.S. Ramchandran, Sr. Marketing Manager. - Rs. 20,00,000/- 7. E/143/07 Shri J.M. Znwar, Dispatch In-charge - Rs. 1,00,000/- 8. E/144/07 Shri N.M. Sonar, Authorised Signatory - Rs. 1,00,000/- 9. E/145/07 Shri R.D. Yalkar, Authorised Signatory - Rs. 1,00,000/- (Dictated in Court)
-
2007 (4) TMI 404 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
Cenvat/Modvat - Short receipt of inputs - Bulk liquid cargo ... ... ... ... ..... in case of Savita Chemicals Ltd. vide order No. A/1574-1575/WZB/05/EB/C-II dated 8-4-2005 and the other orders placed in their case being order No. A/1609/C-IV/SMB/WZB/ 2006 dated 24-4-2006. 4. emsp I also take note of the fact that Jt. Commissioner vide his subsequent order dated 28-2-2007, while dealing with the above issue in the appellant rsquo s case, has observed that the Tribunal rsquo s order dated 24-4-2006 stands accepted by the Department as reported in F. No. V(Final)2-43/2006/RC dated 6-12-2006. Inasmuch as the order passed by Tribunal in the appellant rsquo s case involving the same issue, but for a different period, stands accepted by the Commissioner, as noted by Jt. Commissioner in his subsequent order, Revenue cannot be allowed to argue against the same. In any case, the issue being settled in favour of the respondent by the earlier decision of Tribunal, no merits are found in Revenue rsquo s appeal. The same is, accordingly, rejected. (Pronounced in Court)
-
2007 (4) TMI 400 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Demand - Limitation - Misdeclaration ... ... ... ... ..... ountant as early as on 7-4-2000. The department had accepted this price declaration and did not verify its correctness till 2004 when the demand notice was issued alleging suppression of facts on the basis that the cost certificate had excluded certain elements of cost. The case law Asoka Spintex Ltd. v. CCE, Ahmedabad, Ganganagar Sugar Mills v. CCE, Jaipur and Pragathi Concrete Products Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore (supra), cited by the Ld. Counsel for the appellants had dealt with cases of similar facts wherein the Tribunal had held that the department was barred from invoking the larger period in such circumstances. Moreover, in the instant case even if the appellants had paid higher duty, no additional revenue would have accrued to the exchequer. This position was demonstrated by the appellants with figures before us. In the circumstances, we find that the impugned order is not sustainable. We set aside the same and allow the appeals. (Pronounced in open Court on 5-4-2007)
-
2007 (4) TMI 398 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
Steel bars and M.S. bars for utilisation in earthquake affected area ... ... ... ... ..... e is a minor difference in the 2nd and 3rd decimal point. The appellant explained that the same might have happened inadvertently by the person issuing certificate and does not reflect upon the fact of non-receipt and non-utilisation of the goods in the earthquake hit area. I agree with the learned advocate that inasmuch as the other particulars in the certificate fully match with the particulars of the documents under which goods have been cleared and the quantity of the bars also matching in respect of the main weight in MTs and only differing in 2nd/3rd decimal point, the substantive benefit of notification cannot be denied on the above minor discrepancy, especially when there is no other evidence on record to show that the goods have actually not been used for the purposes specified in the notification. 4. emsp Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order allowing appeal with consequential relief to the appellant. Stay petition also gets disposed off. (Pronounced in Court)
-
2007 (4) TMI 383 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Waiver of pre-deposit - Appellant contended that the communication is not an order and request for supply of a copy of the order, which was not responded - There is no doubt that the order has been passed on the file and the impugned letter is merely a communication of the same - This is not the proper course to follow - The appellate authority is a quasi-judicial authority and it should pass a speaking order separately, which itself should be communicated to the parties - This, unfortunately, has not been done in this case - The impugned communication as well as and the order on which this communication is based, ought to be set aside -The same are set aside - The matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority to consider the application for waiver of pre-deposit
-
2007 (4) TMI 279 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Rebate - Export, proof ... ... ... ... ..... vt. Ltd. wherein it is inter alia, certified that the container No. wrongly mentioned in the B/L as FSC4231843-1 instead of correct container No. MISC. 231843 (1) and Seal No. 220507 instead of correct Seal No. S-220507, as certified by the Supdt. of Central Excise Range-04, Division Vasai, Commissionerate - Thane-II. 6.4 From the above facts it follows that the applicants have exported Central Excise duty paid goods out of India Government further notes that it is not case of the Department that the endorsement of ARE-1 and Shipper s above said certificate is not genuine. 6. In view of above facts and circumstances, Government is of the considered opinion that the impugned Order-in-Appeal is not maintainable. Government, accordingly, sets aside the impugned Order-in-Appeal and remands the case back to the original authority for sanctioning rebate to the applicants as per Law, if otherwise in order. The Revision Application succeeds and accordingly, is allowed. 7. So ordered.
-
2007 (4) TMI 278 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... ules, 1944. The said notification also provides that the Modvat credit on the basis of the documents mentioned in column (3) of the Table annexed to the notification can be availed of provided the documents have been issued before the 1st April, 1994 and the credit under the said rule has been taken on or before the 30th June, 1994. At Sl. No. 10 of column (3) the document specified is endorsed gate passes/subsidiary gate passes/certificates. Admittedly in the present case the respondent has taken Modvat credit on the basis of endorsed gate passes which were issued prior to 1st April, 1994 and the Modvat credit has been availed of on or before 30th June, 1994, thus, the Tribunal has rightly allowed Modvat credit on the basis of endorsed gate passes merely. 5. We do not find any illegally in the order of the Tribunal and accordingly, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs.
