Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 311 Records
-
1996 (5) TMI 199 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
`Printing and Writing Paper’ - Meaning of ... ... ... ... ..... ng Paper rsquo and a paper fit for both printing and writing, would be entitled to benefit under Serial No. 1 of Table to the Notification No. 24/84-C.E., dated 1-3-1984. Even otherwise, we do not see any good rationale for denying the benefit of lower rate of duty to a paper either fit for printing rsquo only or fit only for writing rsquo while the benefit is extended to a paper fit for both printing and writing. It may be argued by the Revenue that while construing a notification, it is not appropriate for us to go behind the policy reflected in the notification. Yes, it is true if some policy is discernible. But we would be disinclined to attribute irrationality in policy-making to the policy-makers. An interpretation which leads to such irrationality should be avoided. 10. In the circumstances, following respectfully, the ratio of the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the appellants rsquo own case, we allow this appeal with consequential relief to the appellants herein.
-
1996 (5) TMI 198 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... the learned Judicial Member in his order which follows the earlier decision of the Tribunal reported in 1995 (79) E.L.T. 681 that the rotors and stators come into existence independently as excisable goods classifiable under Tariff Item 68. 17. emsp The papers may be placed before the regular Bench for passing the final order in accordance with the majority view. Sd/- emsp (K. Sankararaman) Member (T) emsp emsp FINAL ORDER In accordance with the majority opinion, keeping in view the scope of this appeal, affected, inter alia by not pressing of the point of excisability the rotors and stators are treated as having come into existence in this case independently as excisable goods which are classifiable under the then tariff item 68 as such. The appeals are therefore accepted. Dated 22-5-1996 Sd/- emsp emsp emsp (S.K. Bhatnagar) Vice President I agree for accepting the appeals in terms of earlier judgment of the Tribunal. Dated 22-5-1996 Sd/- emsp emsp (S.L. Peeran) Member (J)
-
1996 (5) TMI 197 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... ame, on and from 16-3-1995, the transformers have been specifically mentioned for availment of Modvat credit on capital goods. The credit is denied only because, the same was availed of in November, 1994 when inclusion of the transformer in Rule 57Q was not there. He also submits that the appellants are prepared to furnish a bank guarantee and they may not be asked to make any cash deposit. 4. emsp After hearing Shri S.V. Singh, the ld. JDR, it is clear that issue as to whether the transformers which the appellant claim to be of specific qualilty, required for use in furnace for melting, could fall within the ambit of Rule 57Q, is the debatable one. Till then, with a view to secure the revenues, the appellants are directed to furnish a bank guarantee for the entire duty amount. They are granted two months to furnish the same. They should report compliance by 5th August, 1996. On compliance there shall be stay against recovery and waiver against pre-deposit of the duty amount.
-
1996 (5) TMI 196 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat - By-products and waste ... ... ... ... ..... rted in 1993 (68) E.L.T. 42 (All.) 1994 (50) ECR 164 (All.) it was held that by the Hon rsquo ble High Court that terms ldquo used rdquo and ldquo consumed rdquo are not identical or synonymous, and credit would be admissible on the inputs used even if not fully consumed. To qualify for Modvat credit what is required is that a given input should be used in the manufacture of final product. There is nothing to show Modvat credit will not be allowed if manufacturer is not able to prove that required input has been exhausted. This was a case where the Petitioners were engaged in the manufacturing fertilisers where the inputs was Sulphuric Acid and in the process of manufacturing fertilisers a by-product, Spent Sulphuric Acid, was obtained. Following the ratio of this judgment and the fact that we are satisfied that this Spent Sulphuric Acid comes out as a by-product, we hold that there is no infirmity in the order of the Collector (Appeals). Revenue appeal is therefore rejected.
