|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 202 Records
-
1994 (5) TMI 85 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ommissioner, Goa in the case of V.M. Salgaocar and Brothers (P) Limited v. Assistant Collector, Marmagoa, 1982 (10) E.L.T. 322 (Goa), in which it has been observed in para 21 that ldquo any vessel that navigates beyond the inland waters is sea going or an ocean going vessels. rdquo 20. emsp In the case of Panduronga Timblo Industries and Others v. Union of India, AIR 1992 SCW 1158, the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court, after discussing the definitions of barge, boat, ship and vessels, held that the definition of vessel was wide enough to cover both boats propelled exclusively by oars as well as boats fitted with engines. 21. emsp Thus, we consider that the boats manufactured by the appellants were even otherwise eligible for exemption as ocean going vessels. 22. emsp As on these points alone, we consider that the appeals merit acceptance, we do not consider it necessary to discuss the other points raised by the appellants. 23. Thus, we allow both the appeals and order accordingly.
-
1994 (5) TMI 84 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... penalties have been imposed on the basis of classification of the steel balls under Tariff Heading 84.82. In view of our finding on the question of classification and applicability of Notification 162/86 or 62/86 demands of duty and penalties on some of the assessees herein would not be sustainable. 10. In short, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessees are allowed with consequential relief to the assessees. 11. Before parting, we may say that both the sides have relied on certain citations of general propositions such as (1) Heading of Tariff to be interpreted in the light of Chapter Notes, (2) definition in the Tariff to be followed, (3) specific prevails over general, (4) use is not relevant for classification (5) opinion of an expert should not be brushed out of hand, and (6) order under Section 37B by the CBEC is not binding on appellate authority etc. We have taken those citations also into consideration while arriving at the aforesaid findings.
-
1994 (5) TMI 83 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
MODVAT Credit ... ... ... ... ..... not been expedient commercially to follow other process. In the instant case, Grinding Belts are no doubt used in the process of manufacture of handtools but their operation in the entire process is that of a tool, apparatus or contrivance which falls in the Exclusion category. At one point the appellant had pleaded that Grinding Belts are used like steel balls in a cement mill. Steel balls in the cement mill are used for crushing etc., and cannot be termed as tools or apparatus. Operationally, therefore, they are different from the use of Grinding Belts as Grinding Belts are used for cleaning and polishing and function as tools. Other issues are not very relevant and therefore are not being specifically commented upon. 10. Having regard to the above findings that Grinding Belt falls in the category of Exclusion items under Rule 57-A, I hold that Modvat credit will not be admissible on them. In this view of the matter, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal is rejected.
-
1994 (5) TMI 82 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ices, which had not been done. On investigation and on the basis of the price list received from the manufacturer M/s. Konika Japan (Export Division) Overseas Department, it was found that the value of the consignment was Rs. 86,420/- as against the declared CIF value of Rs. 43,437/-. The appellants have challenged the authenticity of the pricelist received from the manufacturer. This aspect of the matter calls for categorical finding which is not reflected in the impugned order. 11. emsp Taking all the relevant considerations into account, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the competent adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication after complying with the principles of natural justice. As the goods are reported to be in the custody of the revenue authorities, the de novo adjudication proceedings should be completed expeditiously, preferably within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. The appeal is thus, disposed of by way of remand.
