|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 280 Records
-
1997 (6) TMI 232 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... The specific observation reads as under ldquo The observations in the said decision must be confined to the facts of the case. rdquo We find that the facts of this case are identical to the facts narrated in the case of Rainbow Industries. In that case also, a show cause notice seeking re-classification was issued nearly one year after the approval of the price-list. In the present case, we find that the show cause notice does not even seek to re-classify the product but purposes the demand of duty on the assumption that the contested goods were classifiable under a Tariff Item different from that approved by the Assistant Commissioner. On this count and also on the observation that M/s. Bhiwani Textile Mills judgment was dated later, we are inclined to follow the ratio of the judgment of the Tribunal cited by the learned Advocate. 9. emsp On this observation, we allow the instant appeal, set aside the lower orders and direct the consequential reliefs to the extent warranted.
-
1997 (6) TMI 231 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Sawn timber not amounting to manufactured goods and not liable to Central Excise duty ... ... ... ... ..... and Others v. CCE, Bangalore reported at 1986 (23) E.L.T. 293 wherein the High Court has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills Ltd. (AIR 1986 SC 1293). In all these cases it was held that timber includes sized timber, planks, refts etc. and that even in commercial parlance they mean the same thing. Accordingly timber is not a different commodity even after it is sawn and cut into smaller sizes and sawn timber does not satisfy the requirements of lsquo manufactured goods rsquo and is not liable to Central Excise duty. Since this issue has already been considered by the Tribunal in the aforesaid cases, we are not inclined to take a different view. The ground urged by the ld. DR that the matters are pending before the Supreme Court is not convincing to admit or allow the appeal as urged by the department. Accordingly we uphold the impugned order in both the cases and in the result, these two appeals are disposed of.
-
1997 (6) TMI 230 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Dental spittoon - benefit of exemption under Notification No. 66/88-C.E. ... ... ... ... ..... to classification, while ld. DR referred to HSN Notes 70.17, we find the Notes themselves indicate that the expression ldquo Hygienic or pharmaceutical glassware rdquo refer to articles of general use not requiring the service of a practitioner though it includes spittoon under articles of general use. We are of the view, considering the nature and character of the dental spittoon, that this cannot be considered as general purpose spittoon. The Notes themselves exclude glass instruments and appliances of Chapter 90 such as hypodermic syringes, special cannulae and other articles being medical, surgical, dental or veterinary instruments which are classifiable under 90.18. We have, however, referred to this classification issue only in passing since, as indicated earlier, classification as such is not material in deciding the question of exemption in this case. 10. emsp In the result, for the reasons mentioned hereinbefore, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1997 (6) TMI 229 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Winding wires manufactured from wire rods -Benefit of Notification No. 47/84-C.E. ... ... ... ... ..... ese wire rods were used for manufacturing winding wires in their unit. He contended that as such it cannot be said that the winding wires were not made from wire rods of copper. In respect of the second condition specified in the notification, he submitted that it is settled law that nil payment of duty is also payment of appropriate duty and in view of this, the other condition of the notification is also complied with. 4. emsp We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. We observe that the winding wires was manufactured by the respondents from wire rods. If in between any other product comes into existence, it cannot be said that the finished product has not been made out of wire rods. Further, it is well settled position of law that if any product is exempted from payment of duty, that is also regarded as duty paid product. In view of this, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.
-
1997 (6) TMI 228 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat - Input ... ... ... ... ..... cture of the final product. It is not in dispute that industrial tapes have been used in the manufacture of PU foams manufactured by the appellants. The dispute is on the question whether RG 1 stage in their case was reached even before the tapes were pasted on the PU foams manufactured by them. The cases cited by the Counsel for the appellants emphasise the point that the essential requirement for admissibility to Modvat credit of an input is that such input is used in the manufacture of the final product and that the use of such input is required for enabling the final product to be marketed. In the light of discussion above I find that the appellant rsquo s case is well founded and their plea for admissibility for Modvat credit of industrial tapes well merited. As a result I set aside that part of the impugned order by which credit of Rs. 11,376/- was disallowed to the appellants. Subject to the above modification the impugned order is confirmed and the appeal disposed of.
