|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 161 to 180 of 501 Records
-
1996 (9) TMI 407 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... n of the appellants that the requirements under Notifications 32/94-C.E. and 33/94-C.E. are merely procedural requirements and no more. In view of settled position of law that a substantive benefit, allowing the Modvat credit here, cannot be denied on merely procedural deviations, particularly created by the Department for whatever reason and the transition period having already been prescribed upto 31-12-1994, I do not see any reason why the benefit of such invoices issued by dealers who have not registered themselves with the authorities subsequently, should not be allowed. As rightly pointed out, the registration of dealers is not in the control of an assessee. If such view as I have taken above is not conceded then the assessee who acted on understanding of law existing before the percolation of Notifications 32/94-C.E. and 33/94-C.E. downwards would be left in lurch for no fault of his. In the circumstances, I allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1996 (9) TMI 406 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Modvat credit ... ... ... ... ..... ner to compare the duplicate gate pass with the original and to extend the credit if the Assistant Commissioner is statisfied that the particulars in both tally. It is very fair direction on the facts of this case with which we do not feel inclined to interfere. 2A. emsp The appeals are disposed of by holding that the foundry fluxes are eligible inputs under Rule 57A. Deemed credit cannot be denied merely on the presumption that they must have been cleared by the manufacturer-supplier under exemption without any enquiry as to the factual position whether the condition for the exemption have been satisfied or not. It is further held that the direction given by the Commissioner (Appeals) to grant Modvat credit on the Assistant Commissioner, being satisfied that the particulars in the duplicate gate pass tally with the original is a direction with which the Tribunal is not inclined to interfere as it is well-founded and reasonable. The appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
-
1996 (9) TMI 405 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Money credit - Soap ... ... ... ... ..... to be so the authorities cannot turn around and say that all processes required for manufacture of soap had not been carried out when they themselves have allowed clearance of the product from the factory as soap for the purpose of levy of Excise duty. In that view of the matter we find force in the plea of the appellants. The case law cited by the appellants also supports the appellants rsquo plea that what had emerged as bars and noodles was only soap. The benefit of notification has to be made available so long as it is shown that the processes which gave rise to the product which answers to the description of soap have been carried out in the appellants rsquo factory. In the present case there is no dispute that the bars and noodles which emerged answer to the description of soap. We therefore hold that the appellants cannot be ruled out the benefit of notification for the reason that condition No. 2 had not been satisfied. We therefore allow the appeal of the appellants.
-
1996 (9) TMI 404 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... seen the copies of such documents produced by the appellants and agrees that they clearly show endorsement of duty payment. Therefore, he has no objection to the request of the appellants being granted. 11. emsp I have considered the above submissions. I observe that in view of the deposit already made in terms of the Collector rsquo s order, no further deposit was called for and the appeal could be heard straightaway. I also observe that in view of the above submissions, the dispute has virtually ceased And, in view of this position, there is no point in remanding the matter and I allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants. 12. emsp Further, in view of the appellants rsquo request to which learned DR has no objection, since the entry on 22-5-1993 was made in view of the rejection of the stay application by the Collector, therefore, this entry could itself be directly reversed in terms of this order and that would be sufficient for the purpose of this case.
-
1996 (9) TMI 403 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Project Import ... ... ... ... ..... ned a declaration from a partner of the appellants and the statement contained in the application form for registration included that the appellants would be using the imported machinery for substantial expansion of its existing unit and on that basis the appellant was assessed for duty at a concessional rate under Heading 84.66 of the Customs Tariff Act. Since the appellants did not instal the said machinery for the expansion of its existing unit, but transferred the machinery after it had been cleared from the customs, the appellant cannot claim the benefit of the concessional rate of duty under Heading 84.66 of the Customs Tariff Act and is liable to pay such duty at the normal rates prescribed in the Customs Tariff. 6. emsp In view of this, since the machinery was not used for substantial expansion of the unit for which contract was registered, the appellants were not eligible for benefit under Heading 84.66. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.