-
1994 (5) TMI 81 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
SSI Exemption - Brand name of other manufacturer affixed on goods not eligible for SSI exemption
-
1994 (5) TMI 80 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
SSI Exemption - Brand name ... ... ... ... ..... on of facts. The appellants have stated that they had given all the details including the collaboration agreement as well as catalogue of the company. It has also been argued that the officials had scrutinised these documents and they were aware of the affixing of the word Festo rsquo which is also the collaborater rsquo s name. There is no detailed finding with regard to his plea and also on the plea of computation of duty, and on the plea that some of the items were not branded items and some were bought out items. It is just proper that the issue pertaining to the limitation and computation of duty is remanded to the original authorities for de novo consideration. The appellants are to be given an opportunity to establish their plea that there is no suppression in the matter and the officials were aware of these facts. The appellants are entitled to cross- examine the department officials to establish their case. In the result, the appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1994 (5) TMI 79 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Natural Justice - Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... stice, we are of the view that it is a fit case where the matter should be remanded. Shri A.K. Singhal, learned JDR has also got no objection for the remand of the matter in view of the facts and circumstances explained by the learned advocate. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority having jurisdiction. We further direct that the Adjudicating Authority shall supply the copies of the seized documents on which the SCNs. are based and also allow the appellants to inspect the records in accordance with law. It is further directed that an opportunity of personal hearing may be granted to the appellant in respect of 12 show cause notices. It is also directed that the appellant shall co-operate with the Revenue Authorities for the completion of the adjudication proceedings. In view of the above discussion, the stay application is allowed. The appeal is also allowed by way of remand. (Pronounced and dictated in the open Court)
-
1994 (5) TMI 78 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay - Strictures against Revenue
... ... ... ... ..... it may be stated that the present application has been filed by the Revenue in a most perfunctory manner. Even the stake involved in the present case is not mentioned. To add further it does not say that the issue has a recurring effect, though the learned SDR attempted to argue that it has a recurring effect. These observations are only for the guidance of the Department in future and it is for the authorities concerned to take care while filing such stay applications. 6. emsp On merits, we do not find that it is a fit case where we should exercise our inherent powers to suspend the operation of the impugned Order-in-Appeal as the question of interpretation of Customs Tariff Item is involved which requires detailed examination at the time of hearing of the appeal on merits. 7. emsp In the result, the Stay Application is rejected. However, the Revenue would be at liberty to move an application for out of turn hearing, if so advised. (Dictated and pronounced in the open court)
-
1994 (5) TMI 77 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Modvat credit - Recovery of - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... crutiny of the various evidence referred to above would reveal that records of supply of radiator parts to M/s. Bhagavathy and this fact is also supported by the MODVAT declarations filed by the suppliers of Radiator parts. If these units did not supply radiator parts to the appellants it does not stand to reason as to why no proceedings were drawn against those suppliers if the MODVAT declarations were wrong. On a query from the Bench in this regard, the learned DR after scrutiny of the documents submitted that he is not able to give any reply to the same. Therefore, on consideration of the entire evidence on record, we are inclined to hold that there is no acceptable legal evidence to substantiate the allegation in the show cause notice in regard to erroneous availment of MODVAT Credit. In this view of the matter on consideration of the entire evidence, we hold that the charge has not been substantiated. In the result the impugned order is set aside and the appeals allowed.
-
1994 (5) TMI 76 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat Credit ... ... ... ... ..... by the Public Sector Undertaking/Canalising Agencies like MMTC/STC are duty paying documents. Learned SDR is not correct in his submission that this trade notice of 19-2-1988 is not relevant to the issue in dispute and in fact, it is very germane to the issue and directly covers the case of the appellants. His argument that it is only the certificates issued by MMTC/STC who have been authorised by the Trade Notice to issue certificates for availment of proforma credit (and subsequently extended to Modvat credit) has been explicitly negatived in para 6 of the order of the Tribunal (supra). To our minds there is no distinction between Devi Dayal and Mahendra Corporation case (supra) and this appeal. Accordingly following the above ratio, we hold that the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Modvat credit during the period on the basis of the certificates issued by Hindustan Copper Ltd., set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal as already pronounced in open court.
