|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 655 Records
-
2002 (2) TMI 1172 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... icating authority but she has failed to examine the same in details and record her finding. We are also not impressed with the argument advanced by the ld. JDR for the Revenue that the notional interest in respect of the advances/loans are liable to be added to the sale price of the goods in terms of the provision of Rule 5 of Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975. The adjudicating authority has not proceeded with the case on the basis of these provisions and has not quantified the money value of additional consideration which would be liable to be added to the price of the goods sold by the appellants to M/s. Oswal Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. to arrive at the assessable value in terms of this rule. In the result, we are unable to agree with the findings arrived at by the Commissioner in the impugned order. Since the case of the appellants is being upheld on merits, the plea of time bar is not being examined. We therefore set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1171 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... pellants shows the Tribunal rsquo s judgment in the case of Search Chem Industries Ltd. v. C.C.Ex. 2000 (118) E.L.T. 608 . The Tribunal in that case held such items as admissible capital goods. 4. emsp While determining the admissibility of such goods, what is material is to examine the use to which such goods are put. In the present case, the appellants manufacture cored wire of ferro alloys using furnace. The chart placed on record shows that water is stored in the said tank and then the water is softened and flows to cooling tower. The cooling tower is generally used to reduce the temperature of a substance earlier used for heating. Unfortunately, the lower orders do not show the contents of the said tank. The explanation given by them in the appeal memorandum does not show that the stored water is used for any activity linked with production of cored wire of ferro alloys. In these circumstances I hold that the tank does not qualify as capital goods and dismiss the appeal.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1169 - CEGAT, BANGALORE
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on inputs ... ... ... ... ..... process of manufacture, cannot be regarded as waste which occurs during the course of manufacture rdquo . In the present case it is not that credit on the lsquo sample rsquo tested i.e. lsquo Carbon Black rsquo is under consideration, nor the lsquo lots rsquo of sub-standard goods have been ldquo cleared rdquo as understood in Central Excise, after manufacture, Or that they get destroyed during Quality Testing. That case was of lsquo Battery Cells rsquo removed for the process of testing, which got consumed/destroyed during testing which was being considered i.e. a case of entire final product getting destroyed. The case before us, is of the lsquo Packing Material rsquo destroyed during the upgrading of the entire lsquo sub-standard lots rsquo and not packing material consumed/destroyed during or in quality/control test. Therefore the case law relied upon by the learned DR is not applicable. 4. emsp In view of our finding, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1168 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on input ... ... ... ... ..... as held that the fluxes mixed in molten metal used to remove impurities and foreign particles from castings, are eligible inputs for the purposes of Rule 57A. By applying the ratio of the said decision, I hold that the exothermic compound is an eligible input under the provisions of Rule 57A. 6. emsp In respect of S.S. Mould Wash, it is seen that the same is used for washing the moulds before and after use. As washing is necessary to protect the manufacturing product from contamination and to maintain the high quality of the product. The Tribunal in the case of Commr. of Central Excise, Meerut v. Usha Rectifier Corporation reported in 1998 (101) E.L.T. 398 (Tribunal) has held that mould cleaning compound are eligible for Modvat credit. As such, I do not find any reason to take a different view and allow the credit in respect of S.S. Mould Wash. 7. emsp In view of the foregoing, the impugned orders are set aside and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1166 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... n the stay application, concerned with the merits of the case. The claim of the applicant before us that it could not deposit the amount because of financial hardship is not acceptable. The Tribunal had specifically noted in its stay order that the applicant had not pleaded financial hardship. It follows therefore that the Tribunal rsquo s order asking for partial deposit of the sums demanded and the final order dismissing the appeal for failure to deposit the sum (no application for modification having been filed in the meantime) were correct. We are therefore unable to interfere. 4. emsp The applications are dismissed.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1164 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Remission of duty ... ... ... ... ..... mission to be granted, notwithstanding that it would be contrary to the express provision of the law. It appears to me that this decision has not considered the words of sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Act excluding from its scope ldquo lost rdquo as a result of pilferage. The decision is therefore per incuriam of the provisions of the law and therefore does not have binding force. The decision of the Tribunal in Herdillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CC is not relevant to the facts of this case. It only provided that weighment certificate issued by the Bombay Port Trust was acceptable evidence as shortage of goods. The decision of the Tribunal in Keshari Steels v. CC which relied upon the decision in Herdillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CC, also does not deal with the issue that is under consideration. 7. emsp For these reasons, therefore, it has to be concluded that the claim has been correctly rejected. I am therefore unable to interfere with the impugned order. 8. emsp Appeal dismissed.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1162 - CEGAT, BANGALORE
