Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 332 Records
-
1994 (3) TMI 236 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Penalty - Clearance of goods pending approval of subsequent classification list ... ... ... ... ..... under the heading which was earlier approved. The authorities apparently would have been also receiving the RT-12 returns and also assessing the same regularly. In this background the only understanding that the appellants would have got would be that their classification list stood approved. In any case if at all there is any failure it can only be attributed to the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities, who sat over the classification list. The appellants in such circumstances, though technically can be said to have cleared the goods without the approval of the classification list cannot be visited with penal consequences as the authorities had given their tacit approval to the classification by assessing the RT-12 etc. as filed by the appellants. In the above view of the matter I hold that in the facts and circumstances of this case there was no warrant for levy of any penalty. The learned lower authority rsquo s order is therefore set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
1994 (3) TMI 235 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Penalty - Clearance of goods pending approval of subsequent classification list ... ... ... ... ..... under the heading which was earlier approved. The authorities apparently would have been also receiving the RT-12 returns and also assessing the same regularly. In this background the only understanding that the appellants would have got would be that their classification list stood approved. In any case if at all there is any failure it can only be attributed to the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities, who sat over the classification list. The appellants in such circumstances, though technically can be said to have cleared the goods without the approval of the classification list cannot be visited with penal consequences as the authorities had given their tacit approval to the classification by assessing the RT-12 etc. as filed by the appellants. In the above view of the matter I hold that in the facts and circumstances of this case there was no warrant for levy of any penalty. The learned lower authority rsquo s order is therefore set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
1994 (3) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Penalty - Clearance of goods pending approval of subsequent classification list ... ... ... ... ..... under the heading which was earlier approved. The authorities apparently would have been also receiving the RT-12 returns and also assessing the same regularly. In this background the only understanding that the appellants would have got would be that their classification list stood approved. In any case if at all there is any failure it can only be attributed to the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities, who sat over the classification list. The appellants in such circumstances, though technically can be said to have cleared the goods without the approval of the classification list cannot be visited with penal consequences as the authorities had given their tacit approval to the classification by assessing the RT-12 etc. as filed by the appellants. In the above view of the matter I hold that in the facts and circumstances of this case there was no warrant for levy of any penalty. The learned lower authority rsquo s order is therefore set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
1994 (3) TMI 233 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ... ... ... ..... can accrue to the appellant in terms of Notification 175/86. The learned Advocate could not show us from the reading of the Notification that in the case of the goods as cleared from the appellant rsquo s factory any benefit could accrue to them by way of abatement of the value for reckoning the value of the exempted goods cleared from the factory. In any case if the appellant wanted to claim any refund, the refund claims should have been filed for the purpose within the period of 6 months. Admittedly, in the present case the refund has been claimed in respect of goods which suffered duty after the limit of Rs. 75 lakhs had been exceeded beyond the period of 6 months prior to the filing of the refund claim. Under Section 11B there is no provision under which the relevant date could be reckoned with reference to the date on which the rebate claim was made by the person to whom the goods had been sold. In view of the above, we find no merits in the appeal and dismiss the same.
-
1994 (3) TMI 232 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Modvat - SSI Exemption and job work ... ... ... ... ..... at credit can be taken by a Small Scale Manufacturer in respect of the materials received otherwise than by way of purchase and this is available even in respect of the materials received on job work basis by a manufacturer holding Central Excise licence as per the Board rsquo s subsequent order. Moreover, there is no stipulation in Notification 175/86 that a Small Scale Unit paying duty at the concessional rate cannot receive inputs under Modvat scheme, if they are received on transfer basis for job work on behalf of another manufacturer. 3. emsp Before parting, there appears to be a loophole, in the scheme of higher notional credit and M/s. Jyoti Structures appear to have taken advantage of the same. On that ground, the appellant who is an independent manufacturer cannot be denied Modvat Credit without any legal basis, particularly when the Board have clarified that even acquisition of inputs otherwise than by way of purchase by a manufacturer can be extended Modvat Credit.
