Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 354 Records
-
1990 (8) TMI 253 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Proforma Credit ... ... ... ... ..... cceptable or useful definition of the term either in the dictionary or in technical literature. The words and phrases ldquo component parts rdquo and ldquo raw materials rdquo have been interpreted by the Supreme Court in the case of CCE v. East End Paper Industries Ltd. - 1989 (43) E.L.T. 201 as ldquo anything that enters into and forms part of manufacturing process or is required to make the article marketable rdquo . 9. In the instant case,, there is no dispute that BOPP film is used as separators in the manufacture of the final product viz. rigid plastic laminates. Therefore, applying the ratio of the decisions of the Supreme Court (supra), the benefit of proforma credit is available in respect of BOPP film in terms of Rule 56A. The benefit of Notification 71/71 is also admissible as BOFP film is covered by the term ldquo any plastic material rdquo . 10. In the result, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order and uphold the same. The appeal is thus dismissed.
-
1990 (8) TMI 252 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Nut making machine ... ... ... ... ..... the machines is attached vide Annexure-A. In the B/E description has been given as automatic multi-station nut making machine whereas the figure Nos. 5 and 6 which are annexure with this order clearly states that finishing presses are two station machines with solid series being partly of vertical and partly of horizontal construction. The same issue had come up before the Tribunal in the case of Guestkeen Williams v. CC cited supra. In the grounds of appeal the appellant has made a prayer for grant of relief in respect of machine model PKE and no relief has been claimed for PKZ. While disposing of the appeal the Tribunal should not extend the scope of the appeal in view of the above discussion. We are of the view that the machine PKE is not entitled to the benefit of Exemption Notification 40/78. 5. In the result, the Revenue rsquo s appeal is allowed in terms of the prayer made in the grounds of appeal and the findings of the Tribunal are only confined to machine model PKE.
-
1990 (8) TMI 251 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Stay application by department ... ... ... ... ..... able. It is not disputed that the financial position of the respondents is very sound. 10. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the facts and circumstances do not justify the grant of stay. The above captioned eight stay applications are dismissed. While disposing of the stay applications, we have duly taken into consideration the financial position of the respondents. 11. Before we part with the matters, we would like to make further observations that while disposing of the stay applications which are in the nature of interlocutory orders, the facts and circumstances of each and every case have to be looked into. 12. Both the sides plead before us that a very large number of matters are pending before the Tribunal and there is also recurring effect and as such early hearing be ordered in these cases. In the interest of justice, we order that the above captioned appeals will be beared on merits on 19th October, 1990.
-
1990 (8) TMI 250 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal — Condonation of delay ... ... ... ... ..... plication on behalf of the Department for condonation of delay and secondly, the reasons for delay as given in the Dy. Collector rsquo s letter were not acceptable. In the matter before us Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Cus. v. Ajanta Tube Ltd. had confirmed the findings of the Tribunal. 8. In view of the above discussions, we are of the view that there was negligence on the part of the appellant and appellant was not prevented by sufficient cause for late filing of the appeals. We do not find it a fit case to exercise our discretion in condoning the delay in the terms of provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. Accordingly, the above captioned 3 applications for condonation of delay are rejected. 9. Since we have rejected the applicant rsquo s prayer for condonation of delay in the above captioned 3 appeals the appeals as well as stay applications are dismissed being hit by limitation and we are not going into the merits of the same.
-
1990 (8) TMI 249 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Adjudication — Electricity ... ... ... ... ..... ke into consideration only that part of the electricity deducting the quantity of energy supplied to the various associated companies from the total supply of energy received from DVC. The High Court rsquo s order is also clear that this should be done on a monthly basis. 13. We, therefore, direct that formula laid down by the High Court should be applied to the matter. We have made clear the implications of the High Court rsquo s order. The Collector should now examine the correctness of the demand against the appellants in the light of our directions which are entirely based on the Judgment of the Patna High Court. If these two requirements were not earlier followed due to any reason, the demand now should be revised in the light of our directions. The Appellants should be given adequate opportunity to make representations in this regard. A fresh order should be passed after such representations are considered by the Collector. 13A. The appeal is disposed of in these terms.
