|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 6048 Records
-
2002 (12) TMI 541 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Deemed Credit - Iron and Steel Products ... ... ... ... ..... paid, may be deemed to be duty paid and credit of duty in respect of the said inputs may be allowed at such rate and subject to such conditions as the Central Government may direct, without production of documents evidencing the payment of duty. rdquo As the very language of the provision would show, it is an extraordinary facility given to the manufacturer in view of the situation that it is difficult for the manufacturer to secure evidence of the duty paid character of the inputs. The provision specifically does away with the production of duty paying documents. It also indirectly does away with the need to file a declaration in as much as the inputs and the final products which would qualify for this extraordinary benefit are both prescribed and illustrated in the Notification issued under this provision. Therefore, the denial of deemed credit for want of a declaration is not warranted. 5. emsp I, thus, concurring with the finding of the Member (Judicial) allow the appeal.
-
2002 (12) TMI 540 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Suspension of legal proceedings etc. ... ... ... ... ..... nataka 1998 6 Kar LJ 280 and also the judgments of the courts in Standard Metal Industries v. Indian Overseas Bank 1997 2 LLJ 1032 (Mad.) and BSI Ltd. v. Gift Holdings (P.) Ltd. 2000 24 SCL 351 / 100 Comp. Cas. 436 and Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd. v. Pennar Peterson Secrities Ltd. 2000 34 SCL 88/ 100 Comp. Cas. 755 have held that the recovery of statutory dues to the parties is not barred by the provisions of section 22 of the SICA. The same principle holds good in respect of farmers under the Control Order. Thus the contention urged on behalf of the factory that section 22 of the SICA is bar to recover the amount from it, does not merit consideration and the same is rejected. 13. For the reasons stated above, W.P. Nos. 46964 of 2001, 44063 of 2001 and 45890 of 2001 are dismissed. W.P. Nos. 46349-50 of 2001 are allowed. The Deputy Commissioner is directed to sell the sugar under lock and seal. After paying the excise dues, the balance amount shall be disbursed to the farmers.
-
2002 (12) TMI 539 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... ces that the applicant issued, which we have seen, show that it paid duty on the goods applicable to heading 7610.10 of the tariff, which covers doors and windows of aluminium and their frames. We do not find it prima facie possible to conclude that fixing of panes on these frames change their character resulted in a new item. The door and window frames continue to be so, whether is they are fitted with panes or not. Nor can it prima facie be said that fixing of doors on to the walls of the building in which they are to be installed amounts to manufacture of different goods. 3. emsp Accordingly, we waive deposit of the duty and penalty and stay their recovery.
-
2002 (12) TMI 538 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Clandestine removal ... ... ... ... ..... o consideration for assessing the total turnover of M/s. Narendra Re-rolling Mills. The Tribunal in its order dated 7-8-1997 had recorded the fact that Shri Narendra Singh, Managing Director of M/s. Narendra Re-rolling Mills, appeared before the Assessment Officer and made a statement that he had never manufactured any steel bars for M/s. Balbir Steels Pvt. Ltd. 7. emsp In the present case, the Revenue had neither recorded any statement from M/s. Narendra Re-rolling Mills nor had relied upon the statement made before the Assessment Officer, which goes against the case of the Revenue. 8. emsp In view of the discussion made above, the demand raised, only on the basis of note books recovered from another person rsquo s premises and without making any investigation regarding the correctness of the entries, is not sustainable and is set aside. 9. emsp As the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed, there is no merit in the appeals filed by the Revenue and the same are dismissed.
-
2002 (12) TMI 537 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Demand - Expiry of warehousing bond ... ... ... ... ..... uch duty is demandable. 2. emsp Shri Ishwar Singh, learned J.D.R. appearing for Revenue states that submissions regarding goods having gone to the E.O.U. were not made before the lower authorities. He has no objection to case being remanded to the original authority for considering the matter afresh in the light of the aforesaid submissions. 3. emsp After hearing rival submissions and perusal of case records, we remand the matter to the Adjudicating authority for considering the claim of the appellants that the goods were cleared from the warehouse to the E.O.U. and therefore they remain exempt under Notification No. 13-Cus., dated 9-2-1981 subject to conditions stipulated therein. 4. emsp Appeal is allowed by way of remand.
