Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 228 Records
-
1994 (8) TMI 134 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Import - OGL ... ... ... ... ..... fine and penalty. We find that the adjudicating authority in the impugned order has observed as under in this regard ldquo Having regard to the extenuating circumstances however, particularly in the fact that it was possible to hold the other viewpoint I hold that this case calls for leniency in the imposition of penalty in terms of Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 . Therefore, keeping in mind the above observation of the Collector and also in the facts and circumstances of the case and also having regard to the date on which the importation took place, and the nature of the goods rsquo susceptibility to evaporation and also the plea of heavy demurrage incurred, we are inclined to think that interests of justice would be served if the quantum of fine is reduced to Rs. 12,50,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs and Fifty Thousand) and the penalty to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) and we order accordingly. Except for the above modification, the appeal is otherwise dismissed.
-
1994 (8) TMI 133 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... tended solely for export but also all other goods required in connection with the packaging of such goods. Under these circumstances, we hold that the various types of cellular expanded polyethylene sheets which are placed in containers or cartons for preventing damage during transportation and in handling would also be eligible for exemption under Notification No. 186/75 provided the procedural requirements and other conditions laid down in the notification are fulfilled. 7. emsp It is seen that the question whether in respect of the goods in question the appellants had fulfilled the conditions of the Notification No. 186/75 was not examined by the lower authorities. We, therefore, remand the matter to the Assistant Collector for reconsideration of the matter in accordance with law. We direct that he should keep in view the findings in this order and grant a personal hearing to the appellants before deciding the matter. 8. Both the appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
-
1994 (8) TMI 132 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... d considering the fact that the question whether the applicants rsquo understanding about the exemption, was correct and bona fide, is presently a contentious issue, and having regard, further, to their financial liquidity aspect, the order proposed by Hon rsquo ble Member (Judicial) would appear to be more appropriate. It is accordingly concurred with. 11. emsp Order per S.L. Peeran, Member (J) . - In terms of the Majority Opinion the applicant shall deposit in cash a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) and furnish bank guarantee, for another sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only), within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On compliance of this order, the balance of duty and penalty shall stand waived and recovery stayed thereof. The registry shall list the case for reporting compliance and for fixing final date for hearing of the appeal, as per the terms of the order, after expiry of the period granted for deposit of the sum, indicated herein.
-
1994 (8) TMI 131 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Demand ... ... ... ... ..... this stage is as to how the classification list initially filed was approved. Copies filed are not very clear and legible but once the appellants had declared that they were also manufacturing Homeopathic medicines, this aspect was required to be taken into cosideration by the proper officer. Of course, the details were required to be furnished by the appellants but if they had failed to do so, it was open to the department to call for the same and in the absence thereof to keep approval provisional if necessary. 18. emsp The question of calculation of exact amount etc. is a matter of detail which could be considered more appropriately at the time of the hearing of the main appeal and so also the question of the test reports or certificates filed by either sides which is a matter of evidence. 19. In view of the above, looking to the totality of the facts and circumstances, we waive the pre-deposit of amount in question and stay the recovery during the pendency of the appeal.
