|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 267 Records
-
1986 (8) TMI 200 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Revisions - Review show cause notice ... ... ... ... ..... he Order of the Assistant Collector and the notices. It cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be argued therefore that the matter does not relate to non-levy of duty. Although, the notice have been issued by the Government under Section 131(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 it must be deemed to be actually issued under Section 131(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. 13. emsp The Order-in-Appeal being passed on 24th April, 1981 and the show cause notice issued by the Central Government having been issued on 11th February, 1982 is clearly beyond the time limit provided under Section 131(5). 14. emsp In taking this view, we also rely on the decision of the Bombay and Delhi High Courts and the Tribunal decision cited above. 15. emsp Both sides had also extensively argued on merits. In the view, that we are taking, however, on the preliminary objection as regards limitation, it is unnecessary for us to go into the merits of the demand of duty as such. 16. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 199 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal and application for condonation for delay rejectable ... ... ... ... ..... ch went on till 19-12-1985, that the file was put up to the Collector and it was then that the Collector gave the order to file the appeal. Here, it is a case where there is an inordinate delay of 84 days in filing the appeal which we find no sufficient reason to condone because it is not possible to accept the plea that this appeal could not be filed because some other appeals had also be filed. Besides that, we have already observed that the manner in which the office of the Collector proceeded to process this appeal does not show that any ground has been made out for condonation of delay. We, therefore, do not feel inclined to grant the prayer for condonation of delay and reject this application. The appeal, being barred by time is liable to rejection as having been filed beyond the statutory period of limitation. The appeal is also thus rejected. The Cross Objections filed by the respondent being Cross Objection No. C/Cross/289/86-B.2 become infructuous, and may be filed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 198 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
POY is an identifiable item, marketed and known as such in the market ... ... ... ... ..... different from the view taken by the lower authority. In the instant case, we have, in detail, considered the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). We have held that his order is wrong and therefore we are interfering with his order. We are not interfering on the ground that a different view is possible but on the ground that the view taken by him is erroneous. 40. emsp On consideration of all the aspects, we hold that the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) is erroneous. POY is not a semi-finished goods requiring further manufacturing processes. We further hold that Rule 56-B does not authorise the Collector to permit removal of POY for the purpose of drawing and texturising which process was for the purpose of manufacturing fabrics. 41. emsp In the result, for the reasons stated in this order, we allow this appeal and set aside the order passed by the Collector Central Excise (Appeals) and confirm the order passed by the Asstt. Collector.
-
1986 (8) TMI 197 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appellate order binding on Assistant Collector - Refund ... ... ... ... ..... plication for getting the refund of duty in terms of the Appellate order. Instead of complying with the Order-in-appeal, the Assistant Collector refused to grant refund and rejected the refund application. This was not proper. If the department was aggrieved by the order dated 26.11.82 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), they were at liberty to file appeal before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal within the stipulated time-limit. Having not done so, they were obliged to comply with the said order of the Collector (Appeals). We, therefore, find that the Collector (Appeals) by his impugned order correctly dismissed two appeals filed before him by the assessee challenging the Assistant Collector rsquo s order rejecting their refund claim. 4. emsp In the circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Collector of Central Excise. As a result we uphold the said order and dismiss both the appeals filed before us.
-
1986 (8) TMI 196 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Iron or steel - Ram - Forgings ... ... ... ... ..... s rsquo letter No. Imp/S 76/51 dated 27-2-1979 addressed to the Appellate Collector, shows that post-importation operations for 71 hours in the case of 10 cwt. forging and 50 hours in the case of 5 cwt. forging were necessary, involving expenditure of about 20 of the price of the forgings. The learned Advocate has not controverted the arguments of the learned S.D.R. that without these operations ram cannot function and hydraulic operation is not possible. The forgings at the time of importation properly fell under Tariff Heading 73.04/06(2) C.T.A., 1975 read with item 26AA of C.E.T. for the purpose of countervailing duty. We, therefore, find that the original assessment was correct and the goods do not merit re-assessment as finished ram under Heading 84.45/48 in terms of Rule 2(a) of the Rules for Interpretation of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as claimed by the appellants. In the result, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal as untenable.