-
2002 (12) TMI 536 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... le of cotton yarn and cotton waste taken together exceeds the limit of 50 . Therefore, the applicants were required to pay the excise duty at full rate without the benefit of Notification No. 8/97. 3. emsp The Revenue relied upon the Board circular dated 25-5-1999 in support of their claim. The Circular provides that DTA sales on all accounts for all sectors will not exceed 50 of FOB value of previous financial year export. Para 9.9-B of Exim Policy provides that entire production of EOU shall be exported subject to 50 sale to DTA on payment of applicable duties. In respect of waste there is a separate para 9.20 of the Exim Policy provides that waste arising out of production process may be sold to DTA on payment of applicable duties. 4. emsp In view of the above mentioned paras of Exim Policy, prima facie, we find a strong case in favour of the applicants. Hence pre-deposit of duty and penalty is waived for hearing of the appeal. 5. emsp Adjourned to 29-1-2003 for arguments.
-
2002 (12) TMI 535 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... at merely because worn out spinnerettes were melted for purposes of repair, it cannot be concluded that the said spinnerettes have lost their identity. The learned Jt. C.D.R. submits that this decision which was rendered in the context of Customs Act Provisions, may not be applicable for deciding the issue of manufacture under Central Excise Act. 3. emsp The appellant rsquo s case is prima facie, covered by the observation of the High Court that mere melting for the purpose of repair cannot lead to the conclusion that new spinnerettes have been manufactured. The waiver sought in the application is allowed. Appeal to come up for hearing in due course.
-
2002 (12) TMI 534 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... r directing pre-deposit of the entire amount of duty and penalty. For non-compliance with the condition of pre-deposit, the assessee rsquo s appeal was dismissed by the lower appellate authority. 5. emsp We have heard both sides. 6. emsp We find that there is no discussion in the adjudication order on the grounds raised in the show cause notice and further it is stated by the learned Counsel before us that the appellants had nowhere admitted that the declaration was filed late and it has been their contention right through the proceedings that the declaration was filed before the receipt of the capital goods in their factory. In these circumstances we set aside the impugned order which has been passed without going into the merits of the case and remand the case to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision on merits. He shall pass fresh orders after extending a reasonable opportunity to the appellants of being heard in person. 7. emsp The appeal is thus allowed by remand.
-
2002 (12) TMI 533 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Dane Salt required for manufacture of Amoxycillin - Exemption under Notification No. 64/79-Cus.
-
2002 (12) TMI 532 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Locus standi ... ... ... ... ..... t and given an option to get the same redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The validity of the imposition of redemption fine can only be challenged by the UPSRTC. The appellant is only Regional Manager of the UPSRTC. Being Regional Manager, he cannot be said to be owner of the bus. As employee he has no independent locus standi to challenge the validity of the impugned order imposing redemption fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the UPSRTC. There is nothing on the record to suggest if UPSRTC had even authorised the appellant to file the appeal on its behalf. The appeal, as is evident from the record, had been filed by him in his own name. Moreover, the appeal in the name of Regional Manager, even otherwise is not maintainable, as it is only the name of the office and not a legal entity. 5. emsp In the light of the facts and circumstances discussed above, in my view, the appeal filed by the Regional Manager is not maintainable and as such, the same is ordered to be dismissed.
