|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 200 of 568 Records
-
2003 (10) TMI 517 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Demand - Excess production shown in balance sheet ... ... ... ... ..... impugned order is set aside, and the appeal allowed. Annexure lsquo A rsquo HLL FINISHED GOODS - PRODUCTION, SALES, STOCKS TONNES Rupees Packed Stocks Product Opening Stock Production Sales Reprocess Transfers for internal consumption Closing Stock Ope-ning Stock Closing Stock Sa-les Va-lue LB Soap (108 150 gms) 0 16444.1988 82.3608 16321.014 40.824 Lux Soap (144 100 gms) 12.7152 0 0 0 12.7152 SLDP (60 500 gms) 93.51 9382.14 114.6 9324.66 36.39 Whel Bar Green (120 125 gms) 0 7434.51 215.55 7198.89 20.07 Wheel Bar Green (60 250 gms) 0 7897.71 226.695 7648.485 22.53 Wheel Bar Blue (120 125 gms) 0 1110.075 0.165 1109.91 0 Wheel Bar Blue (60 250 gms) 0 1135.605 40.545 1095.06 0 LB Noodles 0 9094.143 0 9094.143 0 SLDP Bulk 0 3717.283 0 3717.283 AFF and Co SKS Prepared Sd/- emsp emsp emsp emsp Verified Sd/- emsp emsp emsp emsp Approved Sd/- emsp emsp emsp Unit emsp emsp emsp emsp From SS5 Hindustan Lever Limited, Stepan Chemicals Limited, A-5 Phase II, Focal Point, Rajpura, Punjab
-
2003 (10) TMI 516 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Interest and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... mposable and interest is demandable under Sections 11AC and 11AB of the Central Excise Act respectively. 4. emsp We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The appellants are not disputing the demand of duty, which has been confirmed for extended period. We, therefore, find force in the submissions of the learned SDR that the appellants are not disputing the invocation of extended period as provided under proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act. Once the extended period of limitation is invocable, provisions of Section 11AC for imposing penalty and provisions of Section 11AB for demanding interest on delayed payment of duty, are attracted. We, therefore, hold that the appellants are liable to pay penalty and interest. However, considering the fact that the appellants had discharged the duty liability immediately after detection by the Central Excise officers, we reduce the amount of penalty to Rs. 10 lakh. With this modification, the appeal is rejected.
-
2003 (10) TMI 515 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay - Suspension of licence of CHA ... ... ... ... ..... the CHA and the order of suspension of the licence issued. On noting that the enquiries against the CHA were conducted by the DRI and the fact of enquiry was communicated to the Commissioner only in July, 2003 we are of the view that prima facie it cannot be said that there has been inordinate delay in issue of the suspension order so as to justify an order of stay of operation of the suspension order. We therefore dismiss the stay application. 3. emsp However, keeping in mind the fact that livelihood of the applicant is involved, we fix the appeal itself for out of turn hearing on 14th November, 2003.
-
2003 (10) TMI 514 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Order - Non-speaking order - Refund ... ... ... ... ..... ein it has been ruled that no refund is permissible to an assessee, if he has passed on the incidence of duty to the ultimate buyers. The revenue, had, under these circumstances no option but to challenge the validity of that noting of the Assistant Commissioner before the Commissioner (Appeals), as the same amounted to the passing of an order by him allowing the refund claim of the appellants without applying his mind to the facts and law on the point. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly set aside, the short order of the Assistant Commissioner in the form of noting, which was passed without marshalling the facts and applying the law laid down by the Apex Court in the Mafatlal Industries Ltd. case (supra) and remanded the matter for re-examination of the refund claim of the appellants on facts in accordance with law. Therefore, we find no illegality in the impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) and the same is upheld. The appeal of the appellants is dismissed.
-
2003 (10) TMI 513 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Redemption fine and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... of both the sides. Rule 173G(1) of Central Excise Rules, 1944, clearly provided that during the period the facility to make payment of duty on fortnightly basis is forfeited, the manufacturer is required to pay excise duty for each consignment by debiting to the account current and in the event of any such failure, it will be deemed as if such goods have been cleared without payment of duty. We, therefore, agree with the learned SDR that the penalty is imposable on the appellants as they paid the duty during the material period through Cenvat credit account. The goods also are liable for confiscation as these are deemed to have been cleared without payment of duty. However, taking into consideration the facts that the entire amount of duty has been paid along with interest as soon as the appellants were directed to make payment of duty in cash, we, reduce the penalty to Rs. 10,000/-. We also reduce the redemption fine to Rs. 10,000/-. The appeal is disposed of in these terms.