-
1994 (5) TMI 75 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat credit and S.S.I. exemption ... ... ... ... ..... re, necessary that the accounts of use of tin plates are required to be maintained separately for use as input for the manufacture of Crown Corks and separately for use as input for the manufacture of Metal Containers. The Asstt. Collector shall verify if the accounts of use of tin plates are maintained separately and the duty paid on tin plates used as input for Crown Corks is utilized for payment of duty on Crown Corks then to that extent the respondent shall be eligible for availing the Modvat credit. The above findings can be summarized as under - (a) Modvat credit on Crown Corks and SSI exemption under Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 could be availed of on PP Caps and Metal Containers simultaneously. (b) Modvat credit of duty on that portion of the imported tin plates can be availed on clearances of Crown Corks which have been used as input in the manufacture of Crown Corks. Subject to the above findings, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
1994 (5) TMI 74 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Shortage and excess ... ... ... ... ..... ned on the basis of average weight. Average weight cannot be the basis for determining the quantum of demand. In the absence of any finding about what the exact excess or shortage was hellip .. I find that the demand is based on presumptions and assumptions. Presumptions and assumptions cannot take the form of proof. I therefore hold in these circumstances of this case and evidence available on record and pleaded at the time of hearing that the demand for duty is not sustainable in law. 6. In regard to the imposition of penalty I find that it has been admitted by the appellant and confirmed by the department that the production records were being maintained on the basis of estimated average weight. This method of maintaining records is neither correct nor legally sustainable. Production of goods must be shown in exact numbers, quantity or units. As it was not being done, I hold that the penalty is sustainable in law. In view of the above findings the appeal is partly allowed.
-
1994 (5) TMI 73 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Baggage - Gold - Condition of six months’ stay abroad ... ... ... ... ..... ould at best be pleaded as a mitigating factor. 20. At the same time, it is to be kept in view that from the admitted facts, it is evident that there was no intention on the part of the appellant to evade customs duty which was paid (although by a co-passenger on his behalf) and therefore the charge of evading Customs Duty falls through. 21. Since the duty was paid in foreign exchange, one of the essential conditions of the Customs, I.T.C. as well as FERA Notifications has been duly fulfilled and there was no violation on that score. 22. Looking to the totality of facts and circumstancesm, we hold that the gold was liable to confiscation for violation of the Customs Act read with the Import Trade Control Act and order, but in the circumstances of the case absolute confiscation was not justified. We, therefore, allow it to be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 25,000/- taking note of the fact that full duty has been admittedly paid. We also reduce the penalty to Rs. 5,000/-.
-
1994 (5) TMI 72 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Maintenance of Accounts ... ... ... ... ..... of the appellants rsquo company who was present at that time for average basis as actual weighment was not possible, I find that the Department was right in taking action in respect of the first charge. But as regards MODVAT credit taking into consideration that they have declared it as scrap and there was dispute in respect of item as scrap or otherwise and non-mention of the very item is no bar to avail MODVAT credit since it has been used in the manufacture of the final product. I find that the Tribunal is consistently taking the view that MODVAT credit should not be denied for technical lapses. Accordingly the party is entitled to take MODVAT credit in respect of the item which has been used in the manufacture of final product and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that redemption fine and penalty are excessive and accordingly both redemption fine and penalty are reduced to Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- respectively. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1994 (5) TMI 71 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... old that the ends of justice would be served if the penalty is reduced to Rs. 2,00,000 (Rs. Two lakhs) on appellant Shri Syed Muneeruddin Ahmed. In regard to appellants Shri Ghulam Subhani and Shri Anwar, we hold that they have been involved by appellant Shri Syed Muneeruddin Ahmed and they were only parties for attempt to clear the baggage which belonged to Shri Syed Muneeruddin Ahmed and while knowing it to be so filed papers in the name of Shri Ghulam Subhani. There is nothing on record to show that these two persons were privy to the knowledge about the gold and they knowingly tried to clear the gold. Therefore, we hold that the ends of justice would be served if the penalty on Shri Ghulam Subhani, who signed the baggage declaration form in respect of the baggage not belonging to him, is reduced to Rs. 15,000 (Rs. Fifteen thousand) and on Shri Anwar to Rs. 10,000 (Rs. Ten thousand) and order accordingly. But for the above modifications the appeals are otherwise dismissed.