-
1990 (8) TMI 248 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand — Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... ing to this issue is that proceeding initiated either under Rule 10 or Rule 10-A cannot survive, as the said rules have been deleted with effect from 6-8-1977 and 1,. such deletion has been made without saving clause. 15. This issue is covered by the earlier decision of this Tribunal, in the case of M/s. Atma Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh and others reported in 1984 (17) E.L.T. 331, it was held that the proceedings initiated with reference to a rule or provision validly subsisting at the time of initiation proceedings can continue in spite of repeal or substitution of original proceedings. This was further followed in the case of Jaipur Udyog Ltd. Sawaimadhopur v. Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur - 1987 (27) E.L.T. 177 and in other subsequent cases. We feel this issue was well considered in these cases and we fully concur with this view. Accordingly, the appellants fail on this issue. 16. These three appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
-
1990 (8) TMI 247 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... er was looked into by us at the time of arguments and we could not see that same could be linked with the appellant. Even the documents which were proved to be of the appellant did not justify the inference drawn by the Additional Collector about the factory of the appellant having been commissioned during the relevant period. If that be so, then the goods in question, did not belong to the appellant nor they have anything to do with them. The other parties are not in the appeal before us and it is not necessary to discuss those aspects of the case which pertain to other noticees. 7. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned order, as far as it pertains to the appellant, cannot be sustained. So, we pass the following final order The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is modified as far as it relates to the appellant and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed upon M/s. Ambika Spg. Mills and Rs. l,000/- on Sh. Vivek Wahi, partner of M/s. Ambika Spg. Mills are set aside.
-
1990 (8) TMI 246 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... at there is no material for the Department to come to the conclusion that the item imported is anti-oxidant (for organic rubber chemicals). The Chemical test report also does not support the Department. In the citation referred to supra, it has been held that in case a substance has several alternative uses and if it is not used predominantly as a rubber processing chemical, then it would not be correct to describe it so merely because this description finds place in the Central Excise Tariff. The Department has chosen to look into one such application of the imported product in the literature without any supportive evidence. They have not even cared to ascertain whether the imported goods are predominantly being used as rubber chemicals. In that view of the matter, the impugned orders have to be set aside and the claim of the appellants have to be allowed on the basis of the evidence produced by them which has not been controverted by the Department. The appeals are allowed.
-
1990 (8) TMI 245 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Project Imports ... ... ... ... ..... Court in the case of M/s. Hemraj Govardhandas v. Assistant Collector of Customs, Surat and Others - 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J-350) was also considered. 21. Thus, whether the issue is considered from first principles or in the light of judicial pronouncements and decisions of this Tribunal, there is no doubt in the present case that the colour scanner imported was entitled to the benefit of full exemption from auxiliary duty of customs in terms of Notification No. 311/86, dated 13-5-1986, though it was assessed to basic customs duty under Project Imports under Heading 98.01 of the Customs Tariff Schedule. In this view of the matter, I agree with the order recorded by Shri K. Prakash Anand, Member (Technical). ORDER 22. In view of the majority opinion the impugned order passed by the Collector of Customs denying the benefit of Notification No. 311/86 dated 13-5-1986 in respect of auxiliary duty is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellants, if any.
-
1990 (8) TMI 244 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Record Book ... ... ... ... ..... pt or manuscript. Without such details being entered in the various columns, the book would lose its intrinsic value and would be worthless and meaningless. Only on the columns being completed does the publication become informative to a parent and/or doctor of the child whose particulars are entered in it. The publication is not of any interest to a parent and/or doctor and/or school other than that of the child whose details it contains. It is not a diary which is defined in the Chambers Dictionary as ldquo a daily record, a book for making daily records, noting engagements etc. rdquo and in Webster rsquo s Dictionary as ldquo a daily written record especially of the writer rsquo s own experiences. However, being a record book, it is an article similar to a diary, falling under Heading 48.20. The imports are therefore, assessable under Heading 48.20 as articles similar to diaries. 11. In the light of the above discussion, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal.