-
1996 (5) TMI 194 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Penalty - Classification of goods ... ... ... ... ..... to a particular rate of duty. In this connection he cites the case of Universal Cables Ltd. v. U.O.I. reported in 1977 (1) E.L.T. (J 92). 3. emsp The learned D.R. reiterates the departmental pleas and submits that if misdeclaration was with intent to evade payment of duty penalty was imposable. 4. emsp We have heard both sides. We find that the appellants made a claim to a particular rate of duty describing the goods as Grey Board/Deluxe Grey Board. The issue, we note from the learned advocate rsquo s contention, as regards classification, is still pending with the department. The department was within its right to classify the product under the appropriate heading of the tariff. The fact that the Collector (Appeals) himself had doubts and ramanded the matter and the issue is still pending with the Tribunal would only indicate that a claim was made bona fide for which an assessee cannot be penalised. In these circumstances we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1996 (5) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... t of plain model but of Deluxe model. The Collector (Appeals) was inclined to agree that the 15 deduction from the price allowed by the Assistant Collector was arbitrary and blamed the importer for not furnishing parti-culars. This approach would absolve the Custom House of all responsibility in the matter. At one stage, we were inclined to remand the matter directing the lower authorities to find out the difference between the actual price of the plain model and the Deluxe model, but considering the fact that the import was made in 1988, we thought it was not appropriate to postpone the final decision further. Having regard to all the circumstances, we direct that the price of plain model should be arrived at by deducting 20 and not 15 from the price of the Deluxe model. 4. emsp The impugned orders are modified by directing depreciation to be granted at 52 of the base price to be determined by reducing the price of Deluxe model by 20 . Appeal is allowed in part as indicated.
-
1996 (5) TMI 192 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Broth - Excisability - Marketability ... ... ... ... ..... oods were unstable, unmarketable and therefore not excisable. In her order, the Addl. Collector found that the inoculum produced by Citurgia was not a preparation for growing bacteria, but was a solution which contains developed bacteria. Her finding shows that the goods could not attract the classification under heading 38.21. On the ground of lack of marketability and the lack of coverage by the relevant Tariff and also that the revenue has advanced no grounds to challenge, the finding of the Collector (Appeals) is required to be upheld. 14. emsp As we find that the ld. Collector (Appeals) was right in holding that these two products viz. neutralised fermentation broth (referred to as Calcium Citrate) and the culture media were not excisable goods. We uphold the order and reject the appeal from the revenue. 15. emsp The cross objection filed by the respondents is in the nature of replies to various contentions made in the revenue appeal and stands disposed of by this order.
-
1996 (5) TMI 191 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - SSI Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... hat the use of trade mark and trade name of the foreign firm disentitles the SSI unit to avail of the exemption vide para 7 of the said notification. 4. emsp Considering the submissions, it appears that the logo and trade name have been registered in the name of an Indian firm which prima facie appears to be an SSI unit recognised and assessed as such, by the jurisdictional Excise Department. In that case, prima facie, the provisions of para 7 would stand attracted in favour of the assessee for availment of SSI exemption benefit. There appears to be an arguable case in favour of the applicants as to the time bar aspect and the issue whether the use of trade mark of a foreign firm not operating in India, has to be considered in the light of the conflicting opinions expressed by two different Benches viz. South Regional Bench and North Regional Bench. 5. emsp Considering all these aspects, we grant stay against recovery and waiver of pre-deposit of the duty and penalty amounts.
-
1996 (5) TMI 190 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Packing ... ... ... ... ..... r durable packing returnable by the buyer has to be excluded. They have held ldquo It would create an absurd situation if durable packing supplied by the assessee and returnable to the assessee is not to be includible in the assessable value but a durable packing supplied by the buyer to the assessee and returnable to the buyer is made a part of the assessable vlaue rdquo . In the proceedings before us it is not the case of the appellants that the cardboard containers were durable and returnable. The Squashes and Syrups would not be sold loose in the wholesale market. They had to be packed in packing which in this case was a cardboard carton for stacking 12 bottles in each carton. These were specific to the goods with name of the product and other necessary details to identify the product and the producer were imprinted. 11. emsp Taking all the relevant considerations into account, we find no merit in both these appeals and the same are rejected. 12. emsp Ordered accordingly.
-
1996 (5) TMI 189 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... duty demanded. 3. emsp Shri S.V. Singh, the ld. JDR however, submits that the documents which can be accepted for the purpose of availment of Modvat credit have been duly specified under Rule 57G, and if those documents in the same form do not exist, Modvat credit cannot be availed of. He therefore submits that the appellants have availed of Modvat credit on documents which are irregular, and subsequent rectification thereof could not be condoned. 4. emsp Considering the submissions, there are debatable issues requiring consideration at the final hearing stage and therefore accepting offer made by the ld. Advocate. We direct the appellant to make a deposit of Rs. 12,00,000/- within a period of 2 months, and report compliance by 9-8-1996. On compliance there shall be stay against recovery and waiver against pre-deposit of the balance of duty and penalty amount on due compliance, the parties will be at liberty to apply for out of turn hearing which will be considered on merits.