-
1994 (8) TMI 130 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand and penalty - Offence ... ... ... ... ..... period in question. The chart is reproduced below Statement of so-called note book and internal gate passes - Period Production as per rough note MTs Production entered in RG-I register MTs Difference of rough note and RG-I MTs A B C D Aug. 85 to Feb. 87 10909.500 6882.515 4026.985 Mar. 87 to July 87 emsp (23rd) 743.000 261.960 481.040 Dec. 83 to Sep.84 (20th) 6138.160 5423.920 714.240 Total 17790.660 12568.395 52222.265 Transferred to cutting forging MTs Runners and Risers MTs Total E and F MTs E F G 3351.510 238.755 3590.265 180.240 9.270 189.310 453.950 249.881 703.831 3985.700 497.906 4483.406 Dfference as per rough notes and RG-I register 5222.265 MTs Transferred to cutting and runner and risers 4483.406 MTs Difference of 1 and 2 738.859 MTs For Metal Forgings P. Ltd. Sd/ (O.P. Sethi) 5. emsp In the result we confirm the demand of duty on 738.859 MTs and reduce the personal penalty imposed upon the appellants to Rs .25,000/-. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1994 (8) TMI 129 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Restoration of ... ... ... ... ..... e High Court had desired the expeditious disposal and if possible on 4-10-1993 or in near future thereafter. The matter had been repeatedly coming up for hearing from time to time and the Tribunal had been making constant efforts to dispose of the appeal but due to lapse on the part of the appellant, the matter could not be disposed of. However, again the appellants make a prayer for restoration of appeal. We do not appreciate the conduct of the appellant and keeping in view the submissions made by both sides and regrets expressed by the learned Advocate and the assurances she has given for the future, we hold that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause. We restore the appeal to its original number and further order that the matter will be heard on 11-10-1994. It is made clear that no adjournment will be granted in any case. In the event of appellants rsquo non-appearance or seeking adjournment on that date, the Tribunal will dispose of the matter on merits ex parte.
-
1994 (8) TMI 128 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Cl;assification ... ... ... ... ..... ding the application of Rule 5 is not acceptable, proceeds on the assumption, without any basis or evidence that the value declared is false. Both the Additional Collector and the Collector (Appeals) have, thus, in their orders, assumed what had to be established i.e. the value declared by the importer was false or in any case not acceptable under the law. These orders therefore suffer from want of application of mind and hence are not sustainable. The value of the goods will have to be determined afresh on the basis of evidence available in accordance with the provisions of the Section 14 of the Act and the valuation rules. 8. emsp In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent that the classification of impugned goods is confirmed under sub-heading 2504.90 of the CET, the question of valuation is remanded to the original authority for de novo consideration to be decided in the light of the observations made above and in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
-
1994 (8) TMI 127 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... classifiable under Item 51A, which is more or less in pari materia with Heading 82.05. 9.The appeals are, therefore, rejected. 10. emsp Assent per Harish Chander, President . - I have perused the order written by my learned brother Shri Gowri Shankar. I agree with the conclusions arrived at by the Member. However, I would like to add the following observations. 11. emsp The Tribunal in the case of Motiram Tolaram and Others v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, reported in 1987 (29) E.L.T. 278 (Tribunal) Paras 10 and 19 had held as under - 12. emsp The Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Rajkot v. M/s. Surgichem reported in 1987 (27) E.L.T. 548 (Tribunal) 1987 (11) ECR 245 (CEGAT SB-C) Paras 5 and 6 had held as under - 13. emsp In view of the above observations, I hold that the appellants are not eligible to classify the goods under Tariff Heading 84.45/48 and the correct classification would be under Heading 82.05/8207.90. In the result, the appeals are rejected.
-
1994 (8) TMI 126 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Electric motors - `Geared Motor’ ... ... ... ... ..... with the relevant provisions or statutory rules of interpretation put up thereon. For exigibility to excise duty the entity must be specified in positive terms under a particular tariff entry. In its absence it may be deducted from a proper construction of the tariff entry. There is neither intendment nor equity in a taxing statute. Nothing is implied. Neither can we insert nor anything can we delete but it should be interpreted and construed as per the words the legislature has chosen to employ in the Act or Rules. There is no room for assumption or presumptions. The object of the Parliament has to be gathered from the language used in the statute......... rdquo 10. emsp Since in the case of appellants, motors and gears are separate, connected only by a metal stap, these cannot be considered as internally geared motors rsquo and have been correctly held as classifiable under Tariff Item 85.01(2) of the then CTA. We accordingly reject the appeal and uphold the impugned order.