-
1994 (3) TMI 231 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Confiscation for imports against licence without attestation by DGTD ... ... ... ... ..... osition is that they have got the DGTD certificate including this item, which has been produced before the Department. In view of this position, that item cannot be held to be liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, since the bona fides of producing the photo copy of the certificate have been gone into by the Addl. Collector and accepted as genuine mistake. 5. emsp As regards the aspect of special relationship we find that their imports are made subject to special valuation branch circular and hence their assessment would normally be provisional. In such a case, non-mentioning this cannot be construed as wanton or deliberate. Moreover, we find that even the loading of 5 has been withdrawn at the time of finalisation of provisional assessment. Having regard to all these factors, we deem it proper to remit the redemption fine under a warning to the appellants that they ought to have declared this aspect in their declaration. Consequence relief to follow.
-
1994 (3) TMI 230 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Reference to High Court - Short credit ... ... ... ... ..... , on which we would like to have an authoritative pronouncements from the High Court. Only in this view, a reference on the same issue was admitted by one of us sitting as a Single Member. We agree for making a reference for the same reason on the question, as framed below. ldquo Whether in the context of the provisions of Rule 57B of the Central Excise Rules read with Exemption Notification No. 175/86 (para 4 thereof), the Tribunal is justified in holding that higher notional credit, though otherwise eligible at the time of entry of the inputs, but not taken, could be taken at a subsequent stage within a period of six months, applying the time limit prescribed under Section 11B. rdquo 6. emsp The Registry is directed to send the file containing the relevant orders to the Bombay High Court for consideration of the Reference Application along with the Reference Application already made in the case of Serene Dyestuff Industries Ltd., reported in 1994 (69) E.L.T. 665 (Tribunal).
-
1994 (3) TMI 229 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Ball Bearings - Import - OGL ... ... ... ... ..... items permissible for import under OGL and have been rightly ordered confiscation vide Sec 111(d) of the Customs Act. 15. emsp While ordering confiscation, the authority below has given option to the appellants to pay fine of Rs. 60,000/- in lieu of confiscation which virtually comes to 50 of the CIF value. Though the Ball Bearings yield high margin of profit and the quantum of fine assessed does appear fair, it has to be considered that the appellants are the actual users and profit motive is not explicit. Therefore, there appears some scope for showing some leniency in that regard. Only with that aspect in view, the fine in lieu of confiscation is reduced to Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand only). 16. emsp Thus while confirming the order of the authority below, so far as it pertains to confiscation of goods vide Sec 111(d) of the Customs Act, the fine in lieu of confiscation is reduced to Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only). Consequential relief, if any to follow.
-
1994 (3) TMI 228 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat Credit ... ... ... ... ..... goods or packing. 14. emsp We find that this Tribunal has repeatedly observed, that a substantial benefit should not be denied for minor procedural infractions and if there were some minor curable defects, it was up to the departmental authorities to get those defects rectified and advise the licencee/assessee suitably or take such other precautions as may be called for in a given situation and if necessary verify the facts with reference to the records, rules and goods. Since in the present case the appellants have already obtained the necessary endorsements on the original gate passes after obtaining time from the Tribunal for this purpose and have filed the copies thereof, we waive the pre-deposit of the amounts in question. 15. emsp Further taking up the main appeals we accept them in view of a catena of orders of this Tribunal on the above points with the observation that it will be open to the proper officers concerned to take any further precaution as may be necessary.
-
1994 (3) TMI 227 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Departmental clarification - Import Policy ... ... ... ... ..... his aspect need not be examined in details for the purpose of alternative submision made, but the same can be looked into to ascertain that besides the characterstics indicated above, and also the view expressed by the licensing authority, even the Customs Authorities have treated the same as sensors, for the purpose of allowing them for import under OGL, in relation to at least four previous consignments. 13. emsp The appellants rsquo classification under TI 90.24 in the Bill of Entry, could not operate as estoppel against them, as the department have not accepted the same and have assessed them under TI 85.17. 14. emsp When the literature produced in relation to the specific unit leads to show that they are no more than the sensors, the reasonings adopted by the Ld Adjudicating authority cannot be endorsed to hold that the units are self-contained instruments. 15. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The goods are held importable under OGL. Consequential reliefs to follow.