-
1996 (5) TMI 188 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
... ... ... ... ..... the goods supplied by them. In the instant case, it is interesting to note that the Department has added a part of the fee and royalty paid by the appellant to their collaborators, M/s. HCL whereas the goods have been supplied by M/s. NIC, from whom no technical know-how has been bought and who are not in the picture as regards the setting up of the Unit is concerned. No royalty has been paid to M/s. NIC for the simple reason that they have not supplied any technical know-how etc. to the appellant for the manufacture of refractories. Accordingly, we hold that the loading of the price was not justified and we set aside the same. In arriving at the above conclusion, we have also taken into consideration the fact that the contract was entered into with M/s. NIC after floating global tenders and making necessary enquiries. Certificates produced by both the foreign companies also support the appellant rsquo s case. 10. emsp Appeal is thus allowed with consequential relief, if any.
-
1996 (5) TMI 187 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... citation referred to by the importer of Shah Scientific (India) v. Collector of Customs (supra), the Tribunal has held that Carmine SS rsquo being a laboratory chemicals rsquo is rightly classifiable under Heading 29.01/45(19) despite the fact that it may not have a definite composition, as it has been held to be immaterial, in view of the wordings of Note 2 to Chapter 29. Also due to the fact that the Note is very wide in scope and has the effect of bringing within sub-heading (19) of Heading 29.01/45, a large number of substances, provided they satisfy the condition of packing, purety, marking or other features mentioned in that Note which shows that they are meant for use solely as Laboratory Chemical rsquo . In this case there is evidence on record to satisfy these criteria and hence this ruling is clearly applicable to the facts of the present case. 6. emsp In that view of the matter, the appellants succeed and hence the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed.
-
1996 (5) TMI 186 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Second hand construction machinery ... ... ... ... ..... nths only and the other was in choosing the percentage of depreciation. We hold that the depreciation should be allowed for the entire period of three years, but not at the rate applied by the Collector. The Collector has invoked the slab of 16 for the first year, which is generally followed in the Customs House but that is for the first year after manufacture or purchase of a new machine. That cannot be applied to a case where a machine used for over 20 years is purchased. The relevant percentage for the period in question would be 8 per year. There is a controversy as to whether the machines were in a packed condition or lying exposed in Saudi Arabia where they were taken by the appellant. There is no evidence either way before us. Having regard to the entirety of circumstances of the case, we are of opinion that total depreciation of 15 should be awarded for the period of three years. 7. emsp The impugned order is modified accordingly. The appeal is allowed to this extent.
-
1996 (5) TMI 185 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Appeal - Court fee stamp ... ... ... ... ..... appeals has been served on the appellants. He has also stated that the duty amount has been deposited. 4. emsp Heard Shri S.V. Singh, the learned Departmental Representative. 5. emsp The defect of non-affixing the court fee stamp is a remedial defect and defect memo could have been issued. For rejection under Section 35F of the Act, Notice to show cause has to be issued which, appears to have not been issued. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not given the finding on merits and hence I set aside the orders of rejection of the appeal and remand back all the above appeals to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding them on merits, according to law. 6. emsp All the appeals are allowed by way of remand in the above terms.
-
1996 (5) TMI 184 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat - Waste ... ... ... ... ..... 72 (Tribunal) where the same issue was under consideration and the Tribunal has held that Rule 57D is applicable even for the waste arising out of the breakage of the bottles. 5. emsp Considering the submissions made, when the process of manufacture is deemed to have been extended upto the process of packing, any waste arising during the manufacture would stand covered under the provisions of Rule 57D. Breakage of bottles has arisen during the same process and this is also the view taken by the South Regional Bench in the case cited by the ld. advocate. This Bench has also held similar view in another matter and considering all the aspects, denial of Modvat credit on the waste arising out of the breakage of glass bottles during the process of manufacture of P.P. medicine cannot be justified. The orders passed by the authorities below, are therefore, in conformity with the provisions of Rule 57D and hence no interference is called for. Appeals from the Department are rejected.