-
2003 (10) TMI 512 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Recovery of balance amount despite stay ... ... ... ... ..... f the provision to Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944, revenue can recover the amount. Ld. Advocate submits during the pendency of the appeal stay has been granted. Revenue rsquo s initiation to recover the balance amount is not correct. 2. emsp On a careful consideration we notice that the appellants have partially pre-deposited as per the stay order. Therefore, the Revenue should not proceed to recover the amount till the disposal of the appeal. However, in the interest of justice, Registry is directed to list the matter out of turn on 24-12-2003.
-
2003 (10) TMI 511 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ture of the payment of duty inasmuch as it, inter alia, called upon the party to show cause why ldquo the amount of Rs. 2,19,036/- voluntarily paid by them towards Central Excise duty during the course of investigation of this case should not be appropriated towards duty as mentioned above rdquo . In all the cases cited by the Counsel, the duty was paid voluntarily by the respective assessees before the issuance of the show cause notices and it was held by the Tribunal that any penalty was not imposable under Section 11AC and/or Rule 173Q. In the case cited by the DR, it is not clear as to whether the payment of differential duty by the assessee was voluntary rsquo or not. The case law cited by the ld. Counsel is applicable to the instant case as voluntary character of payment of duty before issuance of show cause notice is a common thread of all these cases. 7. emsp Following the case law cited by the Counsel, I set aside the penalty on the appellants. The appeal is allowed.
-
2003 (10) TMI 510 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture - Reconditioning of bulk drugs ... ... ... ... ..... ng from bulk pack to retail pack or adopting of any treatment to render the goods marketable to the consumer. This was the view held by the Tribunal in Lincoln Parentarals Ltd. where the medicament earlier cleared on payment of duty were brought back for changing the labels as the labels fixed thereon mentioned wrong potency and the Tribunal held that such change of labelling does not amount to manufacture in terms of Note 5 to Chapter 30. We, therefore, set aside the demand of duty amounting to Rs. 88,513/-. Regarding the demand of duty in respect of Pen-G Acylase that was received back from their Mohali factory for repairing/reconditioning, the Tribunal has already held in the Appellants rsquo own case vide Final Order No. A/374/2003-NB(C), dated 9-7-2003 that the process of milling, blending, sifting, washing etc. does not amount to manufacture. Following the ratio of the said decision, we allow the Appeal on this account also. The Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
2003 (10) TMI 509 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay order - Modification of - Financial hardship ... ... ... ... ..... nancial hardship had been considered by directing pre-deposit of amounts in the stay order and no ground for modification has been made out by the applicants. 3. emsp On hearing both sides and noting that the plea of financial hardship which was raised in the application and during the hearing of the stay application, does not appear to have been noted by the Bench while fixing the amounts of pre-deposit, we modify our order by directing M/s. Sujala Exports to deposit 25 of the penalty imposed upon them within a period of eight weeks from today. We see no ground to interfere with the direction for pre-deposit of 50 of the penalties imposed upon the remaining three applicants. 4. emsp On deposit of 25 of the penalty by M/s. Sujala Exports and 50 of the penalties by the other three applicants within eight weeks from today, pre-deposit of balance penalties shall stand waived and recovery thereof stayed pending the appeals. 5. emsp Compliance to be reported on 9th December, 2003.
-
2003 (10) TMI 508 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Removal of inputs ... ... ... ... ..... ent by accommodating additional words viz. lsquo shal1 pay the appropriate duty of excise leviable thereon as if such inputs or capital goods have been manufactured in such factory rdquo . 4. emsp I am unable to find such distinction as made out by the Commissioner (Appeals). In the case of Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. CCE, Delhi, reported in 2003 (161) E.L.T. 248 (T) 2002 (53) RLT 395 (CEGAT - Del.), this issue was specifically examined with reference to the provisions of Rule 57AB and it was held that the credit reversal would be with reference to the credit taken at the point of receipt of the inputs, following the ratio of the of the Larger Bench rsquo s decision in the case of Asia Brown Boveri Ltd. (Supra) which was with reference to the provisions of Rule 57F(1)(ii). 5. emsp Therefore, I hold that the orders of the lower authorities are not sustainable and the appeal deserves to be allowed. The appeal is accordingly allowed with consequential relief, permissible under the law.