-
1994 (3) TMI 226 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... ri Rajiv Dutta never appeared and again his proxy, Vipin Nair appeared and requested for ad journment with an undertaking to file the Vakalatnama. 3. We are not happy with such casual approach and thought it proper to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. However, in the interests of justice and as a last chance we give two weeks to the appellants to rectify the said defects. Failure to rectify the defects may entail the dismissal of the appeal without any further notice. To come up for hearing on 28-3-1994. 2. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in view of the continuing default of the appellants and also their advocate, we are of the view that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal properly and in accordance with law. Accordingly, we are constrained to dismiss the same for want of prosecution and for want of non-compliance with the directions of the Bench under Rule 11 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. Dictated and pronounced in open court.
-
1994 (3) TMI 225 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit of penalty ... ... ... ... ..... t rupees fifty thousand each in cash within four months from today. 11. Now coming to the financial position of Sh. B.L. Sharma, it is an admitted fact that he is an employee. He has to support his family. We are of the view that if the appellant is desired to deposit the penalty amount, it will amount to undue hardship. We dispense with the pre-deposit of penalty in the case of Shri B.L. Sharma. We further order that during the pendency of the appeal, the Revenue authorities shall not pursue the recovery proceedings for the balance amounts in the case of Banswara Fabrics Ltd. R.L. Toshniwal and M.L. Dalamia. The appellants shall report compliance of this order to the registry within five months from today. In case the appellants fail to comply with the terms of this order, the stay order shall stand automatically vacated. In the result, the stay applications are partly allowed. The stay application of Sh. B.L. Sharma is allowed. 12. Pronounced and dictated in the open court.
-
1994 (3) TMI 224 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Import - OGL- Actual user ... ... ... ... ..... e of shipment. There is also another letter from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting dated 31-7-1985, which indicates that the Ministry have recommended the appellants to M/s. Gujarat Communication and Electronics Ltd. for making available the video facilities on the ground of their experience in film production. Based on these documents, we are to hold that the appellants had established their nexus with film production and this equipment is for their actual use. In the case of film production, it may not always be possible for the producers of films to have their own studio and they may engage the studio for producing the films, where such equipment of their own could be taken for use, instead of hiring them. Hence, when we are satisfied that the appellants are engaged in film production and the equipment is for their actual use (Non-Industrial), we are to allow their appeal. Accordingly, we allow the appeal with consequential relief. (Pronounced in the open court)
-
1994 (3) TMI 223 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Credit of Money Scheme ... ... ... ... ..... o. Instead he preferred to take the precaution of asking the Superintendent to verify the facts before approval (and wisely so). Learned DR has not been able to show even at this stage as to whether the Superintendent had reported any fact which would disentitle the respondents from the benefit of the claim. No copy of the classification list has been filed before us. Learned DR has also not able to show that the facts of Tata Oil case were similar. 7. emsp In such circumstances, the Department rsquo s contention that the respondents were disentitled remains unsubstantiated on the facts. Hence, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the Collector (Appeals). In view of the above position, we uphold the order of the Collector (Appeals) and dismiss the Department rsquo s appeal. Before parting, we make it clear that this order is in the specific circumstances of this case and there is no doubt that in the normal course the provisions of 57(O) is required to be followed.