-
1997 (6) TMI 227 - CEGAT, MADRAS
SSI Exemption - Value of clearances ... ... ... ... ..... ve to be re-determined in the light of our observations above. The learned lower authority while passing the order afresh after taking into consideration the observations as above should enter reasoned findings for arriving at his conclusions after affording the appellants an opportunity of hearing, before passing the order. 11. emsp We observe that the appellants have indulged in clandestine removal and have resorted to the device of clearance of the goods under the cover of documents of another firm when the goods were being manufactured and cleared by M/s. PEP, they are liable to penalty. Taking into consideration the facts of the case and also that the unit is closed and the managing partner is no more, we are of the view that the ends of justice will be met if the penalty levied on the company is reduced to Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) and on Shri Ravi is reduced to Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand). 12. emsp The appeal is, therefore, decided in the above terms.
-
1997 (6) TMI 226 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... nnecting to the pipes for its operation. So under these circumstances, it does not come under the category of consumer goods. So the description under 84.13 as per para 7 will not apply. The impugned order has presumed the goods as a consumer one which is not correct for the above reason. The orders of the Commissionerate both prior and subsequent to the date of impugned order are not binding in nature. The goods involved is held as not consumer goods. It was not in the Negative List earlier. The reasoning of the respondent in the impugned order is based on the conclusion that it is a consumer goods. The official notification under Para 8 of the Policy on 25-3-1996 does not change the nature of goods in the case. In view of the discussion made in the above paras, the contention of the appellant is accepted. Point raised is answered in the affirmative. Hence, we pass the following order ORDER For the reasons indicated above, the appeal is allowed and impugned order is quashed.
-
1997 (6) TMI 225 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat - Duty paying documents - Order - Adjudication order ... ... ... ... ..... t credit would be taken on both these copies. It would be necessary, in my view to inquire into the matter in detail. It is only SAIL who would be in a position to clarify how many copies are issued and what precautions are taken to ensure that only one copy goes into general circular. After all it must be at the initiative of SAIL and TISCO that the Board rsquo s circular must have been issued. The advocate for the respondent says that he will collect all this information, and such further information as may be required by the Collector (Appeals) to whom I propose to send this matter for passing a clear and categorical decision, and that appropriate affidavits from responsible authorities in SAIL will be produced in support. The department is at liberty to adduce such material as it considers in support of its case. The Collector (Appeals) shall pass appropriate clear and categorical order according to law. 6. emsp Appeal allowed. Impugned order set aside in the above terms.
-
1997 (6) TMI 224 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Modvat - Duty paying documents ... ... ... ... ..... uo s invoices were sufficient to extend the benefit of Modvat credit to the appellants, the Assistant Collector has erred in relying on dealers invoices and rejecting the appellants claim for Modvat by holding the same to be improper documents. I find that the Assistant Collector should have looked into the manufacturer rsquo s invoices and should have allowed the benefit of Modvat after satisfying himself about the correctness of the same. As the manufacturer rsquo s invoices have not been looked into by the Assistant Collector from that angle, I set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the original adjudicating authority with the directions to verify the particulars required to be mentioned in the manufacturer rsquo s invoices under the law and to extend the benefit, if available, on the basis of the manufacturer rsquo s invoices. 6. emsp In view of the foregoing discussions, penalty of Rs. 5,000/- is also set aside. 7. emsp Appeal disposed of in the above terms.
-
1997 (6) TMI 223 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Clandestine removal - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... gly, I do not find any merits in this contention of the appellants and accordingly, reject the same. 8. emsp The appellants have submitted that the demand in question was barred by limitation of six months inasmuch as the show cause notice was issued after a period of six months from the date of visit of the Officers concerned. I find that this issue has already been considered by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Oxygen Ltd. reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. 131 and 1997 (89) E.L.T. 557. 9. emsp In this view of the matter, I do not find any merits in the appellants rsquo plea of limitation also. 10. emsp In view of my foregoing discussions, I reject the appeal and confirm the demand of duty of Rs. 4,60,971.00. However, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, personal penalty of Rs. 2.00 lakh (Rupees two lakh) is hereby reduced to a sum of Rs. 1.00 lakh (Rupees one lakh) only. But for the above modification, the appeal is otherwise rejected.