-
1986 (8) TMI 195 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... Science and Technology (Vol. I) relied upon by the department, we observe that the list of modifiers given in Table-3 at page 686 of the said book can by no means be said to be an exhaustive list of modifiers. Apart from the fact that there is no indication that the list is exhaustive it goes on to say at page 685 in the Section ldquo Modifiers rdquo that ldquo several of the modifiers given in Table-3 might actually be considered as Alkyd ingredients. They have been included as modifiers to recognise historical convention rather than with precision rdquo . From this it is apparent that the list in Table-3 of modifiers indicating their advantages and disadvantages cannot by any means be considered to be an exhaustive list of modifiers for Alkyd Resins. In view of the technical authority adduced by the assessee no doubt is left that the product in question is a chemically modified Alkyd Resin. Accordingly, it is covered by the said notification. Hence the appeal is set aside.
-
1986 (8) TMI 194 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Sugar - Demand - Excess production rebate ... ... ... ... ..... he facts of the present case. In fact, the Assistant Collector himself, after issuing the Show Cause Notice under Rule 10, had observed in the adjudication order that the case was not covered by Rule 10 and had to be dealt with under the General Law of Limitation wherein the demand was not time-barred. As has been made clear in the Tribunal rsquo s decision cited above, if the excess payment has to be recovered under the General Law of Limitation, it can be done only by filing a suit, and in any case, the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) will not be correct in law under the Central Excise Rules. As has been held by the Tribunal, in the case of Miles India Limited v. The Assistant Collector of Customs which had been upheld by the Supreme Court (1985 ECR 289), the quasi judicial authorities are bound to act within the provisions of the Act itself and the remedy in such case which fall outside the Act will have to be sought elsewhere. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... onsignments and relied upon the information passed on by the exporter to them cannot be said to be without substance in the absence of any direct evidence on record against the appellants. With the result the appeal has to be allowed and the penalty imposed on the appellants cannot be sustained. Accordingly appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. 5. emsp Before I part with the case I would like to observe that in the past the appellants were also given the benefit of such ignorance in the case of M/s. Lemuir Air Express v. Collector of Customs, Delhi - Order No. A/222/84-NRB, dated 3-8-84. This is the second occasion when such benefit is given in the instant case mainly relying on the Order No. A/408/85-NRB, dated 12-12-1985 rendered by this Tribunal in the appeal filed by the exporter M/s. East West Linkers (P) Ltd., supra, who was also found guilty and punished by the impugned order. I hope the appellants would now be careful while acting as Air Cargo Agents.
-
1986 (8) TMI 192 - CEGAT, , NEW DELHI
Power - Use of in ironing ... ... ... ... ..... e manufactured product could be sold to the consumer, such packing would not be a process incidental or ancillary to the completion of the manufacture of the product. In the present instance packing in a butter paper envelope is neither obligatory nor even necessary but is only carried out for the purpose of convenient dispatch and delivery. In such circumstances we are of the view, following the dicta in the several decisions cited supra, that the process of ironing carried out by the appellants, though with the aid of power, did not, for that reason, disentitle them from the benefit of notification 179/77-CE, dated 18.6.1977. 20. emsp Hence, we set aside the order of the Appellate Collector to the above extent but maintain his order in so far as it denied benefit under the notification for the period when drying (third of the nine stages mentioned in his order) was being carried out by the appellants with the aid of power. The appeal is therefore allowed in the above terms.
-
1986 (8) TMI 191 - CEGAT, NRB, NEW DELHI
Gold - Seizure and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... hority has rightly held him guilty for contravening the provisions of Section 16(2)(m) read with Section 6(1) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. 9. Before I part with the case, I would like to observe that the direction of the learned Adjudicating Authority that the seized gold ornaments. shall be released to the appellant on payment of personal penalty adjudged was not according to law as no such direction can be issued when the penalty simpliciter is imposed. On the point of clarity, it may be mentioned that such direction may be necessary where in the case of confiscation the option to redeem in lieu of confiscation is given. However, during the course of arguments, Shri G.K. Rana, learned Advocate informed that the appellant has already paid the fine and the seized gold ornaments already stand released, hence no separate order with regard to this issue is required to be passed by me. 10. In the light of the foregoing discussions, the appeal fails being devoid of any merits.