-
1996 (5) TMI 183 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Demand - Quantification ... ... ... ... ..... ating to that period has been held as barred by limitation by the Collector (Appeals). Section 11A requires that a notice should be issued specifying the amount demanded and any other form of communication sent earlier could not be taken as part and parcel of the show cause notice. The statute requires issuance of show cause notice and not a communication alleged to have been entered into by the Department with the assessee. Going by the said letters, they are in the form of advising the parties to maintain the particular records and requiring them to pay the appropriate dues. There was no demand as is contemplated under Section 11A. In that case, rejection of the contention raised by the Department about taking those letters as either show cause notices or as part of the show cause notices, appears to be correct and not calling for any interference. 5. emsp We, therefore, uphold the order of the Collector (Appeals). The appeal filed by the Department is, therefore, rejected.
-
1996 (5) TMI 182 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Refund - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... hemical Process Equipments Pvt. Ltd. - 1992 (59) E.L.T. 377 (Bom.) and has pleaded that when the duty has been under mistake of law, general period of limitation would apply and Section 11B will have no operation. To negative the contention, one has to simply refer the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Miles India reported in 1987 (30) E.L.T. 641 (SC) and also in the case of Doaba Co-operative Sugar Mills - 1988 (37) E.L.T. 478 (SC) as also the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Britannia Industries Limited - 1989 (40) E.L.T. 170 (Tribunal) for holding that the Tribunal being the statutory authority, have no right to go beyond the statutory provisions laid down. Under these circumstances, we cannot ignore the provisions of Section 11B and sanction the refund claim. The decisions cited by the ld. advocate are also in relation to the Writ Petition filed before the High Court. Under these circumstances, there is no merit in the appeal and is, therefore, rejected.
-
1996 (5) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat - Declaration ... ... ... ... ..... arly provides that there was a chance of confusion as it was a new provision introduced with effect 1-3-1994. Therefore the Government has specifically provided that the Assistant Commissioner could condone the delay if the declaration is filed within one month from the date of receipt of the capital goods in the factory. In the instant case I find that Modvat credit was taken on 31-5-1994. I also observe that declaration was filed on 8-6-1994 thus there was a delay of 8 days. Having regard to the facts that it was transition period as also to the fact that declaration was filed with 8 days from the date of taking credit as also that there is specific provision for condoning of delay. I also observe that delay of 8 days has been explained by the appellants. In the circumstances the delay is condoned. In the result Modvat credit taken on 31-5-1994 becomes admissible to the appellants. Having regard to the above finding the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
1996 (5) TMI 180 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Trade discount ... ... ... ... ..... o s price if available and if that was not feasible, to go by the invoice price. If the catalogue price is not to be adopted the next alternative is to go by the manufacturer rsquo s net price. This would mean there should be material to show that the manufacturer concerned was offering trade discount on sales effected by the manufacturer. There is no such material available in this case. The purported manufacturer rsquo s price list produced before the Collector (Appeals) a copy of which has been shown to us also does not indicate that the trade discount was allowable on such price list price. In the circumstances, we hold that the decision in Hamender Singh rsquo s case is inapplicable to the present case. 5. emsp In the result, we modify the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) by directing allowance of additional depreciation to the extent of 21/2 and reassessment of the assessable value and duty accordingly. 6. emsp The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.
-
1996 (5) TMI 179 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Seizure of goods - Territorial jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... jurisdiction to grant extension of period under the proviso to Section 110(2) of the Act. 10. emsp The impugned order passed by the Collector of Customs (Preventive), Bombay deals with clandestine removal of a part of the goods and misdeclaration of value of another part of the goods. From what we have indicated above, it follows that the impugned order to the extent it relates to goods removed clandestinely has been validly passed by the officer but he had no jurisdiction to pass the order in relation to goods imported and cleared at Mangalore Port on the ground of mideclaration of value or underassessment of duty. The impugned order to the extent it relates to allegation of misdeclaration of goods cleared at Mangalore on payment of duty is without jurisdiction and is set aside. It is made clear that the adjudication proceeding initiated by him on the allegation of clandestine removal of goods at Mangalore Port is valid. The appeal is allowed only in part as indicated above.
............
|