-
1996 (9) TMI 402 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... uded copper scrap in the relevant entries whenever it thought it is liable to duty. Similarly, in case of Indo Plast and Another v. Union of India and Others - 1987 (32) E.L.T. 463 (Bom.) by Bombay High Court where in almost identical case except that commodity was different held that Item 15-A of Central Excise Tariff was amended by addition of Explanation on 1-3-1982 whereunder even waste and scrap was included. Since the import of plastic scrap has been effected on 7-1-1982, i.e., long before 1-3-1982, the added explanation to Item 15A has no application. As such scrap imported prior to 1-3-1982 requires to be classified under Item 68 only. 6. emsp It is, therefore, clear to us that the term copper in crude form prior to 1-3-1981 could not have covered copper scrap. In view of this, orders of Collector (Appeals) classifying such scrap prior to 1-3-1981 under Tariff Item 68 are sustainable. 7. emsp In view of this, we reject the Revenue Appeal and uphold the impugned order.
-
1996 (9) TMI 401 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Valuation - Contemporaneous imports ... ... ... ... ..... ints. They differ in terms of quantity and date of contract and the intermediary in the case of M/s. Shalimar Paint whereas there is no intermediary in the present case. The difference in quantity, we are of view, is very substantial. The appellants had entered into the contract for the import of a total quantity of 144 M.T. of Glycerine whereas the goods imported by M/s. Shalimar Paints was for a quantity of 18 M.T. This factor by itself apart from the other factors makes the invoice of M/s. Shalimar Paints as not comparable with the present import. Therefore, the invoice of M/s. Shalimar Paints will not be reliable for determining the value of the present consignment before us. In the absence of any other evidence, the price of the importers at US 1000 per M.T. has to be accepted. In the aforesaid circumstances, there is no case for confiscation of the goods calling for imposition of any penalty. Hence we allow the appeal with consequential reliefs to the appellants herein.
-
1996 (9) TMI 400 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Redemption fine ... ... ... ... ..... ay be assessed by the competent authority in respect of the goods. 2. emsp Having regard to the above clause in the bond I hold that no point of law is involved. I find that the bond does not make a mention of redemption fine. It may be in the category of other lawful charges. But can a redemption fine be imposed when the goods are provisionally released under a bond when the goods are provisionally released and are not available for confiscation, the question of their redemption does not arise. Thus Section 34 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is not applicable inasmuch as when the redemption fine is paid by the assessee the goods are required to be restored to him. Can the goods be restored if they are not available with the adjudicating authority. Therefore the only natural consequence will be that no redemption fine can be imposed if the goods are not available for confiscation and therefore the application for reference is rejected as no point of law is involved.
-
1996 (9) TMI 399 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Polyester fibre - Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... fication the levy has been restricted to one stage i.e. at the tow stage or fibre stage. We, therefore, in the circumstances of the case, are of the view that exemption Notification 191/85 is in respect of duty which ultimately will be relatable to the staple fibre. This duty burden on the staple fibre is either relatable to the duty paid at the tow stage or the duty which will be paid at the staple fibre stage itself by use of tow which is cleared without payment of duty under Notification 84/87. In the above view of the matter, no duty will be chargeable in respect of tow which has been used in the manufacture of polyester fibre which has been cleared without payment of duty under Notification 191/85. The subsequent Notification 76/92, dated 1-7-1992 issued in this regard exempting duty on tow used for fibre for supply to KVIC by amending the Notification 191/85 has to be held to be clarificatory in nature and will have retrospective effect. The appeal is therefore allowed.