-
2003 (10) TMI 507 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Confiscation - Smuggled goods - Burden of proof ... ... ... ... ..... the confiscation of foreign currency and reduced the penalty from Rs. 1,00,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- on the firm and the partner respectively. (c) The case law relied is found to be of seizures made earlier to 1992 when there was a sea change in the EXIM Policy. While earlier every import was banned till licensed the new law permitted, all goods importable, till restricted. The Baggage imports were not only liberalized but also the ban of resale of goods imported in Baggage was lifted. The quantities are not enormous are freely available and tradeable, merely because they are of foreign origin and bills are not available can only be a presumption but not lead to a belief that they are smuggled. The goods are notified. The case law in 1992 (61) E.L.T. 676, relied by Revenue was for notified goods is not therefore applicable. 3. emsp In view of the findings, there is no case for upsetting the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) order. Appeals are therefore dismissed.
-
2003 (10) TMI 506 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Accountal of goods ... ... ... ... ..... , learned Departmental Representative reiterated the finding as contained in both the Orders passed by the lower authorities and submitted that the Appellants had not accounted the goods stored by them which was required to be done under the provisions of Rules 52AA and 57AE(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 4. emsp I have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Board under Circular dated 13-2-95 has issued instructions relating to issue of invoices under Rule 57G of Central Excise Rules, 1944. In Para 9(C) of the said Circular, the Board has clearly permitted a registered person not to enter into his RG 23D Register details of those consignments for which he does not propose to issue modvatable invoices. As the impugned goods were not intended to be sold along with the modvatable invoices, there was no requirement by the Appellants to enter them in their RG 23D register. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned Order and allow the Appeal with consequential relief.
-
2003 (10) TMI 505 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Duty paying documents ... ... ... ... ..... that, all the transporters have lost the duplicate copy of invoice in transit. Therefore, I hold that appellants are not in position to justify their claim for Modvat on the basis of original documents. Therefore, the claim against original invoices is rejected. 4. emsp So far as the invoices issued by Metco services and trading are concerned, I notice that the critical particulars as prescribed by Notification Nos. 32/94 and 33/94-C.E. (N.T.) are not incorporated therein. Therefore, the credit taken against the invoices issued by the said dealer is also correctly held as inadmissible by the lower authorities. 5. emsp Accordingly, I hold that, except for allowing the credit pertaining to the consignment diverted to Dombivili from the head office, relating to the credit of Rs. 39,668/-, the claim for the remaining amount is disallowed. Accordingly, the appeal is rejected partly and partly allowed for the claim to the extent of Rs. 39,668/-. Appeal disposed off in above terms.
-
2003 (10) TMI 504 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Jute products - Laminated jute products - Process of manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... uly represented by Shri J.C. Patel, ld. Advocate for the respondent and Shri A. Chopra, ld. JDR for the Revenue. We find that the notification nowhere laid down the process of manufacture of laminated jute products so as to earn the benefit of the notification. No differentiation has been made between the thermosetting process or the binding process of manufacture of laminated jute fabrics. We also take note of earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Mahakali Plastic Weave Pvt. Ltd., v. CCE, Bombay 1983 (14) E.L.T. 2064 CEGAT laying down that the laminated products composed of bitumen bonded layers of paper and jute have to be taken as laminated jute manufactures. We also take note that the respondents have described the goods as laminated jute fabrics in their invoices. 4. emsp In view of the foregoing, we do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals). In view of the above, the appeal, filed by the Revenue is rejected. Ordered accordingly.
-
2003 (10) TMI 503 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Refund - Valuation of goods ... ... ... ... ..... (Appeals) in his Order-in-Appeal has held that lsquo if the appellants produce the proof of destruction of molasses, the excess duty paid to the extent of Rs. 78,681/- should be refunded rsquo . The appellant had claimed before the Commissioner (Appeals) that the duty paid molasses was destroyed in presence of the State Government Excise officials. 4. emsp In the present appeal, the appellants have claimed that they are entitled for refund of Rs. 92,550/- on the ground that the molasses was valued at a higher price of Rs. 550 PMT by the Department whereas their price was Rs. 500 PMT. 5. emsp I have examined the issue. I find that no appeal was filed against the assessment order, by the appellants. Therefore, at this stage where refund claim is in issue, the plea of valuation of the molasses and asking for excess refund on that reason cannot be taken. 6. emsp The order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is correct in law and it is upheld. The appeal is accordingly rejected.