-
1986 (8) TMI 190 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Excise duty - Dutiability ... ... ... ... ..... tured by the appellants we reliable to duty, taking into account the exemption notifications cited before the lower authorities and before us. 22. emsp In the result, we allow the appeal to the extent of holding that the appellants could not be regarded as manufacturers of ldquo dewatering systems rdquo . The duty demand on the basis of the total value of the goods cleared, including duty-paid goods, is therefore set aside. It will be open to the Excise authorities to decide, after giving due opportunity to the appellants, whether the different articles manufactured by them, such as the centrifugal pumps and accessories, were liable to duty under the respective items of the Central Excise Tariff, taking into account the relevant exemption notifications. 23. emsp As a consequence of the above order, we also set aside the reduced fine of Rs.2,500 in lieu of confiscation of the seized articles. 24. emsp The appeal is allowed to the extent set out above and is otherwise rejected.
-
1986 (8) TMI 168 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - ECIL related person ... ... ... ... ..... levision Factory, the appellants, made the goods on behalf of ECIL. 13. emsp From this we can say that the price declared by M/s. Television Factory, a price agreed upon between them and ECIL, is not an acceptable price under section 4 of the Customs Act, and that the only acceptable price for assessment is the price at which the TV receiver sets are sold to independent customers by ECIL. The price quoted by Television Factory, the appellants, is a dictated price, a captive price and not an independent market price determined only by the forces of supply and demand, and is not a price that was the sole consideration for the sale. From the various things we have seen in the agreement, M/s. Television Factory and ECIL are related persons and the action of the Assistant Collector in demanding a part IV price list was quite correct since the assessable value must be governed by section 4(1)(a)(iii) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 14. The appeal is accordingly rejected.
-
1986 (8) TMI 166 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Re-entry of duty paid goods into factory ... ... ... ... ..... e issue, it is unnecessary for us to go into the other points raised before us in detail. Suffice it to say that the procedure followed by the appellants was within the knowledge of the authorities and had, in fact been evolved over the years in agreement with the authorities. The appellants were sending intimations to the authorities at the time of receipt of defective compressors, were maintaining accounts in Form V, were issuing separate gate passes and were making a separate note in their monthly RT 12 returns regarding re-issue of the repaired compressors. The charge of clandestine removal is, therefore, not proved nor is any suppression or fraud established to warrant invoking of limitless time for making of duty demand under Rule 9(2). Imposition of penalty of the amount of over Rs. 3 crores under Rule 173Q was also not warranted. 22. emsp In view of our above discussion, we set aside the impugned order and allow this appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1986 (8) TMI 165 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Customs - Rate of duty - Warehoused goods ... ... ... ... ..... peal, the appellants have stated that C.V. duty was charged by the Custom House arbitrarily, which forced them to keep the goods in the warehouse. C.V. duty was charged with the order of the Collector of Customs. Unless there is a doubt of classification, the bill of entry does not go to the Collector for a decision. Apparently, there was some doubt in the mind of the assessing officer because of which the classification was decided by the Collector in this case. Simply because the appellate authority (Central Board of Excise and Customs) reversed the order of the Collector, it cannot be said that the assessment was arbitrary. The appellants have not adduced any reason as to why they considered the Collector rsquo s decision as arbitrary. The contention of the appellants, therefore, does not have any force. 11. emsp In view of the above discussions, we find no infirmity in the orders of the lower authorities. In the result, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal.
-
1986 (8) TMI 158 - ITAT PUNE
... ...
... ... ..... shtra State Warehousing Corporation. Alternatively and additionally this was a charitable, organisation which was engaged in the object of general public utility not involving activity in the profit within the meaning of s. 2(15) of the It Act. For these reasons, we are satisfied that it was entitled to exemption under ss. 11 and 12 of the IT Act and therefore, the ITO was not justified in bringing to tax the surplus in the income and expenditure account of the fund for the asst. yrs. 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82. So far as the asst. yr. 1977-78 is concerned for the reasons stated above, we would confirm the order of the AAC and hold that the ITO was not justified in disallowing the expenditure which was spent on the objects of the trust nor was he justified in taxing the donations received from the Corporation which were correctly deleted by the AAC. 7. For the aforementioned reasons, the order of the AAC for all years in confirmed and the Departmental appeals are dismissed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 155 - ITAT MADRAS-B
... ...