-
1994 (8) TMI 125 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Reference Application ... ... ... ... ..... d Steel v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise reported in 1993 (66) E.L.T. 594 and held to be not correct. The goods under consideration are graphite electrode and mercury anode. While they function as such electrodes they are only graphite and mercury. Such goods are not machinery, machine, equipment, tools, appliance, apparatus, which are the excluded items in terms of the Explanation Clause in Rule 57A. In the said provision, parts of such machine, machinery etc. are not covered. In view of this position, the argument against the Tribunal decision for making out a question for reference to the High Court fails. We accordingly dismiss the Reference Application. We incidentally find that the West Regional Bench of the Tribunal had also dismissed the Reference Application filed by the department against their decision allowing modvat credit in respect of Titanium Anodes used similarly in the manufacture of caustic soda in the case of Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals Limited.
-
1994 (8) TMI 124 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Demand - Provisional assessment ... ... ... ... ..... in the facts and circumstances have been correctly held to be provisional as held by the learned lower appellate authority. After finalisation of the provisional assessment even though there was delay in raising the demand. The demand should have been raised immediately after finalisation and this apparently was not done and the demand came to be raised on 22-1-1990. There is, however, nothing in law to say that demand raised after final adjustment even if not within six months would be barred by limitation. It is not the case of the appellants that the demand has been raised beyond six months period after adjustment of the duty provisionally paid. While there has been delay on the part of the authorities, in finalising the matter, the appellants also have not approached the authorities for getting the matter settled expeditiously. In view of the above, we hold that in law, the lower appellate authoritys rsquo order is maintainable and the appellants rsquo appeal is rejected.
-
1994 (8) TMI 123 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Restoration of ... ... ... ... ..... w that the appellants were prevented by sufficient cause for not making the payment earlier. We set aside the order dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of provisions under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. We restore the appeal to its original number. Shri Raju Ramchandran, the learned advocate made a prayer that when the Stay Order No. E/278/93-B1 dated 15-9-1993 was passed, the pre-deposit of the penalty amount was dispensed with. Since the stay order does not exist, he made an oral prayer that the pre-deposit as ordered by the Bench for the penalty amount at Rs. 50,000/- may be dispensed with. Shri B.K. Singh, the learned SDR does not object to the same. After hearing both the sides, in the interest of justice, we order that dispensing with the pre-deposit of the penalty amount of Rs. 50,000/- shall continue in terms of stay order No. E/278/93-B1 dated 15-9-1993 read with this order. In the result, application for Restoration of Appeal is allowed.
-
1994 (8) TMI 122 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... - 1992 (62) E.L.T. 17, the Rajasthan High Court had occasion to consider the restriction permitting import only through Bombay and Delhi as incorporated in Item 29 of the Appendix 6 of the Import and Export Policy 1990-1993 and held that restriction was arbitrary and unreasonable and allowed the Writ Petition. The High Court noted the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Kalindi Woollen Mills v. Union of India - 1991 (53) E.L.T. 524 (Cal.) wherein it was held that the restriction was reasonable, having regard to the administrative feasibility for effective control and in order to plug loopholes perpetuated by unscrupulous traders and differed from the Calcutta High Court judgment, holding that power to restrict entry is to be exercised in an arbitrary manner and that the restriction imposed is not justified. 10. emsp Following the ratio of the above judgments, we set aside the confiscation of goods and the penalty and allow the appeal with consequential relief.
-
1994 (8) TMI 121 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Baggage - Goods imported as baggage by passenger after a stay abroad for a period of two years
-
1994 (8) TMI 120 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... under - ldquo We have heard the pleas advanced from both sides. We prima facie agree with the submissions of the ld. Consultant that the case is apparently covered by the Tribunal rsquo s judgment in the case of Trimurti Weldmesh (P) Ltd. (supra). We also note the poor financial conditions of the applicants and the fact that the factory is lying closed for the last three years. Therefore, having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the applicants would be facing undue hardship if they were asked to deposit any amount of duty. Accordingly, the stay application is allowed unconditionally. rdquo The facts of the present case are similar as that of Ved Electronics. Accordingly, we are of the view that if the applicants are desired to deposit the duty amount of Rs. 4,01,255.71 it will cause undue hardship to them. We, therefore, dispense with pre-deposit of duty amount and stay recovery thereof. Accordingly stay application is allowed.
