Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 4698 Records
-
1996 (12) TMI 180 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... ession which was alleged against. It is also not the case of the appellant that these charges should be included in the sale price. 4. emsp We have considered the submissions. We find that the mere fact that contract was produced before the authorities is not sufficient to hold that the authorities were made known about the fact of non-inclusion of these advertisement charges in the price lists. Therefore, the conclusion arrived at by the lower authority in this regard is based on the factors available on record. The invokation of longer period of limitation is correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. However, it was pleaded before us that the penalty of Rs. 4,000/- is excessive taking into consideration the duty demand. We have considered this aspect. We feel that the interests of justice will be met, if the penalty is reduced to Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred). Ordered accordingly. But for the above modifications, the appeal is otherwise dismissed.
-
1996 (12) TMI 179 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ... ... ... ..... ation while the value of the machine also is fixed. Since the machines are new, we are of the view that this price of US 170,000 can be taken as the price for the goods in question. The assessable value will have to be arrived at by the addition of freight etc. The value of three machines in question is to be fixed at the rate of US 170,000 each. Since the machine is of 1991 model, any escalation factor due to inflation will be taken care of by not allowing any depreciation of this value. There is no allegation or any evidence against the appellants that they have made any extra payments for the machines in question. In this view of the matter, confiscation of these three machines as well as the imposition of penalty are not warranted and we therefore set aside the same. We make it clear that subsequently if any additional evidence is forthcoming, it would be open to the authorities to take any action under the law available. The appeal is thus disposed of in the above terms.
-
1996 (12) TMI 178 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... to any one of the items spelt out under this tariff heading. It is however possible on account of the reason of shape and use this item may be considered as part of the machinery taking into consideration the chapter notes under Chapter 84. The facts in regard to the same are not before us. The learned DR is also not able to enlighten us to the alternative classification for the same. The lower authority has not examined the issue of classification in depth. The classification aspect will have to be re-examined taking into consideration the shape and use of the item and the various entries in different chapters and unless it can be shown that the item clearly falls in any one of the chapter headings in Chapter 84, the goods will be classifiable under heading 3926.90. With this observation we remand the matter to the original authority for this limited purpose for de novo decision in the light of our observations above after affording opportunity of hearing to the appellants.
-
1996 (12) TMI 177 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... y for filtering and purifying the liquids and those for purifying and filtering of gases. 32. emsp But, that does not make much of a difference in view of the fact that in the present case, we are concerned with parts of filtering and purifying machinery and apparatus and such parts are covered by Heading 8421.99 and were by virtue of this classification entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 172/89-Cus. (as amended) since Entry 18 of the said notification covers goods falling under sub-heading 8421.91 or 8421.99, excluding parts of goods falling under sub-heading 8421.23 or 8421.31 whereas the filtering or purifying machinery for liquids (other than the specified ones) is covered under 8421.29 and the appellants have stated (and the Department has not disputed) that the machinery in which these parts are intended to be used is meant for filtration of viscose solution. 33. emsp In view of the above position, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are accepted.
-
1996 (12) TMI 176 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Manufacturer - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... appellant had a bona fide belief that these are not chargeable to duty. It is further seen that bi-metal scraps were sold to many parties by the manufacturers of bi-metal powder and the position should have been verified in this regard. If there is a general practice in the trade with respect to this aspect and if the Department also has not taken any proceedings against others, then this fact will be relevant for deciding the issue of limitation which was pleaded by the appellant. The learned lower authority has not adverted to this plea of the appellant which is very material for deciding the limitation aspect in this case. Therefore in view of the above reasonings we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal by remand for de novo adjudication by the adjudicating authority in terms of our observations mentioned above. All legal pleas with respect to the Modvat credit as well as valuation are allowed to be raised by the appellants during the adjudication proceedings.