-
1990 (8) TMI 243 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand — Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... r. Since it is the buyer rsquo s use that consummates and concludes the exemption process, it is in the fitness of things that he should also be the one who must ultimately answer for the duty. 12. The time limit that the law provides for demands is applicable only to the factory that manufactures the goods. For example, time limit must start ticking from the so-called relevant date. None of the relevant dates can fit a demand under Rule 196. The time limit provided by Section 11-A of the Act cannot fence these demands in . Therefore, we do not find any substance in the arguments that the demand cannot be sustained under Rule 196. The appeal of the department is only to the extent of the correctness of the Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad rsquo s adjudication holding that in the Off-site plant, usage of Ammonia is in the process of fertilizer manufactured and since we have already held that such a conclusion is not well founded, the department rsquo s appeal is allowed.
-
1990 (8) TMI 242 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Artificial teeth ... ... ... ... ..... ell established that in a taxing statute there is no room for any in-tendment but regard must be had to the clear meaning of the words. If the taxpayer is within the plain terms of an exemption he cannot be denied its benefit by calling in aid any supposed intention of the exempting authority. In a Court of Law or Equality what the legislature intended to be done or not to be done can only be legitimately as.c.ertained from that which it has chosen to enact either in express words or by reasonable or necessary implication. rdquo 8. Loss of teeth does not make a person handicapped and in view of the dictionary meanings reproduced above, teeth cannot be equated with artificial limb. Accordingly, we are of the view that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 164/86-C.E., dated 1st March, 1986 read with Notification No. 71/86-C.E., dated 10th February, 1986. 9. In view of the above dis.c.ussion, there is no merit in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed. .
-
1990 (8) TMI 241 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... purchased the goods through an unknown broker and the payment was made through a broker against the bill in question which was issued by M/s. Haridas and Sons. In such circumstances, the onus had not shifted on to the respondents to prove the licit character of the goods. Accordingly, Point No. (i) is held against the Department. In view of this finding on Point No. (i) the Point No. (ii) does not survive for consideration. Point No. (iii) Since the Department had not established the smuggled nature of the goods the confis.c.ation of the same as ordered by the learned Assistant Collector was not in accordance with law and on that count, the respondents could not have been penalised under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Accordingly, the learned Collector of Customs (A) was correct in allowing the appeal of the respondents. I, therefore, find no force in this appeal filed by the Collector of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal. Accordingly, this appeal stands dismissed.
-
1990 (8) TMI 240 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... s is more apposite. 31. In this view of the matter, I answer the 3 questions posed by the two Learned Members who heard the appeal in the first instance 1. It was refund of duty (yet to be paid) and, in that sense, advance credit but subject to deduction on quantities of sugar exported and the quantity, if any, lost due to any reason. It was also subject to the entire quantity produced during May and June 1978 being cleared from the factory. However, it was not provisional with regard to the dispute involved in the present case. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the present case, the time limit for recovery of erroneous credit (refund of duty) on excess production of sugar is to be computed from the date of the credit in the PLA. 3. The entire demand is time-barred. DECISION 32. In view of the majority opinion the impugned order as well as the Order passed by the Assistant Collector are set aside and the appeal is allowed as the entire demand raised was time-barred.
-
1990 (8) TMI 239 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Refund - Export of Black Pepper ... ... ... ... ..... on 10-5-75 i.e. to say after the export of the black pepper in question as contended by the appellants. That apart, circumstances on the record are eloquent against both the appellants. According to their own admission both the appellants filed their Shipping Bills on 7-5-85 in three cases and on 9-5-85 in the fourth case and paid the duty in terms of the said Notifications namely 147/Cus. and 148/85-Cus. both dated 7-5-85. This could not ldquo have happened had the appellants were not aware of the said Notifications levying the duty as contended by them. This circumstance by itself conclusively establishes that the Official Gazette containing both the said Notifications No. 147/85-Cus., dated 7-5-85 and 148/85-Cus., dated 7-5-85 was made available to the public on 7-5-85 itself. 6. In the light of above, we find no substance in the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants. 7. Thus in the result we uphold the impugned order and reject all the four appeals.