-
1994 (8) TMI 119 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Reference to Supreme Court ... ... ... ... ..... the Bombay High Court and also the ruling of the Calcutta High Court and the report in the E.L.T. of the pendency of the SLP in the Supreme Court of the case referred to above, we are of the view that in asmuch as there is an apparent conflict in the view taken by the various Courts with reference to the scope and interpretation of Section 59 of the Customs Act, 1962 with reference to the leviability of interest on warehoused goods, when the party concerned is not liable to pay any duty by reason of any exemption of the goods in question, we are inclined to think that the matter in the interests of justice will have to be resolved by the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court in the above facts and circumstances. In this view of the matter we think it is expedient that a reference should be made direct to the Supreme Court and accordingly we refer the above matter to the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court, through the President of the Tribunal in terms of Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962.
-
1994 (8) TMI 118 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation of Indian currency on the charge that it represents sale proceeds of smuggled gold
-
1994 (8) TMI 117 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation of currency ... ... ... ... ..... respondents alongwith Shri Naseem Ahmed, Zabbar and Mohd. Sadiq. Both the respondents have stated at the earliest that they know nothing about the currency and that Shri Naseem Ahmed had revealed to the Customs Officer that the currency was the sale proceeds of smuggled silver after smuggling it from Pakistan and that Shri Naseem Ahmed had not told the respondents anything about the smuggling. It cannot therefore, be said that the department has discharged the burden of linking the respondents with smuggling of silver and establishing that they had abetted the smuggling of silver. Accordingly, we extend the benefit of doubt to the respondents and uphold the setting aside of personal penalty imposed upon the respondents. 10. emsp In the result, we set aside the finding of the lower Appellate authority directing release of the seized Indian currency to the respondents and uphold the order relating to setting aside of the penalty. The appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
-
1994 (8) TMI 116 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
EDPM Rubber Tubing ... ... ... ... ..... atter before me, there is no dispute as to the product in dispute. The only dispute is whether it is marketable or not and no evidence has been placed by the Department. As already observed, as a third Member, I am not to give my independent decision. I have to agree with one of the Members who have referred the matter before me. In view of the above discussion, I agree with the conclusions arrived at by my learned brother Shri S.K. Bhatnagar, Vice-President. The question referred to me is answered accordingly. The matter may be placed before the regular Bench for passing appropriate orders, in accordance with law. Dated 5-8-1994. Sd/- (Harish Chander) President FINAL ORDER 21. emsp In view of the majority opinion the order of the Collector is set aside and the matter is remanded for de novo consideration in the light of the observations and findings of the Vice-President and the law. Sd/- (G.A. Brahma Deva) Member (J) 18-8-1994 Sd/- (S.K. Bhatnagar) Vice President 12-8-1994
-
1994 (8) TMI 115 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Modvat credit vis-a-vis Drawback ... ... ... ... ..... late authority in his order has observed that it cannot be stated that the drawback so availed is strictly restricted to Customs duty paid and has also entered a finding that ldquo Under the circumstances, the appellant has not let in any conclusive evidence to my satisfaction to show that what he had claimed related only to Customs duty rdquo . In such a situation, the best course for the authority was to refer the matter to the Drawback Directorate and to ascertain as to the basis on which the drawback rate was fixed and also whether the Central Excise duty component has been taken into reckoning while fixing the drawback rate. In view of the above we hold that the matter requires to be examined further and therefore, hold that the order of the learned appellate authority is not proper and has to be set aside. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the learned appellate authority for de novo consideration in the light of our above observations.
............
|