-
1996 (12) TMI 175 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Valuation - Trade discount ... ... ... ... ..... on towards dealers margin which worked out to 2.9 . Hence all those facts were taken into account and the benefit of this amount was given to the appellants therein. But the facts in this case are different and therefore that decision is not applicable to the facts of this case. 11. emsp Reliance was also placed on the decision reported in 1996 (85) E.L.T. 139. In that particular case the Tribunal held that there is no material collected by the adjudicating authority to show that the wholesalers acted as agents of the manufacturer or that whatever have been paid was really in the nature of commission for services rendered. In this view 3 discount paid to the wholesalers was (sic.) allowed for deduction. But in this case the facts clearly indicate that the dealers were acting as the agents of the appellants. Therefore that decision is also not applicable to the facts of this case. In such circumstances there are no merit in the appeals. Accordingly these appeals are dismissed.
-
1996 (12) TMI 174 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Money credit Scheme - Exemption Notification - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... or invoking the larger period of limitation. In the case of M/s. Citadel Fine Pharmaceuticals v. G.O.I. reported in 1989 (42) E.L.T. 515 (S.C.), the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court held that when there is no period of limitation prescribed a reasonable period of limitation is to be read into. Therefore, under Rule 57P even if there is no period of limitation prescribed, the reasonable period of six months should be read into the same. Even in respect of Rule 57I, this Tribunal as well as the High Courts have taken the view that six months period is the reasonable period under the CEA and rules made thereunder. In these circumstances, we hold that on merits the department have got a case. However in the case we hold that the demand is barred by limitation. In that view of the matter, we hold that though the demand is maintainable in law, the same is barred by limitation. In the premises, the appeal is disposed of in the above terms, holding that the demand is barred by limitation.
-
1996 (12) TMI 173 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... note that the ld. Counsel has suceeded in showing from the records before us that goods of a value of Rs. 5,85,000/- had been cleared on GP 2 and their statement that the value has not been excluded has not been contradicted or shown to be wrong by the other side. Similarly, he has also been able to show us a gate pass indicating clearance of certain types of machinery under 84.37. 17. emsp We also take note of the fact that the report of the retired Chemical Examiner, whom the appellant had consulted and that of the Departmental Chemical Examiner do not appear to tally. 18. emsp Looking to the totality of facts and circumstances we grant waiver of pre-deposit of the amount in question and stay its recovery during the pendency of the appeal subject to the appellants depositing Rs. 75,000/- within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. (It is made clear that the pre-deposit of penalty is stayed). 19. emsp To come up for reporting compliance on 20th February, 1997.
-
1996 (12) TMI 172 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Refund - Valuation ... ... ... ... ..... s to take care of any subsequent variation in the prices. Since the price escalation or de-escalation had retrospective effect, it could not have been possible for the appellant to have agitated the original order of the Assistant Collector approving the declared prices. At any rate the appellants were not aggrieved with such a decision at the time when it was decided, since it was decided as per their own declaration. The subsequent development of escalation cannot be accepted to have the effect of depriving them of an appellate remedy. The remedy resorted to by them by way of filing a refund claim is appropriate in the circumstances. Accordingly, we hold that the finding of the Collector (Appeals) rejecting the appeals before him requires to be interfered with. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and allow the four appeals by remand to the Assistant Commissioner to consider the factual data regarding the revised prices and work out the refund in accordance with law.
-
1996 (12) TMI 171 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Bill of Entry - Amendment of ... ... ... ... ..... essed on the basis invoice price and the goods are cleared the implication is that no remission is allowed and no abatement has been occasioned. The question of redetermining the value of the imported goods could arise only in case where such damage or deterioration before the clearance is proved to the satisfaction of the proper officer. Hon rsquo ble Apex Court also held that it cannot be said that damages received represents the difference in price that had been paid and that ought to have been paid when the seller had agreed to compensate the buyer for the quality of the goods imported, the buyer does not get the right to claim abatement of duty on assumption that the real price was something less than what has been indicated in the invoice. Following the ratio of this judgment, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeals. rdquo 11. emsp In view of the findings given by us in the preceding paragraphs, we do not find any merit in this appeal and we reject the same.