-
2007 (4) TMI 277 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Appeal by Department - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... s deliberate or mala fide. We are, therefore, inclined to take a liberal view of reasons for condonation of delay. It is said that the time was consumed in preparing the appeal as the matter decided by CESTAT was bulky. Delay is condoned. Civi1 Application is allowed in terms of prayer Clause (B) and disposed of. Appeal be processed for registration and posted for admission hearing on 20-6-2007.
-
2007 (4) TMI 272 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Exemption from payment of excise duly - Concrete mix as against read mix concrete - HELD THAT:- We are of the considered view that the appeal lacks merit and is thus liable to be dismissed. There are categorical findings recorded by the Tribunal that in the construction of Ranjit Sagar Dam mixed concrete used to be prepared at site. It is only on account of hilly area that the plant was kept at some distance would not be necessarily bring the production of mixed concrete within the mischief of taxable entry reproduced by item No. 3824.20. The view taken by the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting out interference. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
-
2007 (4) TMI 270 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Export oriented unit, 100% EOU - Capital goods - Machinery ... ... ... ... ..... o the condition that such goods shall be either destroyed with the permission of Assistant Commissioner of Customs/Central Excise in charge of unit or cleared into DTA on payment of full customs duty. 7.A perusal of the afore-mentioned clause makes it evident that in case the goods supplied are unfit for use and the supplier does not insist on re-export then such goods are required either to be destructed with the permission of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs/Central Excise, Incharge of the unit or cleared into DTA on payment of full customs duty. The circular appear to have been issued on account of difficulties being faced by the export oriented units like the petitioner in regard to replacement of goods imported or exported which have been found to be damaged or defective or otherwise unfit for use. Therefore, there arises no substantial question of law warranting admission of the appeal. The appeal is wholly without any merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
-
2007 (4) TMI 267 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Cars for handicapped persons ... ... ... ... ..... l Mr. Rajesh Joshi appearing for the Excise Department has assured that thereshall not be any further delay in making such payment which may amount to adding insult to the injury. Though in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the order passed by this Court, the petitioner can legitimately claim interest on delayed payment and cost of litigation, however, learned Counsel Mr. Bhandari appearing for the petitioner conceded that he is not praying for refund with interest and costs, especially in view of the assurance that the payment shall be made within a period of 30 days from today. Considering this aspect, we do not direct the Department to pay the aforesaid amount with interest and make the cost easy, if the amount is paid within the period as indicated above. However, if the payment is not made within a period of 30 days, said amount will be paid with interest 12 per annum from the date of lodging of claim of refund by the petitioner, i.e. From 8-10-2001.
-
2007 (4) TMI 266 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Penalty - Interest ... ... ... ... ..... ase on hand. Admittedly, the duty has been made over after a demand but before the issue of show cause notice. There is a delay in payment of duty. Prima facie interest seems to be available to the Department. However, in Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd., or in Shree Krishna Pipes case, there is no discussion with regard to interest. It also involves factual aspect of the matter. In these circumstances, we deem it proper to remand the matter in so far as interest is concerned to the Tribunal. 16. In the result, this appeal is partly accepted. Question of law in so far as penalty is concerned is answered against the revenue and in so far as interest is concerned, the same is not answered. Matter is remitted back to the Tribunal only for consideration of interest only for the delayed period. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on or before 30-4-2007. The Tribunal is directed to complete the proceedings within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
-
2007 (4) TMI 265 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Penalty imposed under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 ('the Rules') - default in paying the duty - unit being registered with BIFR - HELD THAT:- In the present case, there is a finding of the Tribunal that the circumstances were beyond the control of the respondent-company as the matter was pending before BIFR, and as such, the amounts could not be deposited by the respondent-company within time and as soon as it was in a position to make the payment, the respondent-company made the payment not only of the duty, but also of the interest calculated under Rule 8(3) of the Rules. Therefore, we have no doubt in our mind that the Tribunal has correctly interpreted Rule 25 of the Rules and the penalty could not be imposed on the respondent-company.
Appeal is dismissed.
-
2007 (4) TMI 264 - SC ORDER
Cenvat/Modvat – Revenue contended that assessee had wrongly availed the modvat credit and was liable to refund the amount – Held that:- excise duty paid and the Modvat credit availed were identical and therefore consequences of payment of excise duty after availing Modvat credit was revenue neutral - appeal is dismissed leaving the question of law open - Decided against Revenue.
-
2007 (4) TMI 263 - SUPREME COURT
Whether 'plastic name plates' can be considered 'parts and accessories' of motor vehicles? - Held that:- The manufacturers of different type of models of vehicles market them under a name and the vehicles are recognized and referred to by the name plate affixed on them. Name plates convey to the consumers the distinct features it carries. Undoubtedly they add effectiveness and value to the vehicle and are at the very least accessories of the vehicle. Thus, even if there was any difficulty in the inclusion of the plastic name plates as 'parts' of the motor vehicles, they would most certainly have been covered by the broader term 'accessory'. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has erroneously come to the conclusion that 'plastic name plates' are not 'parts and accessories' of motor vehicles for the purposes of headings 87.08 and 87.14.
Since plastic name plates are 'parts and accessories' of motor vehicles and since they are not excluded from the Section XVII, the appropriate classification is under headings 87.08 and 87.14. Appeal allowed.
-
2007 (4) TMI 245 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Jurisdiction to order adjustment in payments - appellants have short paid Central Excise duty and they have made excess payment towards education cess - appellants confirms that the jurisdictional Commissioner is in-charge of the appellants’ export oriented unit, and both Customs & Excise work is handled by the same Commissioner – held that, same authority, who is in-charge of both the Excise & Customs work relating to the appellants’ Unit, can order an adjustment in the payments
............
|
