|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 181 to 200 of 468 Records
-
2003 (8) TMI 410 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Winding-up of sick industrial company ... ... ... ... ..... the respondent that they are in a position to bring in the requisite fund. Thus, I find no reason to interfere with the recommendation made by the Board. The recommendation so made is accepted. Consequently, the company stands wound up based on the report of the BIFR. The objection filed by respondent company is found to be without any merit and is dismissed. 20. The Official Liquidator attached to this Court is appointed as the Liquidator in the winding up proceedings. The Liquidator shall take over the assets and records of the company immediately and prepare an inventory of the assets of the company as a first step while sealing the property. The Liquidator shall also consider the contents of both the applications and submit his interim report dealing with the said applications within six weeks. The notice of the winding up order be published in the lsquo Indian Express rsquo (English), lsquo Danik Jagaran rsquo (Hindi) and lsquo Delhi Gazette rsquo for 21st October, 2003.
-
2003 (8) TMI 409 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... suitable modification of the law in that direction. 15. Turning to the instant case, inasmuch as the transferee company is a company incorporated in accordance with the provisions of the Act with its registered office within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and the transferor company, on the other hand, is a foreign company which comes within the definition of body corporate as can be seen from section 2(7) of the Act and under sub-section (4) of section 394 of the Act the transferor company can be a body corporate, there can be a valid scheme of arrangement for amalgamation in between them. Therefore, there is no legal bar for according the necessary sanction. 16. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is ordered. This order shall be drafted in Form No. 42 with such modifications as are required according to the facts of this case. A certified copy of this order shall be filed with the Registrar of Companies within thirty days from the date of receipt of the same.
-
2003 (8) TMI 408 - HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rights of financial corporation in case of default ... ... ... ... ..... e unit was sold to him and hence the case of Sipcot (supra ) squarely applies in the instant case. 19. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the Surveyor of the Corporation assessed the values of the unit to be rupees 5.5 lakhs (Annexure R/9) but the unit was sold only for Rupees Four lakhs and hence the action of the Corporation is mala fide. Resisting this submission of counsel for the petitioner it has been stated by learned Senior Counsel for the Corporation that the same was only an opinion and more over the assessment of the petitioners Surveyor is dated 5-9-1994. However, on account of lapse of time, in the year 1996, when the property was sold the machine became more older and outdated and hence if the unit was sold for rupees 4 lakhs the action could not be said, from any angle, to be mala fide. 20. On the basis of above said premised reasons, the petition has no force and the same is hereby dismissed. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 407 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Oppression and mismanagement ... ... ... ... ..... P, the suit originally filed by Dankha will revive, and the parties will fight it out in the suit Court. That method of obtaining remedy has not been abandoned. 53. The suit not being abandoned, and the matter being a pending matter before the Supreme Court, it would not been possible for the same party, in any event, to pursue two remedies for identical reliefs, one by way of suit, and another by way of relief in a company petition. This would lead to the most undesirable possibility of a conflict of decisions, which the Court is always careful to avoid. 54. In these circumstances, we find nothing to interfere with the ordering portion of the impugned order. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. All interim orders will stand vacated with immediate effect but the actions taken until date on the basis of such interim orders shall not be invalidated thereby. All parties and all others concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this judgment and order on the usual undertakings.
-
2003 (8) TMI 406 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Penalty for wrongful withholding of property ... ... ... ... ..... o how that has caused prejudice to him. At any rate, the petitioner was not forced to admit the said documents. It was on his admission that the documents came to be accepted. There is, therefore, no substance in this last submission also made on behalf of the petitioner. 15. Taking into consideration the above mentioned objections, I am of the opinion that there is no merit in the challenge given to the impugned orders. There is, therefore, no reason for this Court to interfere with the impugned orders. Consequently, the petition is dismissed and the rule is discharged. 16. Shri Jamdar prays for three months time for the petitioner to vacate the premises. It may be noted that the petitioner has been wrongfully withholding the premises for about last 15 years. Shri Jamdar states that the petitioner proposes to file an appeal in the Supreme Court against this order. In view of this fact, eight weeks time is granted to the petitioner for vacating the premises in his possession.
-
2003 (8) TMI 405 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Deductions - Packing cost - Value of clearances - Computation of ... ... ... ... ..... ct the revised contingent liabilities collection as certified by a Chartered Accountant without causing any proper verification. These defects in the computation of value as carried out in the impugned order have certainly yielded a higher duty liability than the correct amount due. Such an exaggerated duty demand cannot be sustained. The correct duty demand has to be worked out afresh. There is also merit in the appellants submission that penalty amount should not have been increased in the remand proceedings. 7. emsp In view of the above observations, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted to the Commissioner for passing a fresh order after giving an opportunity to the appellant to effectively place relevant data as well as to make their submissions. Since the dispute is very old, it is necessary that this case is taken up on high priority and revised order passed within a period not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
-
2003 (8) TMI 404 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... beginning of the year by availment of the benefit of SSI Notification 1/93 shall be counted towards first clearance irrespective of the fact that the goods had been cleared at full rate of duty. We note that this issue has been the subject-matter of the orders of the Tribunal in batches of cases and that there are different views prevalent upon this subject. Therefore we are of the view that a prima facie case for waiver has been made out by both the applicants and hence dispense with the requirement of pre-deposit of duty and penalty and stay recovery thereof pending the appeals.