-
1997 (6) TMI 222 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... and departure of employees in factories, workshops, etc. These consist of a case containing a clock, a date marker actuated by the clock movement, a hammer and an inking ribbon. The employee inserts his card in the machine and operates the hammer either mechanically or electrically, thus stamping the card with the exact date, hour and minute. The number of hours he has been present can then be calculated from the card. Mechanical eight-day clocks and electric clocks are most commonly used. They may be independent, connected to a master clock or themselves serve as master clocks. In the last case, they sometimes set off a striking mechanism or a siren (see the Explanatory Note to Heading 91.05). Shri Biswas fairly concedes that the Time Recorder in question operated in this manner. 5. emsp We, therefore, find that the classification of the impugned goods under Heading 91.06 was correct. There being no other submission, the order of the Collector is upheld and appeal dismissed.
-
1997 (6) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... lls are complete item in all respects before clearance and no further process was carried out by the customer. Hence the ratio of judgment relied upon by the appellant is not applicable in the facts of present case. Hence we find no force in the contention of the appellant that steel grinding balls are classifiable under sub-heading 7208 of the Tariff. 15. emsp Sub-heading 7308.90 of the tariff includes other articles of iron and steel not specified elsewhere. 16. emsp From the process of manufacturing of the steel grinding balls, it is clear that these finished articles of steel and are used as such in cement factories without any further processing hence are classifiable under sub-heading 7308.90 of the Tariff. In the classification list the appellant described the goods as forged steel grinding media only. Hence we also agree with the findings that appellant have not declared the full description of the goods in question in the classification list. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1997 (6) TMI 220 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Flow meters - Interpretation of statute ... ... ... ... ..... 637 in case of Reflect Optics Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay etc. It is claimed by the appellants that some vital parts are still required for making the goods complete flow meters and this cannot be considered as complete flow meters for the purpose of exemption notification. Since goods as described are only parts and not complete flow meters as such, this cannot be considered as flow meters for the purpose of exemption and have to the considered as parts only. 6. emsp Similarly Rules of interpretation cannot be extended to interpret provisions of import policy. Our attention has been drawn to Exim Scrips placed in paper book from Page 40 onwards and Exim Scrips No. A017375 on the reverse, for instance, indicates parts of flow meter. Since parts of flow meters are covered under Exim Scrips confiscation of goods for ITC contravention was not justified. 7. emsp For the reasons mentioned hereinbefore we, therefore, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1997 (6) TMI 219 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... hat in 1996 (87) E.L.T. 42 has held that refractories used for lining on furnace are not inputs. Therefore he says that the goods are refractories and credit has been rightly taken. He contends that the extended period has been correctly invoked for the reason that the applicant did not indicate the nature of the use of the goods. 4. emsp The notice and the order of the Commissioner, have expressly sought to deny credit on the view that the foundry fluxes were part of the tundish. The decision in Union Carbide that parts of items listed as excluded credit will not thus be excluded prima facie applies to the applicant rsquo s case. Apart from this, applicant has a strong prima facie case on the question of limitation. There is no finding that it had not declared the inputs and given a tariff heading as was required by the rules, as amplified and explained by various trade notices. We therefore dispense with the deposit of duty and consequential penalty and stay their recovery.