-
1994 (3) TMI 222 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Cost of transportation ... ... ... ... ..... only) would be imposable. I, therefore reduce the penalty on the appellant to the Rupees One lakh and ten thousand only. Sd/- P.C. Jain) Dated 15-3-1994 Member (T) FINAL ORDER 15. emsp In view of the majority opinion, we hold that the freight administrative charges recoverd by the appellants are not relatable to the cost of transportation but are in the nature of additional consideration. The assessable value, therefore, has to be arrived at under Section 4(1)(b) by applying Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975. The amount of such additional consideration flowing back to the appellants has to be added to the wholesale price and assessable value worked back after allowing admissible deductions. The penalty on the appellants is reduced from Rs. 50 lakhs (rupees fifty lacs) to Rs. 15 lakhs (rupees fifteen lakhs). Accordingly, the appeals are partly allowed. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Harish Chander) (K.S. Venkataramani) (P.C. Jain) Dated 18-3-1994 President Member (T) Member
-
1994 (3) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation of conveyances ... ... ... ... ..... o penalty. However, we observe that the learned Counsel is correct in pointing out that the truck having been released provisionally on cash deposit and bond, could not be confiscated again unless it was made available for confiscation and there is no indication thereof. Secondly, the Department cannot confiscate the truck absolutely and also retain cash security and the bond with it. 17. emsp In the circumstances, we set aside the order of absolute confiscation. But in view of the liability to confiscation, allow the Department to retain Rs. 25,000/- out of the cash security as an adjustment towards fine in lieu of confiscation which would have been otherwise imposable and stands imposed by our order. 18. emsp We also direct the Department to release the bond already executed. Further, looking to the totality of facts and circumstances, we also reduce the penalty from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 5,000/- keeping in view inter alia the loss already suffered. It is ordered accordingly.
-
1994 (3) TMI 220 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Reference to High Court to be made when difference of opinion among Benches of the Tribunal ... ... ... ... ..... ally provide for a case of this nature. rdquo However, since the East Regional Bench in the context of MODVAT credit has taken a divergent view in the case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd., quoted supra, and the scope of Rule 57C requires to be interpreted in the context of the other provisions viz. Rule 57A and Rule 57F, we hold that a question of law does arise for reference as pleaded by the Revenue. We, therefore, refer the following question of law to the Hon rsquo ble High Court of Kerala under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the credit taken in respect of the inputs contained in that portion of the goods which were cleared without payment of duty does not require to be reversed, as the credit was correctly taken when the inputs were brought into the factory, and the same were correctly utilised in terms of Rule 57F and that the provisions of Rule 57C in the facts of this case would not apply.
-
1994 (3) TMI 219 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... xamined in the light of the fact that maintenance chart found in the polythene pack as well as the chart pasted on the machine showed the machine type as KSD-7114 and the maintenance chart showed the year of manufacture as 1971, I find that the report of the expert appraiser coupled with the other documents as indicated above is more reliable than the Chartered Engineer rsquo s certificate as also the confirmation of the supplier. Having found so, I hold that the machine was more than 7 years old and required a specific licence. As there was no specific licence produced by the appellant, I sustain the order of confiscation as well as the order of penalty. However, having regard to the fact that the machine was an old one and the importer was the actual user of the machine, I reduce the quantum of redemption fine to Rs. 30,000/- and the amount of penalty to Rs. 20,000/-. 6. But for the above modifications, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal is disposed of accordingly.
-
1994 (3) TMI 218 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Modvat credit - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... a breach of procedural aspect of Modvat Scheme, I take a lenient view and impose a penalty of Rs. 10,000 (Ten thousand) under Rule 173Q(bb) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. rdquo It is, therefore, clear that the Adjudicating Officer himself stated that what at best can be said is that there is a breach of procedural aspect of Modvat Scheme. It is not his case that in view of such breach of procedural aspect there were a scope of committing any fraud by introducing any administrative inconvenience. On the contrary, there is not even a breach of procedural aspect in view of the fact that the appellants had obtained an approval of the Assistant Collector to sent the inputs directly to the job-workers rsquo premises. In such circumstances, the demand of duty as well as the imposition of penalty is not in accordance with law and we set aside the same. The appeal is accordingly allowed. Operative part of the order was pronounced in the open court after conclusion of the hearing.
-
1994 (3) TMI 217 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Gold Import Scheme ... ... ... ... ..... fy the conditions of stay abroad and those relating to payment of duty in foreign exchange. 2. emsp In view of the above statement, the present prosecution does not survive and the petitioner is entitled for order of discharge. The prosecution sought to be initiated against the petitioner is quashed. Bail bond of the petitioner to stand cancelled and cash security, if paid, will be returned to the petitioner. Similarly gold and silver seized from possession of the petitioner including related documents and passport be returned to the petitioner forthwith. Rule made absolute.
............
|