-
2003 (8) TMI 403 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Exemption - Scrap of plastic ... ... ... ... ..... stic classifiable in Heading 39.15 of the Tariff, if they arise from goods on which excise duty or additional duty of customs has been paid. The Commissioner himself records in Paragraph 4 of the order that the basis for the demand was that Modvat credit had been availed of the duty paid on the plastic from which the waste arose which is utilised in the manufacture of needles. The condition subject to which the exemption was available is therefore shown to have been satisfied. Therefore, duty was not demandable on this score and penalty not imposable. 3. emsp The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside to that extent.
-
2003 (8) TMI 402 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - EXIM - VBAL ... ... ... ... ..... eously claimed Modvat facility on inputs used in the manufacture of export products against which they obtained VBAL licence, which was contrary to Condition No. V(A) of the Notification. 2. emsp On hearing both sides and noting the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Goodluck Industries 1999 (108) E.L.T. 818 (T) which has been upheld by the Supreme Court as seen from 2000 (120) E.L.T. A66 (S.C.) in which it has held that the burden of proving whether Modvat credit was taken on the inputs to be discharged not by the transferee but by the original licencee and also noting that prima facie there is no basis for the allegation in the notice and finding in the order that the original importers had actually availed Modvat benefit on inputs imported under VBAL scheme, we are of the view that a strong prima facie case for waiver has been made out by the applicants. The requirement of pre-deposit of duty and penalty is hereby waived and recovery thereof stayed pending the appeal.
-
2003 (8) TMI 401 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE, N
Settlement Commission - Admission of application - Words and phrases - “Levy, assessment and collection”
-
2003 (8) TMI 400 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Adjudication - Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... r, 1997. 2. emsp After hearing learned JDR and perusal of case records, I find that the impugned order has been passed on 5-1-1999 by the Commissioner (Appeals). Since the impugned order has been passed subsequent to the order allocating work among different Commissioners of appeals, it is clear that the impugned order has been passed without jurisdiction. As such, the same is set aside and remanded to the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the case afresh. 3. emsp Appeal is allowed by way of remand.
-
2003 (8) TMI 399 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Import - Advance licence - Customs exemption ... ... ... ... ..... n issued as per Para 7.5 of the Hand Book 1997-2002 under Notification No. 31/97 and the said licence cannot be applied to exempt goods under Notification No. 41/97 which exempts articles imported into India against quantity based Advance Licenses issued in terms of Para 50 of the EXIM Policy 1992-1997 or under Para 7.4 of the EXIM Policy 1997-2002 as the licence had been issued as per 7.5 of the HBP 1997-2002, therefore the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected their claim. 4. emsp We have carefully considered the submissions and find that there is no infirmity in the impugned order and the ld. Commissioner has rightly held that the appellants are not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 41/97 as the licence has been issued under different Notification, that is, No. 31/97. Ld. Commissioner has appreciated all the arguments and has come to a clear cut finding which is legal and proper and therefore, as we do not find any merit in the appeal, the same is rejected.
-
2003 (8) TMI 398 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... d not have been based on the Tribunal rsquo s decision in Mansurpur Sugar Mills case. What was held in that case was that the process of manufacture of sugar commenced with unloading of cane. There is nothing in the Tribunal rsquo s judgment to indicate that the process of manufacture of sugar commenced with unloading of cane at the weigh bridge site. What is discernible, on the other hand, from the judgment is that the process of manufacture commenced with unloading of cane in the factory premises. In the circumstances, there appears to be no justification in the ld. Counsel rsquo s plea for vacating the penalty. Nevertheless, it needs to be considered that the quantum of penalty should match the offence alleged in the show cause notice and found by the quasi judicial authorities. I have examined the facts and circumstances of the present case, and I am of the view that a lesser penalty can match the offence. The penalty is reduced to Rs. 15,000/-. The appeal is disposed of.
-
2003 (8) TMI 397 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... Oil rsquo . Further, the Adjudicating Authority has also referred to Notification No. 75/84 in which both the terms ldquo Residual Fuel Oil rdquo and ldquo Heavy Petroleum Stock rdquo have been used and has given the finding that RFO and HPS are different Nomenclature used not only by the Appellants, but the law makers also. We do not find any substance in this argument. Notification No. 75/84, in our view, provides a concessional rate of duty Rs. 147.10 per M.T. in respect of Residual Fuel Oil falling under Tariff Item 11A of the Old Central Excise Tariff without any condition or intended use. This rate of duty is applicable to all residual fuel oils including Heavy Petroleum Stock. If heavy petroleum stock failing under Item 11A is ldquo intended for use as feed stock in the manufacture of fertilizers rdquo , it attracts Nil rate of duty. This does not go to suggest that HPS is not a residual fuel oil. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow all the appeals.