-
1994 (5) TMI 70 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Forged Products ... ... ... ... ..... urther process of manufacture has been brought on record while the Collector has set out the process of manufacture in 1st para of the impugned orders. From the process brought on record there is a clear evidence that no operation subsequent to forging at all is undertaken by the appellants herein, not even the processes which are mentioned in Notification 223/88. The products of the appellants are, therefore, pure and simple forged products falling under Chapter Heading 7326.19 of the CETA, 1985. Accordingly, we hold that the benefit of Notification 223/88 is applicable to the goods under consideration here. 6. emsp In view of the aforesaid finding, the question of limitation becomes merely of academic interest. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly of the approval of classification list, we hold that the demands are time barred. 7. In view of the foregoing findings, appeals are allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1994 (5) TMI 69 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... etter dt. 6-12-1988, they gave the details of production, quantity and value of these sub-assemblies. Therefore, on the basis of these correspondence, the show-cause notice has proceeded to levy duty on sub-assemblies. The Supdt. has also visited the factory and has made a detail study of the manufacture of the final product on 4-1-1988. The Annexure A rsquo to the show cause notice clearly refers to these facts and Annexure A rsquo clearly states that the proceedings are only in respect of these three sub-assemblies. The statement of Shri G. Jairam and that of Shri S.V. Kasabekar was recorded in October/December rsquo 1988 who also gave the details of 25 parts manufactured for potentiometer. Therefore, there is no question of any suppression in this matter and there is no vagueness also in the issue. In that event of the matter, we hold that the impugned order is not sustainable in law. In the facts and circumstances of the case, hence it is set-aside. The appeal is allowed.
-
1994 (5) TMI 68 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Condonation of delay ... ... ... ... ..... there is no counter affidavit filed by the Revenue. The judgments cited by the learned JDR do not help him. In the matter before us, the appellant had filed the appeal before the Collector (Appeals) bona fidely within the limitation period prescribed under the Act. Incidentally, the limitation for filing of the appeal before the Collector (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal is the same. The Collector had disposed of the appeal in the first week of July, 1993 and the appeal was filed in the month of September, 1993. Learned Advocate stated in his affidavit that delay occurred to prepare the appeal in his office was due to his over busy schedule. In view of the above discussion and keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in late filing of the appeal. The delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. In the result, the miscellaneous application for condonation of delay is allowed.
-
1994 (5) TMI 67 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ndents rsquo contention that the goods are akin to coloured syrups is not tenable because the goods are powders. 62. emsp After looking into the essential characteristics of the product, I agree with the observations of my learned brother, Shri S.K. Bhatnagar, Vice President and the manner of the applicability of the Rules of Interpretation which have been mentioned in paras No. 45 to 47 of his order. I am of the view that the product will be classifiable under Heading 29.36 of the Central Excise Tariff, and I further direct the Registry to place the matter before the original Bench for passing appropriate order. Dated 29-4-1994 Sd/- (Harish Chander) President FINAL ORDER In view of the majority opinion, the products were classifiable under Heading 29.36 of the Central Excise Tariff and there was no need to interfere with classification under this heading. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly. 2. (S.K. Bhatnagar) (Jyoti Balasundaram) Dated 2-5-1994 Vice President Member (J)
-
1994 (5) TMI 66 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... integral parts of the engine without disputing this finding in the grounds of appeal rsquo and without bringing on record any evidence to that effect. It is apparent from the extracts of HSN Explanatory Notes set out that certain gears rsquo and shafts rsquo which are internal parts of the engines would be covered by Tariff Heading 84.83. We do not think it is necessary for us to enter into the controversy and effect of substitution of the word internal rsquo occurring in HSN by the word integral rsquo in Section Note 2(e) of Section XVII of CETA, 1985 in the absence of any evidence required to be adduced by the Revenue and the absence of any contest to the finding of the Collector (Appeals). 7.4 emsp Question before us is purely of construction of the contending Tariff Headings 84.32 and 87.08 with relative Section Notes and Chapter Notes and Interpretative Rules of the Tariff. On this question, Revenue fails. Impugned order is confirmed. Revenue rsquo s appeal is rejected.
....
|