-
2002 (12) TMI 531 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Refund - Incidence of duty whether passed on to customer ... ... ... ... ..... partment appealed this order to the Tribunal. The assessee claiming the goods classifiable in Heading 85.14 and the department in Heading 85.44. The Tribunal remanded the matter. In subsequent orders, the goods have been classified in Heading 85.44 by the Commissioner (Appeals) (in relation to the same classification list). The representative of the appellant agrees that this is broadly the position and says that he has appealed this order of the Deputy Collector to the Commissioner (Appeals). In the light of this explanation now tendered, it will be clear that the eligibility to refund of the duty paid by the appellant is itself in dispute. Therefore, the question as to whether the incidence of duty has or has not been passed on is insignificant. It would arise only if and when it is finally decided that the refund is payable to the appellant. 5. emsp Accordingly, the entire proceedings before us are at present of no significance. 6. emsp The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
-
2002 (12) TMI 530 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... ing and dyeing was considered amounting to manufacture and that is why the Government had granted exemption to the independent processors. He also states that since the appellants used bleaching and dyeing yarn, the value of bleaching and dyeing have to be included for the purpose of charging duty even if such process did not amount to manufacture before the relevant amendment. 3. emsp After hearing rival submissions and perusal of the case records, we are of the view that since there is no evidence forthcoming that the Revenue has challenged the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) for the earlier period and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ashok Silk Mills v. CCE, Mumbai-II holding bleaching and dyeing not amounting to manufacture prior to the amendment, the appellants have made out a prima facie case for waiver of the pre-deposit of duty and penalty. Accordingly, we waive the pre-deposit of duty and penalty and fix the regular hearing of the case on 16-1-2003.
-
2002 (12) TMI 529 - CEGAT, BANGALORE
Demand - Natural justice - Departmental clarifications ... ... ... ... ..... n by the Commissioner is not relevant to decide the issue since the period of export is prior to the said Circular and the Circular dated 10-4-86 is clearly applicable to the facts of this case. 5. emsp We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. We find sufficient force in the arguments advanced on behalf of the assessee particularly in view of the fact that Circular dated 10-4-86 is clearly applicable to the facts of this case and further more Circular is binding on the authorities who adjudicate the matter. Since the Commissioner has neither discussed the circular referred to and relied upon by the party nor correct in arriving at the decision based upon the subsequent circular which is not relevant to decide the issue involved herein. In the facts and circumstances, we do not find any justification to uphold the impugned order in raising the demand and in the result we set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential relief if any.
-
2002 (12) TMI 528 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... flight to Dubai, subsequently confiscated by the impugned order, was not in consonance with the law. Mustafa Ahadi is the person who has handed over diamonds in question to Daryoush Khodabandheloo. 2. emsp On hearing both sides and noting that, prima facie, selling diamonds to a person of foreign origin is not an offence and further noting that there is no material on record to show that the applicant herein had knowledge that the diamonds would be handed over to someone who would attempt to smuggle them out of India, we hold that strong prima facie case for waiver has been made out and hence dispense with the pre-deposit of the penalty and stay recovery thereof pending this appeal.
-
2002 (12) TMI 527 - CEGAT, BANGALORE
Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on capital goods - Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... ly and even before the said exclusion they are not covered under the definition of Rule 57Q. 7. emsp After hearing both sides and considering the decisions in the appellant rsquo s own case as per Final Order No 1608/2001, dated 23-10-2001 2002 (149) E.L.T. 768 (T) wherein Computers have been denied the benefit of Modvat credit under Rule 57Q, I am not inclined to accept that the Computers in this case are eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q. The Computers which would bring about any change in production i.e. in CAM use would be eligible for benefit under Rule 57Q and not computers used for CAD applications i.e. designing. There is no conflict that designing is not part of manufacture of finished products as rightly pointed out by the DR. However, the eligibility under Rule 57Q is not extending to all the items used in or in relation to manufacture, but it is restricted. The definition cannot be enlarged. Therefore, I find no merits in this appeal and rejected the same.