-
2003 (8) TMI 396 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Appeal by department - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... pursuit of the issue. 8. emsp it is evident from the events that the issue has been processed displaying alacrity but not in a casual manner. 9. emsp the department feels that there is strong case on merits and will succeed in appeal if appeal is admitted. 10. emsp the delay at various stages has since been explained in explicit manner as required under the law, it is urged that the Hon rsquo ble Tribunal may be pleased not to construe the issue of condonation of delay strictly with pedantic stand. She also explained the cause for delay in filing the appeal. 2. emsp On considering the submissions made by both sides and taking into consideration the explanation given by the DR, we are of the view that this is a fit case to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. emsp The Counsel appearing for the Respondents submitted that similar appeals were filed by the Revenue. He requested that all the cases may be posted together. Considered. Ordered accordingly.
-
2003 (8) TMI 395 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Captive consumption ... ... ... ... ..... the Central Excise Act is available, there is no need to go to Section 4(1)(b) or take recourse to the valuation rules. This issue has been settled by a number of decisions of this Tribunal and finally by the Apex Court in the case of Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. CCE, Madras reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. 503. The appellant has no case that apart from the sale to the Defence Department it has any other sale to other dealers charging a different price. Under these circumstances, we find no merit in the matter. The appeal, therefore, stands dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 394 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Modvat/Cenvat - Input - Packaging material - Appeal - New ground ... ... ... ... ..... ere is nothing in the rule making any such distinction and justifying denial of credit on packing which in the opinion of the department is not really necessary. I might incidentally mention that the materials that are cited before me does not lead to the conclusion that the cost of packing has not been included. The two invoices have been cited before me one, M0160 dated 2-12-1996 issued to Kanwar Plastic House, Delhi, and the other, M01765 dated 23-12-1996 issued to AM Trading Company, Mumbai. The unit price for the goods applied to both these parties the Texo Ultra fresh grade designed NL 37, and grade SS is the same in both cases. This does so that the Asstt. Commissioner contradicts with bringing his only customer special request for upcountry or export clearance. However, in the absence of such evidence, the appeal is still have to be allowed for the reason indicated above. Therefore except for the amount of Rs. 29,015 appeal is allowed and the impugned order set aside.
-
2003 (8) TMI 393 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Smuggling - Proof - Origin of goods ... ... ... ... ..... he seized Ginger was not available in Nepal. For want of any corroborative evidence, no inference could be drawn that the goods imported were of Chinese origin. The alleged statements of the drivers of the trucks regarding the Chinese origin of the goods also did not carry any legal weightage, as the drivers could not possibly disclose the origin of the goods. They could not be termed as experts or the persons having personal knowledge about the origin of the goods. 6. emsp In view of the discussion made above and from the evidence brought on record, it does not stand proved that the goods imported were of Chinese origin. Therefore, neither the confiscation of the goods nor imposition of penalty on the appellants could be legally ordered. The impugned orders-in-original in all the three captioned appeals are set aside in toto against the present appellants only. The appeals of the appellants are allowed accordingly with consequential relief, if any, permissible under the law.
-
2003 (8) TMI 392 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... the department, the extended period of limitation can be invoked. Further in the case of Marmago Steel Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. 2001 (137) E.L.T. 381 , the Tribunal had held that the Larger Bench judgment above cited will not apply when the department has conscious knowledge. In the case of Modipon Fibre Co. v. Commissioner of Central Excise 2001 (135) E.L.T. 1420 (Tri. - Del.) , the Tribunal has held that the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked for the period subsequent to acquisition of knowledge regarding manufacturing activities of the assessee, by the Revenue. In the light of the above decisions and the ratio of the Supreme Court in the case of Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company (supra) which is prima facie applicable to the present case where there exists a conflict of decisions, we are of the view that the demand is prima facie barred by limitation and therefore waive pre-deposit of duty and penalty and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.
-
2003 (8) TMI 391 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Delay in filing declaration ... ... ... ... ..... peal will not affect the ultimate outcome of that appeal of the respondents. 8. emsp Another argument of the Counsel that, silence on the part of the department should lead to an inference that the declaration filed by the respondents was accepted, in our view, is misconceived and cannot be accepted. There is no such provision in the Central Excise Act or Rules for raising such a presumption. 9. emsp In the light of the discussions detailed above, in our view, the impugned order appealed against deserves to be set aside and the matter must be sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision on the points referred to above by both the sides. 10. emsp Consequently, the impugned order-in-appeal to the extent to which it has been challenged in this appeal by the Revenue, is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision after hearing both sides. 11. emsp In the above terms the appeal of the Revenue stands allowed by way of remand.
............
|