-
1997 (6) TMI 218 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... 1988, when imported into India for the manufacture of said goods. In other words, components of goods specified in Notification 65/88 are also exempted from duty. The goods admittedly are parts of cystoscope. Being parts of cystoscope, they would in the alternative get exemption under Notification 66/88, dated 1-3-1988. 6. emsp This in fact is what is pleaded by the appellants in their Appeal-memo where they have prayed that assuming without admitting that the goods are not covered by Notification No. 65/88-Cus., these are eligible for benefit of Notification 66/88 inasmuch as the ld. Collector has admitted that the goods are parts of cystoscope falling under S. No. 48 of Notification 65/88. Once we admit that these are parts of cystoscope specified as S. No. 48 of Notification 65/88, they would independently be eligible to concession under Notification 66/88, dated 1-3-1988. 7. emsp For the reasons metioned hereinbefore, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1997 (6) TMI 217 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Ash trays and flower vases ... ... ... ... ..... than that emsp kitchen, office, indoor decoration or similar purposes (other emsp table, of Heading No. 70.07 or 70.13). rdquo 5. emsp The Tariff sub-item covers various articles of glass used for Table, kitchen, office, indoor decoration or for similar purpose. The contested notification however, covers only one class of glassware i.e. Tableware. Therefore, all other tableware was not includible but only specified items were nominated thereunder. It is settled law that the notification is to be construed strictly. Where the goods for which benefit is claimed are akin or identical to the goods named in the notification, but where they are called by different names then the benefit could be extended as was done in the cited order of the Tribunal. But here the contested goods namely Flower Vases or Ash Trays cannot even remotely fall under the categories specifically mentioned. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the Collector rsquo s order and accordingly dismiss this appeal.
-
1997 (6) TMI 216 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Accountal of goods ... ... ... ... ..... se of Kartar Steel Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise - 1997 (93) E.L.T. 443 (Tribunal) 1997 (18) RLT 138 (Tribunal). 8. emsp In the present case the Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant under the Rule 53 and 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 for not accounting the goods in the RG 1 Register and for confiscation of the goods and therefore liable for penalty. Following the ratio of the judgment of Hon rsquo ble Andhra Pradesh High Court and the decision of the Tribunal the order of confiscation of goods and orders to redeem on payment of fine is set aside. However, keeping in view the goods were not entered in the RG 1 Register, the personal penalty is reduce to Rs. 10,000/- for non-maintenance of statutory record under 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for contravention of rules and provision of Rule 53 of the Central Excise Rules. The appellants are entitled to consequential relief if any in accordance with law. The appeal is disposed of as indicated.
-
1997 (6) TMI 215 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... s already been noted that in Raymond Woollen Mills rsquo case (supra) that Tribunal following a Madras High Court judgment has held that the credit earned under the earlier notification does not lapse when it is rescinded. In such a context, the reliance placed under the Commissioner (Appeals) in the Sandoz rsquo case (supra) in the impugned order is also well-founded where the Tribunal held that the credit balance in the rescinded notification should be given either as refund or by transfer under the Rule 57H(3) Central Excise Rules. The facts of the A.C.C. case (supra) relied upon by the department were different. In that case, there was no dispute dealing the application for transfer as the item itself was not included in notification under the Modvat Scheme till 1987 when the assessee opted to work under that scheme. In this view of the matter, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) which is upheld and the appeal is rejected.
-
1997 (6) TMI 214 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... thereof as a component, does not appear to be tenable. It is not in dispute that the appellants had taken credit for the said steel tubes in their RG 23C Pt. II on 29-6-1994 which was verified by the Supdt. on the same day. If there was any doubt as to its subsequent utilisation or if there was any doubt as to the factual position, it was for the Department to verify the same by inspection of the factory or by calling for additional information. Having failed to do so, I do not find any justification for holding that the appellant is liable for mis-statement, and on that basis, to invoke the extended period of limitation. I, therefore, hold that the show cause notice was barred by limitation. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order is set aside with consequential relief, if any, allowed under the law to the appellants. Since the show cause notice itself was not maintainable, I hold that the penalty imposed cannot also be sustained. The same is also set aside.
-
1997 (6) TMI 213 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... a buyer in the invoice. Nevertheless, the name of the appellants was shown as consignee in the relevant invoice. Since the name of the appellants was shown in the documents, it would establish the link between the goods and the ultimate consignee, who happened to be the appellants. Such a description in the documents would, itself, be in the nature of endorsement in their favour, made by the concerned person or the buyer in the cases, referred to above, by the ld. Counsel for the appellants and it has been settled that the name of the assessee has been shown either as a consignee or a customer, the benefit cannot be denied on this ground. In the facts and circumstances and since the issue has already been considered by the Tribunal in the various cases including the cases, referred to by the ld. Counsel, we accept the claim of the appellants and, accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and in the result all these 13 appeals are, hereby allowed with consequential relief.
........
|