... ... ..... r that the same has not substantially reduced his capacity to work. It goes without saying that if the assessee had not suffered from paralysis, he could have done much better in life. The permanent disability from which he suffers has certainly marred his career and will always stand in his way in improving his lot. Thus, taking a broader view, I am of the opinion that the assessee suffers from a physical disability which has the effect of reducing substantially his capacity to engage in a gainful employment or occupation as contemplated under section 80U(ii). My view derives support from the CBDT Circular No. 246, dated 20-9-1978 see Taxmann s Direct Taxes Circulars Vol. 1, 1985 edn., page 579 . According to this circular of the CBDT, an assessee who is suffering from paralysis of lower limbs is entitled to relief under section 80U. I, therefore, accept the claim of the assessee for each of the assessment years under consideration. 5. In the result, the appeals are allowed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 152 - ITAT MADRAS-A
Business Expenditure, Allowability of, Business Disallowance, Gratuity ... ... ... ... ..... haser will discharge the gratuity liability when the occasion for payment arises. This mode of settlement of gratuity is recognised by the High Court in Sarada Binding Works case where it is observed as follows It must be noted, in this connection, that the transferor of a business as in this case has normally got three options (1) to allow the employees to continue in service in his other business, if any (2) to discharge the employees on payment of retrenchment compensation, gratuity and notice pay, etc., or (3) to transfer their service along with the gratuity liability to the purchaser on his undertaking to discharge the entire gratuity liability as and when the occasion for its payment arises. 9. In the light of the above discussion, we uphold the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) not under section 37 but under the second limb of section 40A(7)(b)(i). The Commissioner (Appeals) s order is modified to this extent. 10. In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed.
-
1986 (8) TMI 150 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... .S. AHLUWALIA, J.M. I agree with the ultimate conclusion arrived at by my ld. brother and I would like to add that the acceptance by the Courts in income tax and related to proceedings of fantastically low values which are wholly different from the real values has resulted in large scale evasion of law and creation of black money. It is a matter of common knowledge that houses are never available on the so-called standard rents or the letting value mentioned in the Municipal records, result is that the Municipal Committee/Corporations do not realise proper tax nor is the annual letting value of self-occupied properties ever properly taxed. The various authorities given down at the highest levels are misused to get fantastic decisions. I wish the Courts to go behind the apparent values which are being adopted for technical reasons and find out the real market values for the purpose of taxation laws as has been done in this case. Then only can the IT law serve its real purpose.
-
1986 (8) TMI 149 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... enefit of cl. 4 of s. 7 of the WT Act. This would be introducing an anomaly which was never contemplated by the framers of the WT Act. We are, therefore, of the opinion that before this matter is finally decided, it should be found out as a matter of fact as to who are the members of the assessee family, where they actually reside in the 12 months immediately preceding the relevant valuation dates, and whether they or any of them claimed the benefit of this sub-section in respect of those residential premises. It is only after these facts are found that the question of allowing any benefit of this sub-section would arise. Since the CWT has already restored this matter, back to the file of the WTO, for determining the value of the house afresh, we further direct that he shall also decide the assessee rsquo s claim for exemption in the light of our aforesaid discussions. 5. In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeals shall be deemed to have been partly allowed as such.
-
1986 (8) TMI 148 - ITAT JAIPUR
... ...
... ... ..... etc., and all these objections appear to be some kind of haggling activity. On the whole primarily the assessee would have felt satisfied if some of his demands are accepted as the assessee is not in a position to stand up and claim that his figures cannot be disturbed. In this situation when the assessee is not able to establish that the cost as shown by him is correct and cannot be disturbed which on the fact of if appears to be wrong then probably placing reliance on the departmental valuer report, cannot be said to be altogether wrong. Last but not the least, to make on addition merely based on the valuer s report to my mind, is just not at all proper, as it can in no way be treated to indicate additional investment made by an assessee but the businessmen who are known to invest more in the buildings from their uncounted moneys cannot possibly be checked but for this round about route adopted by the Department especially in cases where no books of account are maintained.
............
|