-
2002 (12) TMI 526 - CEGAT, BANGALORE
Demand - Limitation - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... egation is of misdeclaration and not non-declaration. In this view of the matter, it is found that the longer period under proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be invoked. (c) When no duty demands could be determined, imposition of penalty under Rule 173Q, especially when no allegations have been brought on record as to what in the process of manufacture which was suppressed as a positive rheus by the appellant, no penalty could be sustained. As regards the penalty under Rule 9(2), the penalty thereunder is only on removal of goods without following the procedure prescribed. In this case the prescribed procedure has been followed. It is nobody rsquo s case that the goods have been removed in contravention of Rule 9(1), therefore penalty under Rule 9(2) cannot be upheld. 4. emsp In view of our findings, we set aside the demand, which is found to be barred by limitation and the penalties imposed in this case. Appeal allowed with consequential relief.
-
2002 (12) TMI 525 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), CHENNAI
Natural Justice ... ... ... ... ..... e adjudication proceedings for almost two full years from the date of issue of Show Cause Notice by artful dodging. Ultimately the lower adjudicating authority had no other option but to decide the issue based on the evidence in the file, which was relied upon in the Show Cause Notice. I see no reason to differ from the findings of the lower adjudicating authority. The learned Advocate seeks to project the chimera of denial of natural justice to his client blissfully forgetting that such an obligation extends to the Public Exchequer also. Who will show natural justice to the Exchequer? This is the obligation of the Tax Payer and the Adjudicator. There has to be a balancing of interests. 5. emsp In the impugned order, the lower authority has been just and fair. He was reluctantly compelled to decide the issue ex parte, but the matter has been decided without fear or favour. I see no reason to disagree either with his findings or order. 6. emsp Accordingly, I reject the appeal.
-
2002 (12) TMI 524 - CEGAT, KOLKATA
Cenvat/Modvat - Inputs - Declaration ... ... ... ... ..... sub-heading 4810.10 not having been declared. I would therefore allow the appeal of the Modvat availing appellant in this case by ordering that the embargo placed on denial of Modvat credits before 15-10-97 on chrome paper be lifted and they be allowed the benefit of the credit on receipts of the inputs before 15-10-97 up to 15-5-95. In view of the fact that I find the Modvat credit denied as eligible I find no justification for maintaining the penalty under Rule 173Q as arrived at by the lower authorities. The same is required to be set aside. (b) Since I find that Modvat credit is eligible with effect from the first declaration made in May, 1995. I do not find any merits in the Revenue rsquo s appeal and the same is required to be dismissed. 5. emsp In view of my findings I allow the assessee rsquo s appeal and reject the Revenue rsquo s appeal. Consequential implementation of the order to be effected. Appeals disposed of in above terms. Stay petition also gets disposed of.
-
2002 (12) TMI 523 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE, M
Settlement of case - Interest ... ... ... ... ..... case any more amount is held to be payable, the applicant shall pay the same along with interest 18 per annum for the date amount is held payable i.e. expiry of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order till the date of payment of such extra amount. 8. emsp (3) Fine and Penalty The Commission finds that applicants have cooperated in the proceedings before the Commission. When the facts and circumstances of the case were explained the applicants have accepted to pay the amount as mentioned with r.t. notice. Since, this is a full and true disclosure at the time of final hearing, the Commission orders that immunity shall be given from imposition of fine and penalty to the applicants. 8. emsp (4) Prosecution The applicants are given immunity from prosecution under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). The order of settlement shall be void if the Settlement Commission subsequently finds that it has been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation of facts.
-
2002 (12) TMI 522 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Project import ... ... ... ... ..... will not come under the Heading 98.01 by applying the ratio of Punjab State Electricity Board case. We have no hesitation to hold that the authorities have committed a grave error in coming to the above conclusion. 12. emsp The reason given by the original authority which was affirmed by the appellate authority to come to the conclusion that circular dated 1-5-65 is not applicable in the appellant rsquo s case, is also unacceptable. The appellant has not contended at any time that subject crane has to be considered as part of industrial project. Its contention, always, was that it is a machinery coming under Heading 98.01. For being a machinery coming under 98.01 it is enough if it is an lsquo auxiliary equipment rsquo . 13. emsp In the light of the above discussion, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. The appellant will be entitled to all consequential relief including refund of the amount paid as duty towards the demand which is the subject of this appeal.
............
|