-
2003 (10) TMI 502 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Redemption fine - Quantum of - Discrimination - Differential treatment ... ... ... ... ..... itself expressed the view that holders of such licences were put on caution must be considered to have been put on caution with regard to importability of the restricted items. On 19 October, 1985 that a different view that prevailing earlier could be taken. Therefore, he says, there was no justification for leniency. 4. emsp No doubt, the departmental representative has contended, the quantum of redemption fine is a matter of discretion but it is equally true that discretion must be fairly and reasonably exercised. In a situation where more than one Bench of this Tribunal has, after considering the Supreme Court rsquo s judgment, found it fit to reduce the fine, I do not think it will be appropriate that the appellant who is not shown to be dissimilarly placed from the appellants who have had the benefit of the earlier decisions of this Tribunal should be differently treated. I therefore going by the views of the earlier Benches, reduce the fine to Rs. 80,000/- in each case.
-
2003 (10) TMI 501 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... erned Range Officer. 2. emsp I have heard both sides. There is nothing on the record to suggest if any show cause notice was ever served on the supplier of the goods, viz. MMTC for having availed Modvat credit wrongly, before passing on the same through valid documents to the appellants. Even otherwise non submission of the relevant documents in the range office by the supplier of the goods, could not be made ground for penalising the present appellants who admittedly received the goods on payment of duty through valid documents. The duty paid character of the goods and utilisation of the same by them in the factory has not been disputed by the Department. They had taken the credit on the valid proper duty paying documents. Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowing Modvat credit to the appellants is not maintainable and the same is set aside. The appeal of the appellants stands allowed with consequential relief, if any, permissible under the law.
-
2003 (10) TMI 500 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Company - Incorporation of ... ... ... ... ..... question of date of incorpora-tion and details relating to memorandum of association and articles of association are matters within the special knowledge of the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to furnish all those particulars. Similarly, if any other query is raised by the respondent relating to details of incorporation of the petitioner-company, such details should also be furnished by the petitioner. If the petitioner does not produce copies of relevant documents or deliberately withholds any relevant material it would be open to the respondent to draw any inference in accordance with law. The process of fresh consideration may be completed on or before January 30, 2004. The petitioner is permitted to appear before the respondent either through any advocate or authorised agent on November 28, 2003 on which date the respondent may hold enquiry or fix any convenient date for holdingenquiry. 13. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
-
2003 (10) TMI 499 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Penalty - Seizure of foreign currency ... ... ... ... ..... ature of respondent. (i) Panchnama records the signature (ii) Respondents prayed for return of Indian Currency of Rs. 50,120/- under seizure. (iii) Show cause notice and personal hearing and order issued were sent to the addresses of M/s. Kwality Ice Cream. 3. emsp Considered. The residential address and the evidence of having dispatched the notice by tendering the same by Registered Post or by affixing on the Custom Notice Board as per Section 153 of Customs Act, 1962 is not furthering in the appeal. Therefore, the findings of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) that in these proceedings the departments case is weak and decisions arrived are without notice and hearing is to be upheld. Therefore, this appeal is to be dismissed. The appellants can serve a notice and reinstate the penalty proceedings, since there is no appeal against confiscation and against the refusal of return of Rs. 50,120/-. No orders are passed on that aspect. 4. emsp Appeal disposed off in above terms.
-
2003 (10) TMI 498 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... inancial position as projected before us. The company has been declared as a sick industrial Unit by the BIFR. The balance sheet for the year 31-3-2002 is placed before us to plead financial inability to make of pre-deposit. We note that although the company has suffered a loss, there is a high sales income as seen from the balance sheet and it would not cause undue hardship if they are directed comply with the requirement of pre-deposit of duty. A case for total waiver of pre-deposit has not been made by the applicants. Keeping in view the financial position as reflected in the balance sheet, we direct pre-deposit of Rs. 10 lakhs towards duty within a period of eight weeks from today and on such deposit, the pre-deposit of balance duty and penalty shall stand waived and recovery thereof stayed pending the appeal. Failure to comply with this direction shall result in vacation of stay and dismissal of appeal without prior notice. 3. emsp Compliance to be reported on 15-1-2004.
............
|