-
1996 (9) TMI 398 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... Modvat credit on these inputs used in the manufacture of miniature bulb utilised in the manufacture of torches. We have seen the letter dated 23-3-1986 vide which the appellants filed a separate declaration in respect of miniature bulb and declared (11) inputs used in manufacture of miniature bulb. The appellants also vide letter dated 1-5-1986 filed a classification list in respect of miniature bulb and in the letter they specifically mentioned that if the miniature bulb will be cleared for sale then the clearances will be made after payment of excise duty. When the adjudicating authority raised no objection for the inputs used in the manufacture of miniature bulbs for torches then their can also be no objection for these inputs used in the miniature bulb cleared for home consumption on payment of duty when the appellants also filed a separate classification list in respect of miniature bulbs. In these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
1996 (9) TMI 397 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ere it appropriately falls and that a substance does not cease to be patent or proprietary medicines merely because it can also be used for purposes other than prevention or treatment of diseases. The AHU air parts were used solely or principally with the Air Conditioning Machines and their classification as parts of Air Conditioning Machines by virtue of Section Note 2 (b) of Section XVI is correct. 11. emsp The Collector (Appeals) had held that the AHU was not an air or vacuum pump nor it was a gas compressor. It could also not be said that it is a ventilating or recycling hood incorporating a fan. After studying both the Heading No. 84.14 and No. 84.15, he had confirmed the classification under Heading No. 84.15. 12. emsp In view of the above discussion and keeping in view the nature of the product, their use and utility, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). As a result, this appeal is rejected. Ordered accordingly.
-
1996 (9) TMI 396 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Writ Jurisdiction - Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... led so far, within a period of 45 days from today. If such an appeal or proceeding, as the case may be, is filed within this permitted period as prayed, the same shall not be opposed or shall not fail on the ground of bar of limitation only and shall be decided on merits in conformity with law. 16. emsp If such reply or additional reply is submitted or if such appeal or proceeding is resorted to, the points raised in these petitions, shall be treated as open and litigable. Similarly, the points averred in opposition by the respondents, shall also be taken as available to them for contest. 17. emsp With the aforesaid directions, these petitions are disposed of but without any orders as to costs. The counsel-fee for each side, however, is fixed at Rs. 2,500/- in each petition, if certified. 18. emsp Security cost, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioner in each case, after due verification. 19. emsp Retain this order in M.P. No. 434/87 and place its copy in M.P. No. 620/87.
-
1996 (9) TMI 395 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification - Import - Words and phrases - Appeal ... ... ... ... ..... ich are then marketed for satisfying human wants directly. 31. emsp The Ld. Counsel is also correct in pointing out that a point of law can be raised even at the appellate stage. 32. emsp We also observe that the appellants have produced a statement of items issued by the Director of Industries in respect of M/s. Asian Tube Light (I) Pvt. Ltd. w.r.t. Notification No. 232/83 as amended by Notification No. 285/83. These items include electronic valves and tubes (all types) at Sr. No. 3 and various other electronic items including fluorescent display devices (at Sr. No. 9) and the end use has been shown as electronic lantern/emergency lamp etc. Coming to the Notification No. 232/83 (as amended) since admittedly Sr. No. 3(b) of the table annexed to this notification covers electronic tubes (all types), therefore even fluorescent electronic tubes will get covered under this entry. 33. emsp In view of the above position, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeal is accepted.
-
1996 (9) TMI 394 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... uo ble Supreme Court in the case of TISCO, referred to above, the process upto proof machining will not take the forged product beyond the purview of forgings as such. 7. emsp In the case of Jaypee Forgers v. CCE, Bombay reported at 1996 (83) E.L.T. 49 (Tribunal) 1995 (11) R.L.T. 76 (CEGAT-B), the Tribunal had held that un-machined forgings and forged products of steel which had not acquired the essential character of motor vehicle parts were classifiable as forged products. The forged products which are machined, polished, holed, etc. and made fit for being used as machine parts alone assume a different name, character and use other than of the forged products. In the matter before us, there is nothing to show that these forged products were subjected to such processes as to assume a definite shape of a machine part. 8. emsp Taking all the relevant considerations into account, we set aside the Order-in-Appeal. As a result, both these appeals are allowed. Ordered accordingly.
