|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 221 to 240 of 568 Records
-
2003 (10) TMI 477 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... Notification No. 13/97 prescribing concessional rate of duty. 2. emsp The prayer for waiver is opposed by ld. DR who contends that the applicants have not made out a case on merits as prepregs and unclad laminates are neither in the nature of waste or scrap but are separate distinct excisable goods and therefore the imported inputs cannot be held to have been used for the manufacture of specified final product and therefore duty demand has been rightly raised and confirmed on that quantity of the imported inputs not used for manufacture of copper clad laminates, but used for epoxy prepregs and unclad industrial laminates. 3. emsp We have carefully considered the rival submissions and find prima facie in the plea of, jurisdiction in the face of the language of Rule 8 of the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. We, therefore, waive the pre-deposit of duty and penalty and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.
-
2003 (10) TMI 476 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Valuation - Demand ... ... ... ... ..... rities holding that the respondents had received some additional amounts through debit notes from certain buyers and accordingly demanded Central Excise duty on such additional realisations. The respondents resisted the demand on the ground that the valuation provisions in Central Excise Law contain a specific provision that where the goods are sold under statutorily fixed price, such statutory price would constitute the assessable value and, therefore, the correct duty had been paid by the respondents. This submission of the respondents found favour with the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. emsp We have perused the records and considered the submissions made by both sides. The respondents rsquo contention that when the goods are under statutory price control, that price should form the assessable value is clearly in terms of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. That being the case, there was no short levy. The present appeal of the Revenue has no merit and is accordingly rejected.
-
2003 (10) TMI 475 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... n of the term lsquo transaction value rsquo the view taken by the Board in its circular dated 3-1-2001 cannot have any application. 2. emsp Prima facie we do not find any reason to take a different view from what has been explained in the circular even after the amendment of the statute and bringing the assessable value on the basis of transaction value. We, therefore, find that the appellant has made out a strong arguable case. In view of the above, the condition for pre-deposit is waived and there will be stay of recovery of the demand.
-
2003 (10) TMI 474 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... hall stand waived and recovery thereof stayed pending their appeals. Failure to comply with this direction shall result in vacation of stay and dismissal of appeals, without prior notice. Compliance is to be reported on 13th January, 2004. 4. emsp As for Shri S.S. Sachdev, Superintendent of Customs, the charge and finding against him is that of abetment. We do not find prima facie that the provisions of Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, under which the penalty has been imposed on him are attracted, as knowledge on the part of Shri S.S. Sachdev that an offence is being committed by M/s. Stanley Industries (I) Ltd. is not brought out anywhere in the order and it may be a case of negligence or callousness as the Commissioner himself states in his order, but not that there is knowledge in order to hold prima facie that he was guilty of abetment. We therefore dispense with the requirement of pre-deposit of penalty by Shri S.S. Sachdev and stay recovery thereof pending his appeal.
-
2003 (10) TMI 473 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... apital goods since it does not apply to the requirement in Rule 57Q. I am unable to accept the submission. The law required a manufacturer of beverage to print the sale price on the bottles containing them even the sale of the beverage not bearing the sale price on the container would have been contrary to law. The printing their price on the bottle of the beverage was therefore a process of manufacture and the printing would have to be considered capital goods. 3. emsp Appeal allowed. Impugned order set aside.
-
2003 (10) TMI 472 - CESTAT, MUMBA
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Valuation ... ... ... ... ..... the coupling plates has not been properly determined by M/s. Telco Ltd. who are the manufacturers, demand for differential duty calculated on the real value should be raised against the manufacturers, i.e. M/s. Telco Ltd., and not on the applicants. 4. emsp We have heard both sides. We observe that the applicants have a strong prima facie case in their favour. As users of inputs supplied by somebody, they cannot determine the value of those inputs. It is the manufacturer of the inputs who has to decide the value of the goods manufactured by him. We also observe that the department does not allege that there is any flow-back from the buyers. The transaction value declared by the applicants therefore prima facie appears to be correct. The various issues raised should be gone into at a later stage. 5. emsp Having regard to these facts, we waive the pre-deposit of duty and penalty demanded and imposed on the applicants and stay recovery of the same pending disposal of the appeal.
-
2003 (10) TMI 471 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... d on the two electric motors on the ground that their value was not shown separately in the invoices. The appellant contends that the value has in fact been shown in the invoice, although not against the description of the goods. The copies of the two invoices No. 22803, dated 8-4-1995 and No. 22816, dated 29-4-1995 are enclosed to the appeal to indicate some value. Since, however, the original has not been produced, I think it appropriate to remand the matter to the jurisdictional authority for consideration of this point. 8. emsp In the result, therefore, the appellant is entitled to credit in respect of only items except with regard to the two electric motors referred to in order-in-original No. 95/96, dated 11-7-1996 of the Additional Commissioner, disposed of in Order-in-Appeal No. 384/96/3427, dated 17-9-1997 of the Commissioner (Appeals). The Additional Commissioner shall pass orders solely on the point raised by the appellant referred to above, in accordance with law.