-
1996 (12) TMI 170 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat - Additional duty of Customs ... ... ... ... ..... the notification defines ldquo specified duty rdquo as the duty of excise, the special duty of excise levied under the respective Finance Acts from 1988-1992 and the additional duty leviable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act. This term ldquo specified duty rdquo , has been used in the second proviso relating to vegetable products as well as sheets, boards, floating structures etc. But when reference is made to limiting of the benefit in the case of paper or paper board, the term ldquo specified duty rdquo is not used, but each of the special duties as also the duty of excise is specifically and individually named. The significant omission is of the additional duty of customs. It has, therefore, to be held that this omission was deliberate and that there was no intention to limit the credit to Rs. 800 PMT where the credit originated from payment of additional duty of customs. 5. emsp We set aside the lower orders, allow this appeal and direct resultant relief, if any.
-
1996 (12) TMI 169 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Valuation - Quantity discount ... ... ... ... ..... ty discount is given. In the present case, the quantity discount over the list price comes to about 11 . In the absence of any averment to the contrary, that the discount could not have been allowed, we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, this discount allowed cannot be considered as excessive. We observe that the bona fides of the transaction are brought out by the fact that the appellants have purchased same goods through the agent of the manufacturer and they themselves have got the goods at the price of .32 US per piece and they have invoiced the goods to the appellants at .35 US per piece after making their profit for themselves and the transaction appears to be in the normal course of international trade. In this view of the matter loading of the price as was sought to be done in the impugned order is not correct. Accordingly, we set aside the confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty and allow the appeal with consequential relief.
-
1996 (12) TMI 168 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... merges. In the case of tyre, the tyre comes into contact with the road. Once the tread wears off, the utility of the tyre as tyre for the motor-vehicle ceases altogether. Even then, it has been held that, the activity of re-treading of an old tyre does not result into emerging of a commercially distinct or different entity but that the original character or identity of the tyre remains the same. The other judgment cited by the ld. Advocate show that substantial amount of replacement of parts was done in the case of commodities about which the challenge existed. Compared to those processes or extent of replacement, the extent of replacement in the present case is much less. Following the ratio of the judgments, we hold that the activity of stripping up the old coating and re-coating the selenium alloy compound does not amount to manufacture and that the identity of the drum remains intact. We set aside the lower order, allow this appeal and direct consequential relief, if any.
-
1996 (12) TMI 167 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... were there, we consider that the view taken by the adjudicating authority that the goods were covered under Item No. 68 could not be faulted. 5. emsp We find that under the new tariff, the Supreme Court had decided the classification in the case of C.C.E. v. Fusebase Eltoto Ltd. - 1993 (67) E.L.T. 30 (SC). The Supreme Court had held that the projection television sets were not broadcast television receivers sets but were the video projectors in terms of Notification No. 160/86-C.E. They had observed that the projector was a device for projecting a light beam and apparatus for throwing illuminated images or motion picture on the screen. The Apex Court confirmed the findings of the A.C. in that case that the projection answered the description of a video projector. 6. emsp Taking all the relevant consideration into account, we find no infirmity in the view taken by the adjudicating authority and as a result this appeal filed by the Revenue had no merit and the same is rejected.
-
1996 (12) TMI 166 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... ng stay. 4. emsp In rejoinder, ld. Advocate stated that they had already executed a Bond for Rs. 8 lacs which is alive and in force while the sums demanded are only Rs. 2,84,345/-. He undertakes to keep the Bond alive till the disposal of the appeal. 5. emsp Taking note of the financial difficulties faced by the appellants and the fact that they are State Govt. Undertakings primarily engaged in popularising electronic goods in backward hill areas, we consider that it is a fit case where waiver of the pre-deposit of the duty amount demanded could be granted. We also take note of the fact that the appellants have already executed the Bond as stated by the ld. Advocate and that the appellants have undertaken to keep this Bond alive till the disposal of the appeal. 6. emsp Taking all the relevant considerations into account, we dispense with the pre-deposit of the duty and penalty amount and stay its recovery till the disposal of the appeal. The appeal to come up in its own turn.