-
1996 (9) TMI 393 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Evidence - Additional Evidence - Confiscation - Evidentiary value - Import - Valuation - Additional Duty - Integrated Bracelet Case
-
1996 (9) TMI 392 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... t the central processing units and peripheral devices had been included specifically. As and when the expression ldquo including rdquo is used, it may mean extending the area or it may mean also as a clarification. As computer cannot work without central processing unit, we consider that the inclusions of central processing unit and peripheral devices is by way of clarification. Although, in the exemption notification, the central processing units and peripheral devices have not been mentioned, but as the tariff entry is No. 33DD had been specifically mentioned, we consider that the exemption under Notification No. 254/77-C.E., aforesaid, is applicable to both central processing unit and peripheral devices. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, we are only concerned with the peripheral devices. 5. emsp In view of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) and accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.
-
1996 (9) TMI 391 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... at the reduced price. There is no allegation in the Order of the Superintendent concerned that two types of goods namely ldquo ELSC rdquo simpliciter and ldquo ELSC with free blade packet rdquo , were cleared simultaneously during the relevant period. In the absence of any such allegation, we agree with the learned Representative that their price as declared by them cannot be discarded unless there is any evidence to show that there is a flow-back to the appellants or some other additional consideration, has flowed from the buyers to the appellants herein so as to influence the price declared by them. We also observe that no such evidence has been brought on record by the Revenue. Therefore, the price declared by them for the product, ldquo ELSC with a free-blade packet rdquo , cannot be discarded. The appeals are therefore allowed. 5. Similarly, Appeal No. ED(SB)2840/83 involving the issue as aforesaid is also allowed since no other issue is involved in this particular case.
-
1996 (9) TMI 390 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Agricultural implements ... ... ... ... ..... that shovels and spades are agricultural implements but they are used quite extensively in building operations also. In order that an appliance may be an agricultural implement, the real test is not that it should be exclusively used for agricultural purposes but that it should be commonly so used and it should be intimately and directly connected with agricultural operations. rdquo Reference has also been made by the learned Advocate to the Madras High Court decision in the case of Hargo Industries v. The State of Tamil Nadu, 1979 (STC) 44 at Page 345. He has also referred to the Mysore High Court decision in The State of Mysore v. Santoomal Kishnomal 1962 (STC) 13 at Page 313, wherein it had been held that the crow-bar is an agricultural implement. 8. emsp In view of the legal position, as settled by the different High Courts, we consider that the view taken by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) was not correct. As a result, the appeal filed by M/s. TISCO is allowed.
-
1996 (9) TMI 389 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Interpretation of Statute - Notifications ... ... ... ... ..... eal memo to apply Rule 2(a) for the purpose of interpreting the Notification in view of the fact that the item ldquo spectacle lenses rdquo has been clearly described in Sl. No. 7 of the Notification without leaving any ambiguity. The rulings of the Courts are that the Section note, Chapter note cannot be applied for interpreting the Notification and its applicability will be called for only if the description of the goods in the Chapter heading has been extracted in the Notification. In the present case the imported item opthalmic rough blanks cannot be considered as spectacle lenses as they are not the same item. In order to become spectacle lenses the opthalmic lenses have to undergo several processes as noted by us. The findings arrived at by the lower authorities that the imported item does not fall within the description appearing in Sl. No. 7 of the Notification is sustainable. In that view of the matter, we do not find any merits in this appeal and we reject the same.
-
1996 (9) TMI 388 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Iron or Steel Products - Pattas/Pattis ... ... ... ... ..... tion (xiv) under Tariff Item No. 25. rdquo 5. emsp There is nothing on record to show that the goods in question conformed to the dimensional specifications as given in the definition of the strips rsquo aforesaid. We also find that the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Narayani Udyog Ltd. reported at 1992 (60) E.L.T. 595 (Tribunal) relying upon their earlier decision in the case of Collector v. Sanchoti Synthetics (P) Ltd. - 1990 (48) E.L.T. 578 (Tribunal) had held that Pattas/Pattis viz. pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging of iron or steel classifiable under Item No. 26AA(ia) or erstwhile Central Excise Tariff for the period prior to 1-8-1983 and under Item 25(8) after 1-8-1983. 6. emsp In view of the above, the view taken by the 1d. Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) is not correct and the appeal filed by the appellants merits acceptance. 7. emsp Taking all the relevant considerations into account, we accept this appeal. Ordered accordingly.
............
|