-
2003 (10) TMI 470 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Valuation ... ... ... ... ..... uarely covered by the decision of the Delhi Bench in the case of CCE, Indore v. Panchsheel Organics reported in 2002 (139) E.L.T 319. 5. emsp We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that on the point at issue there are conflicting views by the respective Benches. It was submitted that when there was a conflict or different interpretation with reference to the Circular by the Court including the Apex Court, the Circular is binding on authorities as it was held by Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Vadodara v. Dhiren Chemical Industries reported in 2002 (143) E.L.T. 19 (S.C.). In the facts and circumstances, taking into consideration the different views expressed by the different Benches and in view of the verdict of the Apex Court with reference to Circular, we are of the view that prima facie case is in favour of the party and this is a fit case to grant stay as prayed for. Accordingly, these three stay applications are allowed unconditionally.
-
2003 (10) TMI 469 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... which was contained in his letter regarding misplacement of the appeal papers in his office by his assistant. In these circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) should not have taken such a strict view and refused to condone the delay of only 12 days in filing the appeal. He had discretion to condone the delay upto 30 days and should have exercised the discretion judiciously. It is well settled that technicalities if pitted against the justice, should not be allowed to prevail and that the party should be heard on merits. Moreover, in the instant case, the appellants should not have been penalised for the negligence of the Counsel in misplacing the papers. 4. emsp Therefore, in the light of the discussion made above, the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is condoned and the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for hearing on merits. The appeal is allowed by way of remand.
-
2003 (10) TMI 468 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit ... ... ... ... ..... corded his reasons for disallowing the Modvat credit. Therefore, it would not be legally justifiable to hold at this stage when only the stay application is being disposed of, that the case of the appellants is covered by the above said judgment. It is a case where the interpretation of the Rule 57A and the amended definition of the expression ldquo input rdquo is involved. Therefore, it is not a fit case to allow total waiver of the pre-deposit of the duty amount. 5. emsp Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the issue involved, the appellants are directed to make pre-deposit of Rs. 2 lakhs within 8 weeks from today. On making this deposit, the pre-deposit of the balance duty shall remain waived and recovery stayed during the pendency of the appeal. But failure to comply with the terms of the stay order shall result in dismissal of the appeal without prior notice under Section 35F of the Act. To come up for reporting compliance on 19-11-2003.
-
2003 (10) TMI 467 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Excisability - Manufacture - Marble articles and novelty items - Penalty - Composite penalty - Demand - Limitation - Suppression of facts - Demand - Revenue neutrality
-
2003 (10) TMI 466 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Rockwool/Slagwool and products thereof ... ... ... ... ..... ecords and heard both the sides. 3. emsp Ld. SDR argued in support of the classification under Heading No. 68.03 by relying on the following decisions of the Tribunal - (i) Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad v. Rockwool (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2002 (144) E.L.T. 404 (Tri. - Bang.) (ii) NGP Industries Ltd. v. CCE, JSR 2003 (152) E.L.T. 414 (Tri. - Kol.) . 4. emsp The ld. Counsel for the respondents relied on the decision in Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd. case (supra) and claimed that the subject goods were appropriately classifiable under Heading 68.07. 5. emsp We have considered the submissions. As we are confronted, in these cases, with conflicting decisions of different co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal, we have no option but to refer the issue to a Larger Bench in keeping with judicial discipline. Accordingly, we direct the Registry to place the files before the Hon rsquo ble President for constituting a Larger Bench to examine and decide on the aforesaid classification issue.
-
2003 (10) TMI 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Refund - Unjust enrichment ... ... ... ... ..... ) suo motu could not have challenged the sanction order. Therefore, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is totally illegal and deserves to be set aside and is so set aside. Since the Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any finding regarding the justification for crediting the amount to Welfare Fund, he is directed to pass fresh orders after affording the appellants necessary opportunity of hearing. It is also made clear that the order for sanctioning the refund amount has become final and cannot be disturbed. The Commissioner (Appeals) is also directed to examine the merits of the refund of balance amount of Rs. 9,660/-, which was denied by the Assistant Collector. 3. emsp The appeal of the appellant succeeds and the matter is remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) for passing final orders in accordance with the directions contained in this order, after following the principles of natural justice. The impugned order is consequentially set aside to the extent indicated above.
-
2003 (10) TMI 464 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Valuation - Related person ... ... ... ... ..... ible for this Tribunal to do so, in the absence of such basic material as the bills of entry. It is therefore necessary for him now to consider whether the appellant rsquo s claims is correct, that the products that were under consideration were imported and sold by it without being subjected to any process or manipulation. It is also necessary to emphasize, since the Assistant Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals) were only concerned with the addition of the royalty amount to the assessable value, the question as to whether the price at which the goods are sold is acceptable as transaction value in a situation where the buyer and seller are related has not been considered either by them and therefore by this Tribunal. It may now require to be considered. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall, after considering material that the appellant may produce within a month of receipt of this order, decide upon these issues. 6. emsp The appeal is allowed and the impugned order set aside.