Natural justice - Violation of ... ... ... ... ..... ector found it impossible to verify whether the goods for which the show cause notice was issued were actually received by the dealer or the party. From a perusal of the records, we do not find any submissions or evidence of the supply of this investigation report to the appellants. 3. emsp In view of our findings, we would hold that principles of natural justice have been violated inasmuch as the Assistant Collector has relied on the report of the Superintendent (Preventive) without supplying a copy of the same to the appellants. The order, therefore is required to be set aside. Matter is remanded back for de novo adjudication. After a copy of the report is supplied to the appellant in the de novo adjudication, the de novo proceedings should be held where Board Circular No. 76/76/99, dated 6-11-99 and other submissions being made by the appellant should be considered and a clear cut finding arrived at. The order is set aside and appeal allowed as remanded in the above terms.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1160 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Valuation - Invoice value vis-a-vis transaction value -Enhancement of value of imported goods
-
2002 (2) TMI 1146 - CEGAT, CHENNAI
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on input ... ... ... ... ..... I find in the grounds of appeal that the Revenue is relying on the decision rendered in the case of M/s. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. (supra) wherein Hegatreat and Hegafilm used as a corrosion inhibitor in cooling water system and in steam generation system were held to be not eligible for Modvat credits as inputs, as the same was not directly used for preventing corrosion of the machinery and it was found that the items had no connection and relation with the manufacture of final product. Whereas, in the present case, the Commissioner (Appeals), in the extracted portion has clearly held that the items help in the smooth running of the plant and also he has noted four Tribunal decisions wherein benefit has been granted to the similar items. Therefore, I notice that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is proper and legal. The citations referred in the grounds of appeal is clearly distinguishable. Therefore there is no merit in the Revenue appeal and the same is rejected.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1145 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on capital goods - Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... he other goods in question were also prima facie eligible for such credit during the material period. However, insofar as Tyres, on which a credit of a little over Rs. 2 lakhs was taken by the appellants, are concerned, I observe that the credit has been denied not only on the ground of non-eligibility of the goods under Rule 57Q but also on the further ground of want of declaration under Rule 57T. This latter ground has not been sought to be rebutted at this stage. In the light of the Tribunal rsquo s Larger Bench decision in the case of Avis Electronics 2000 (117) E.L.T. 571 (T) , I am of the prima facie view that the credit on Tyres has been correctly denied. Having regard to the total position already noted, I direct the applicants to deposit an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs under Section 35F and report compliance on 19-4-2002. In the event of due compliance, there shall be waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the balance amount of duty as well as the penalty.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1144 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... We do not see anything turns on to say that the goods were stated to be ldquo in process rdquo . This in fact would tend to show that the goods were not damaged. Nobody would issue goods to be manufactured knowing them to be unsuitable for that purpose. 5. emsp Counsel for the appellant contends that the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the Act permitting importer to relinquish title would apply. We do not see how this is relevant. So far the appellant had not relinquished title to goods. It is accepted that this is the case. The Counsel is unable to affirm to us that the goods continue to be a bonded goods kept in a licence bonded warehouse. Considering that the order of the Commissioner was passed in 1996, it is extremely unlikely that this is the case. In any case this is not the issue before us and it is open to the importer to avail of whatever facilities are available in the law. As far as this appeal is concerned, for reasons given above, it is dismissed.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1143 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on inputs ... ... ... ... ..... o take Modvat credit of duty of Excise on input vests in the manufacturer of final product on the very date on which the invoice under cover of which the input is received is issued. Apparently, this issue has been sidestepped by the lower appellate authority, obviously on account of non-application of mind. In this context, Sub-rule (5) of Rule 57G also seems to be relevant. That sub-rule provides a period of limitation of six months for availment of inputs-credit. That period of limitation shall be reckoned from the date of issue of the Modvat document. The date of issue of Modvat document is not altogether insignificant. However, the question whether it is relevant for the purpose involved in the present case as claimed by the counsel requires to be examined. The lower appellate authority shall do this in accordance with law and the principles of natural justice. 4. emsp In the result, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal by way of remand in the above terms.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1142 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat/Cenvat - Duty paying documents - Invoices ... ... ... ... ..... nvoices, barring the absence of the words lsquo Second Stage Dealer rsquo on the top margin of the document. The assessee has duly rectified this defect by producing a certificate from the supplier of the goods certifying that they had issued the invoices as Second Stage Dealer to the appellants and that the words lsquo First Stage Dealer rsquo happened to be mis-printed on the document. Since the defect has been cured by the assessee, the same will no longer be available to the department as a ground for denial of the Modvat credit. There is no dispute of the duty-paid nature of the inputs, nor is there any case for the Revenue that the inputs were not received in the appellant rsquo s factory and utilised in the process of manufacture of final products. 8. emsp In the result, it is held that the entire credit in question is admissible to the assessee and that there is no ground for imposition of any penalty on them. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1141 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on inputs - Utilisation ... ... ... ... ..... ed by the Central Government. It is not in dispute that the Appellants had opted out of the Modvat Credit Scheme. Once the Appellants are not working under the Modvat Credit Scheme the rules relating to Modvat Credit Scheme will not be applicable to them. Rule 57F comes under Chapter 5. Section AA of the Central Excise Rules which covers ldquo Credit of duty paid on excisable goods used as inputs. rdquo Once the Appellants are not functioning under the Modvat Credit Scheme the provisions of Rule 57F(4) will not be applicable to them. There are other provisions contained in Central Excise Rules which provide for rebate of duty paid on the final products or raw materials used in the manufacture of goods exported out of the country. The appellants, if deemed fit, may seek the rebate of duty under those provisions, if permissible under the law. The Modvat Rules are not applicable to them as such they cannot claim Modvat credit under Rule 57F(4). The appeal is therefore, rejected.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1140 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... . The Positector is a measuring instrument, and the measuring instruments are also held to be eligible in terms of the Tribunal judgment report in 1994 (70) E.L.T. 75 (Tribunal) 1994 (52) ECR 217 . The batteries are the accessories of the movement machinery and would therefore be eligible input. 3. emsp Since the disputed products are held as eligible goods the appeal succeeds and the same is allowed with consequential relief.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1139 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat/Cenvat - Declaration - Condonation of delay ... ... ... ... ..... ng the declaration. Admittedly, the inputs are duty paid and the same have actually been used in the manufacture of the final products. I, therefore find no infirmity in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) which would call for interference. The Revenue appeal in respect of the credit of Rs. 1,13,511.05 is therefore rejected. As regards the appeal relating to the Modvat credit availed on the invoices issued by the dealers which did not contain the particulars of the duty payment by the original manufacturers, the ld. Counsel for the respondents submits that they have since collected supplementary documents to establish the particulars of duty payment by the original manufacturers in each case. In this view of the matter, the case would call for going back to the original authority for verification and reconsideration. The appeal of the Revenue is thus allowed by remand in respect of the Modvat credit of Rs. 3,13,571/-. The Revenue appeal is thus disposed of in these terms.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1138 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat/Cenvat - Duty paying documents - Substitute documents - Strictures against Department ... ... ... ... ..... ce to accept a substitute document was later done away with and such authorities were directed not to deny credit where on perusal of the totalities, the fact of payment of duty on the inputs was established. This is what sub-rule (11) says. Once the Commissioner (Appeals) has directed recourse to be taken to this sub-rule the authorities below had no option but to establish the duty paid nature of the goods. The Dy. Commissioner did not do so. He also relied upon a judgment which brought out his own failure to comply with the directions made. Unfortunately the Commissioner (Appeals) also continued in the same manner without paying any attention to the provisions which were directed to be taken recourse to by the earlier appellate authorities. 5. emsp This appeal is allowed. The proceedings are remanded to the Dy Commissioner who will accept the original documents placed on record and scrutinise them in terms of the aforesaid sub-rule of 57G and then grant appropriate relief.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1136 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on inputs ... ... ... ... ..... cers incharge of the Mumbai Unit who should have denied the credit and consequently the credit would not accrue to the Jamnagar unit. Provisions of Rule 57E would be sufficient in this case, where on denial of the credit taken by the Mumbai unit the variation in the credit taken by the Jamnagar unit would be effected. But it is improper to reverse the credit taken by the Jamnagar unit on the basis of the valid document on the ground of infirmity in the credit taken by the Mumbai Unit. It is significant that although the show cause notice alleges the scheme as devised by the Mumbai Unit, it does not make them as noticees. 9. emsp The ld. Commissioner in his order described the entire operation as a devious method. The scheme may appear to be so but in the absence of proper allegation being made in the show cause notice, the consequential action of denial of Modvat credit is wrong in law. 10. emsp The appeal succeeds and is allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1135 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat/Cenvat ... ... ... ... ..... 3. emsp We have seen the certificate. The proforma itself as prescribed required the certification to be made by the representative of the assessees who manufactures the inputs and requires certification of the correctness of the declaration by the concerned Range Superintendent. Further, the co-relation between the goods despatched from the factory, lifted from the stockyard and received by the downstream manufacturer is available in the various Central Excise documents and is capable of being verified very easily. The Assistant Commissioner did not do that and the Commissioner (Appeals) found fault with the proforma as prescribed by the department itself. 4. emsp On these observations we set aside the order confirming this amount and direct that the Assistant Commissioner shall verify the correctness of the inputs on which the credit is taken with reference to the relevant document to satisfy himself along with other aspects. The case is remanded for de novo consideration.
-
2002 (2) TMI 1134 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat/Cenvat - Duty paying documents - Invoice ... ... ... ... ..... paid the duty against the invoices issued to the appellants. It was also mentioned that due to some problem in the computer, the original invoices against the consignments were mutilated and on that account the original invoices were not endorsed. But all these facts had been totally ignored by both the authorities below. The certificate was enough to satisfy the adjudicating as well as the appellate authorities that the inputs received by the appellants were duly duty paid and original invoices were not endorsed in their favour due to some problem in the computer of the SAIL. In the face of this certificate, the Modvat credit, in my view, could not be denied to the appellants. 6. emsp In view of the discussion made above, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be sustained and is set aside. The appellants are allowed Modvat credit of both the disputed amounts, detailed above. 7. emsp As a result, the appeal filed by the appellants accordingly stands allowed.
............
|