-
1996 (12) TMI 165 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Reference to High Court ... ... ... ... ..... is the case with all other excisable goods finding mention in the first Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 . 2. emsp We have heard Shri S.V. Singh, the ld. DR for the applicant Commissioner and Shri Willingdon Christian, the ld. Counsel for the respondents. 3. emsp We find that the same issue had come up before the Tribunal both in New Delhi and in Mumbai. The Tribunal had held in all the cases that no point of law requiring reference to the High Court is justified, when the same issue already stands settled by the Delhi High Court in the case of Pioneer Silk Mills P. Ltd. v. Union of India 1995 (80) E.L.T. 507 - 1991 (4) Delhi Lawyers 75 . 4. emsp The Tribunal rsquo s decisions which have so rejected in the reference applications are reported in 1995 (76) E.L.T. 220 (Tribunal) 1995 (1) CXLT (Tribunal) CE. 239, 1996 (87) E.L.T. 562 (Tribunal) and 1996 (88) E.L.T. 69 (Tribunal). Following the above cited decisions, these 2 Reference applications are also rejected.
-
1996 (12) TMI 164 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Value of clearances - Clubbing of ... ... ... ... ..... are based on these evidences available before him. We find no reason to interfere with the same. Accordingly we confirm the findings in this regard and consequently the demand of duty of a sum of Rs. 10,02,075/- is hereby confirmed. 16. emsp The next question for decision is whether the extended period is applicable in this case. It is now seen that M/s. CPI had wilfully created the firm in the style of M/s. CBA and the fact that they are one and the same had been suppressed from the knowledge of the Department with intention to evade payment of duty by taking the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 and hence the extended time limit under proviso to Section 11-A(i) clearly applicable in the facts of this case. In that view of the matter the appellants are also liable to penalty. In the facts and circumstances of the case the penalty imposed on each of these firms is reduced to Rs. 25,000/- (twentyfive thousand). But for the above reduction the appeals are otherwise dismissed.
-
1996 (12) TMI 163 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Confiscation of currency - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... n. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case the penalty of Rs. 50,000/- is reduced to Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand). 7. emsp As far as the second aspect of the case is concerned I have to find out whether the imposition of penalty on the appellant Mangilal is justified. Here also this aspect was discussed by the adjudicating authority in para 45 of the impugned order. This appellant had admitted that he had received the parcels on behalf of the appellant Jagraj and several gold biscuits were cleared by him by giving false name as Prakash. He has also not shown any circumstances to come to any conclusion that the statement was obtained under threat or coercion. However he is only an employee of Jagraj and in the facts and circumstances of the case I am of the view that a sum of Rs. 2,500/- will meet the ends of justice. The penalty imposed on him is reduced to Rs. 2,500/- (two thousand five hundred). But for the above modifications the appeals are otherwise dismissed.
-
1996 (12) TMI 162 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... sis on the point that the goods have acquired the character of finished goods for use only in the heat exchangers, we find the Asstt. Collector in his order has observed that the goods imported are ordinary tubes in running length. Collector (Appeals) also observed that there is no further evidence beyond doubt to prove that no process whatsoever has been carried out between the stage of importation and the final fitment of the pipes in heat exchangers. However, since HSN Notes under Chapter Heading 73.04 categorically indicate tubes for heat exchangers and such tubes admittedly are expected to be manufactured according to specifications for heat exchangers, we do not think that these observations about the character of the tubes are of any material significance as HSN Notes make it clear that such seamless steel tubes would fall under Chapter Heading 73.04. 9. emsp In the result, for the reasons mentioned herein before, we reject these appeals and uphold the impugned orders.
-
1996 (12) TMI 161 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Refund - Customs - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... on 22-2-1993 and paid the duty and other charges as determined by the authorities, but they came to clear the goods only on 4-3-1993, by then the rate of duty applicable to the goods had changed. The appellants in terms of Section 15(1)(b) was required to pay duty at the rate applicable as on 4-3-1993. The cause of action for refund therefore in the circumstances could only arise on that date. Any assessment done earlier to that could not be taken to be final and in these circumstances we hold that the relevant date for the purpose of reckoning the limitation would be the one when the cause of action for the refund arose. Taking 4-3-1993 as the relevant date, the appellants rsquo refund claim which was received on 2-9-1993 therefore was within time. We therefore set aside the order of the learned lower authority and remand the matter to the learned original authority for passing orders afresh in the light of what we have held above. The appeal is therefore allowed by remand.
............
|