-
2003 (10) TMI 463 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
SSI Exemption - Brand name ... ... ... ... ..... n this context reference may be made to the ratio of law laid down in M/s. Charkha Detergents and Soap Enterprises v. CCE, New Delhi, 2002 (48) RLT 528 and Tainwala Personal Care Products P. Ltd. v. CCE, Surat II, 2002 (52) RLT 991 wherein it has been observed that the effective date of assignment deed assigning brand name would be the date mentioned therein and not the date of registration. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that appellant No. 4 by virtue of this assignment, became entitled to use the brand name ldquo SUMER rdquo in their own right. 6. emsp In the light of the facts and circumstances discussed above, it is difficult to conclude that the appellant No. 1 had used the brand name of another person so as to deny them the benefit of the small scale exemption Notification 1/93 for the period in dispute. Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief if any, permissible under the law.
-
2003 (10) TMI 462 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... true that the carrier ought to have obtained duty paying document or invoice or import document whichever was appropriate in this case. This only indicates suspicious behavior on the part of the carriers. Nevertheless, penalty cannot be imposed merely on suspicion. It is well settled principle of law that ldquo suspicion rdquo howsoever grave cannot take place of evidence. There is no evidence that the transporter had prior knowledge that the goods were imported fabrics or the same were liable to confiscation. If that had been the case, he would not have taken the risk of storing the remaining 86 packages for 4 more days, when on 1-11-2001 itself, 46 packages were delivered to an unknown consignee. The penalty imposed, therefore, is based on presumption rather than on evidence, hence liable to be set aside. 4. emsp Accordingly, I set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants in the impugned order and allow the appeal. The impugned order is modified only to the extent above.
-
2003 (10) TMI 461 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... t for the respondent along with cross-objections. 6. emsp On a careful consideration of the submissions, we notice that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not interpreted with the order of the original authority in classifying all the items on merits with regard to colour monitor which he has found it to be classfiable along with thermal imager as they constitute and perform a common function of measuring the temperature of the kiln. The section note and chapter notes have been applied for the purpose of classification. The imager does not function independently and it works only to record the temperature noted by the thermal imager. They are complimentary to each other and therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) lsquo s order directing the item colour monitor to be classified along with thermal imager is a correct and proper order and does not require our interference. There is no merit in the appeal and hence it is rejected. The cross-objections also gets disposed of accordingly.
-
2003 (10) TMI 460 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Dutiability - Yarn, multi-folded yarn - Manufacture - Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... arn P. Ltd. and Ors. v. CCE, Jaipur (supra), then the demands are hit by time-bar. 5. emsp In view of appellants rsquo having satisfied that no duty on the polyester sewing thread manufactured out of imported polyester filament yarn is leviable for the reason that the said yarn is nothing but multi-fold yarn, hence such process does not amount to a process of manufacture. Even otherwise, they have paid additional duty which is equal to excise duty in terms of Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of Hyderabad Industries Ltd. v. UOI (supra) and therefore the benefit of notification also cannot be denied to the appellants. As stated earlier, the question of considering the notification does not survive as the process of doubling of yarn does not amount to a process of manufacture. The demands are also time-barred. Therefore, the appellants succeed in this appeal in terms of the judgments cited. In view of our finding above, the impugned order is set aside and appeal allowed.
-
2003 (10) TMI 459 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Audio system - Import of parts/components ... ... ... ... ..... d (supra) where the items are imported SKD/CKD condition in the guise of parts and accessories, then they contravened the provisions of law and required confiscation and proceeded with as per law. Likewise in Sipani Automobiles case (supra), the Tribunal clearly held that when the car has been imported in CKD/SKD condition, it is to be treated as inputs for fully assembled car and these two judgments prevail over in the present case. The Apex Court rsquo s judgment rendered in the case of CC, New Delhi v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (supra) which pertained to import of printing books and printed manuals and has no applicability to the facts of the present case. Likewise the judgment rendered in Award Electronics v. CC, Chennai (supra) is also distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of this case. We find that the fine and penalty imposed is not on the higher side requiring interference in view of high value of the goods. There is no merit in the appeal and hence it is dismissed.
-
2003 (10) TMI 458 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Show cause notice - Validity of - Penalty - Advance licence ... ... ... ... ..... ya the proprietor of the firm was shielding Vinod Jatia, which appears to us swayed by the Commissioner rsquo s finding with regard to H.P. Daga and Co. Lack of opportunity of hearing as in any event is indicated as defence. The letter dated 27-8-1993 by the appellant to the Commissioner seem to have been received by him records that this appellant did not attend the hearing on that date for want of intimation and requested for a fresh date. While the Commissioner records the absence of H.P. Daga and Co. or the representative in the hearing, he does not refer to these requests. In these circumstances, we think it appropriate that the appellant be given a fair opportunity of hearing before the case is decided against him. His appeal is accordingly allowed. The Commissioner shall adjudicate on his liability to penalty in accordance with law. 21. emsp Appeal C/667/94 allowed in part. Appeal C/668/94 allowed. Appeal C/1782/94 allowed by way of remand. All other appeals dismissed.
............
|