-
1990 (8) TMI 238 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... last issue namely eligibility to the benefit of exemption under Notification 115/75, we note that the notification exempts goods falling under T.I. 68 and manufactured in factories covered by any of the industries specified in the schedule annexed thereto from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon. Item 4 of the schedule appended to the notification covers ldquo oil mill and solvent extraction industry rdquo . The appellants rsquo product i.e. low FFA oil falls under T.I. 68 and is manufactured in a factory covered by the oil mill and solvent extraction industry and is therefore eligible for exemption under Notification 115/75. 8. In the result we hold that low FFA oil manufactured by the appellants falls for classification under T.1.68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and is exempt from payment of excise duty by virtue of Srl. No. 4 of the Table annexed to Notification 115/75. 9. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in the above terms.
-
1990 (8) TMI 237 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Clasification ... ... ... ... ..... d of five years can be invoked by the department in demanding duty from the respondents who had filed a declaration under Notification 111/78 dated 9-5-1978 claiming exemption Notification 69/73-C.E., dated 1-3-1973. We do not find, as alleged by the department, that there is any material suppression of facts. The words ldquo tubular poles rdquo in the declaration of goods manufactured was sufficient indication of the manufacturing activity of the respondents. They had also clearly mentioned the claim of the exemption Notification 69/73. In view of these declarations and claim it was incumbent upon the Revenue authorities to satisfy themselves about the claim of the respondents. In these facts and circumstances, therefore, it cannot be held that the respondents had wilfully mis-declared or suppressed any facts warranting invokation of larger period of 5 years. We would, therefore, hold the demand valid for a period of six months and no more. 5. Appeal disposed of accordingly.
-
1990 (8) TMI 236 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Refund - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... refund for the period 25th Dec., 1984 to 25-9-1985 (when the appellant filed a revised classification list under Tariff Item 59(3) till 25-9-1985 when the order on classification was passed by the Asst. Collector of Central Excise) in terms of Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with the proviso to Sec. 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The scope and amplitude of Sec. 11B vis-a-vis the restrictive applicability of Rule 233B extracted above will have to be considered in the light of the evidence available on record in the facts and circumstances of this case and inasmuch as the matter was not argued in this perspective before the authorities below and has not been considered, we are inclined to think that in the interests of justice the matter would require reconsideration in the light of our observations above. In this view of the matter we set aside the impugned order appealed against and remit the matter for re-consideration in accordance with law.
-
1990 (8) TMI 235 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... and plant which are covered by the heading. Serial (7) of the examples mentions ldquo (7). Cooling columns (e.g., for the bread grain milling industry) rdquo . Although bread grain milling industry has been mentioned as an example within this serial, but the cooling towers will fall within the broad description of ldquo cooling columns rdquo . ldquo Cooling tower rdquo also clearly falls within the purview of machinery and plant designed to submit materials (solid, liquid or gaseous) to a cooling process in order to cause a simple change of temperature. Therefore, ldquo cooling towers rdquo will fall under Heading 84.17. Parts of a machine is classifiable under the heading in which the main machine is classified. The imported fill packs are parts of cooling towers. Hence, the imported goods are classifiable under Heading 84.17. Since the goods are classifiable under this specific heading, the residuary Heading 84.59 is ruled out. 16. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.
-
1990 (8) TMI 234 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Insulating Compound for Cables ... ... ... ... ..... this is indicative of the fact that the product is used in insulation shielding of power cables. The Chemical Examiner has not set out the basis on which he is said to have opined that the product is not an insulating (impregnating or filling) compound. The subject product evidently has to be applied on to cables and has been specially formulated for this purpose to impart the necessary properties, acquires the degree of cross-linking that is necessary to make it an effective insulation shield. We do not see why the product cannot be said to be a cable insulating compound within the meaning of the notification. In the state of the evidence on record, it is more proper, in our opinion, to conclude that the subject product is a cable insulating compound. In this view of the matter, the product is eligible for the benefit of Customs Notification No. 196/84. 13. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.
............
|