Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 221 to 240 of 492 Records
-
1998 (2) TMI 277 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... n any reason for holding that this value has to be added. According to the appellant, operating equipment cannot be regarded as an essential part of drilling rig and accessories are optional accessories which are not necessary for the functioning of the drilling rig. These aspects have not been considered by the lower authorities. In our opinion the adjudicating authority should consider the contentions of the appellant with reference to this amount. 8. emsp While upholding the finding that the value of Kelly, weight indicator and rotary table has to be included in the assessable value of the drilling rig, we set aside the finding that the value of spares, operating equipment and accessories has to be added and remand the case to the jurisdictional adjudicating authority for deciding afresh whether the amount of Rs. 3,15,500.00 shown as the value of operating equipment is required in law to be added to the assessable value and to pass a fresh order. 9. emsp Appeal is allowed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 276 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Spent sulphuric acid - Dutiability - Excisability ... ... ... ... ..... huric acid which is left over and called as Spent Sulphuric Acid which is disposed of a as such, and once the test of manufacture is not passed, it becomes immaterial whether it is being bought and sold as such or not. To put it the other way round, Heading 28.07 covers that sulphuric acid or oleum which is manufactured in the first instance and not that which has merely remained unused in a process, for there is no excise on use or non-use of a commodity which was otherwise excisable. In the present case, when sulphuric acid was initially purchased by the respondents for use in the process, they must have paid the excise duty in the normal course on the entire quantity to be utilised in the process. Therefore, even otherwise, it would amount to charging duty twice on the unused left over portion of sulphuric acid. We, therefore, consider that the order of the Collector (Appeals) was correct and is required to be upheld. The Department rsquo s appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 275 - SUPREME COURT
... ... ... ... ..... he course of processing of rice in the rice mill and rice bran oil is obtain- ed by the solvent extraction process and is not fit for human consumption, we are in agreement with the decisions of the Allahabad and Bombay High Court referred to above that rice bran oil does not fall within the ambit of definition of vegetable oil rsquo contained in Section 3(h) of the Development Board Act. 7. emsp The appeal is, therefore, allowed and the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside. The bank guarantees that have been furnished by the appellants in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court shall stand discharged. As regards refund of the amount paid it will be open to the appellants to move the appropriate authority and if any such application is made, the same shall be considered in accordance with the principles laid down by this Court in Mafatlal Industries and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) 1997 (5) SCC 536. No order as to costs.
-
1998 (2) TMI 274 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Dutiablity of free replacement as per warranty clause ... ... ... ... ..... valent in the trade for sale of various guaranteed goods. There is no exemption notification issued under Section 5A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 in respect of goods cleared for free replacement during the warranty period. Moreover, there is also no documents on record showing that value of replacements under warranty was in the price list. The supply of new goods in place of old defective goods out of the manufactured goods will be subject to excise duty at the time of clearance. The appellant rsquo s reference, in support of their claim, to the CEGAT decision reported in 1988 (33) E.L.T. 481, 1988 (33) E.L.T. 787, 1988 (34) E.L.T. 662 also does not appear to be relevant, as in those cases the dispute was for valuation of excisable goods and not the question of duty exemption as in this case. rdquo Since the issue has been properly considered by the Collector (Appeals) we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order and in the result, the appeal is dismissed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 273 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... f entry, stamp papers and declaration form signed by him from the business premises of the appellant and the appellant rsquo s failure to produce Shri Abdul Samad Wazir Khan before the Customs authorities is not by itself sufficient to hold that the appellant had either connived or colluded in the fraudulent import of the car in question. It is to be noted that the appellant is a Customs Clearing Agent and in the normal course of his business, he would be in possession of documents required for clearance of imported goods such as bills of entry etc. What is required for the purpose of establishing a link between the appellant and the fraudulent import is something more than this, and this vital link in the chain of events is missing. Since the evidence on record is not sufficient for driving home the charge of fraudulent import of the Mitsubishi Pajero car against the appellant, I extend the benefit of doubt to the appellant, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1998 (2) TMI 272 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Import - DEEC scheme - Advance licence ... ... ... ... ..... een includible in the deposition of goods imported under an advance licence. The object is undoubtedly to ensure that the benefit of the notification is not denied to goods merely received, when they were imported, and they were not covered by an advance licence but which the Government extended shall get the benefit of the DEEC Scheme, and so far what it subsequently issued an advance licence. These conditions would not apply in view of this specific finding of the Additional Collector that the import was made under an advance licence. 6. emsp It is strange that the importer chose to bond the goods when no duty would be payable on them, which would be the case, if they were importer under an advance licence. We however cannot discount the specific finding of the Additional Collector that the importer had a valid advance import licence when the goods were cleared from the bond. We have therefore no alternative but to allow the appeal. Appeal allowed. Impugned order set aside.
-
1998 (2) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Demand ... ... ... ... ..... tion, in any form, was not raised before the Collector or in the present memorandum of appeal. This new contention which requires investigation into facts, cannot be permitted to be raised. 24. emsp For the reasons indicated already, the order dated 23-9-1988 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay is set aside holding that part of dealers rsquo margin referable to cost of free after-sales-services cannot be included in the assessable value and that show cause notice dated 3-1-1986 is invalid and remanding the proceedings based on the remaining five show cause notices for fresh adjudication on the aspect of cost of advertisement, in accordance with law and the observations in this order by the jurisdictional adjudicating autho-rity after giving Mahindra opportunity of producing documentary evidence and of personal hearing. The order dated 23-10-1989 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi against Maruti is set aside. The appeals are accordingly allowed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 270 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... e product itself being exempt, the question of paying duty on hiring charges on dispensers does not arise. 5. emsp Even if it is be that the product attracted the erstwhile T.I. IB, we are of the view that rent for the dispensers cannot become part of the assessable value of fruit juice. Fruit juice is sold in carbouys to dealers. Dealers sent fruit juice to consumers in small quantity in plastic cups for which purpose, dispenser is necessary. It is for the dealer to arrange for dispensers for themselves either by purchasing such equipment or by taking such equipment on hire from the manufacturer or in other this cannot have anything to do with the activity of manufacturer of fruit juice. It cannot be regarded as enhancing marketability of bulk fruit juice in carbouys sold by the manufacturer. Even if the product dutiable, hire charges collected cannot be regarded as part of the assessable value. For the reasons indicated, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
-
1998 (2) TMI 269 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Related person ... ... ... ... ..... ice at which such goods are ordinarily sold by the assessee to a buyer in the course of wholesale trade for delivery at the time and place of removal, where the buyer is not a related person and the price is the sole consideration for the sale. Since M/s. Escorts Ltd. is a ldquo related person rdquo , the price charged to M/s. Escorts Ltd. cannot be regarded as the normal price under Section 4(1)(a) of the Act. There were sales to independent wholesalers at lesser discount. Those wholesalers were not ldquo related persons rdquo therefore, the lower authorities were justified in holding that the assessable value of the goods sold to M/s. Escorts Ltd. should be based on the wholesale price charged by appellant to independent wholesalers. 7. emsp Appellant has succeeded before the lower authorities in regard to the period prior to 1-1-1981 but has nevertheless filed two appeals in respect of the aforesaid period also. 8. emsp For the reasons aforesaid, the appeals are dismissed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 268 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... rade notice offering in document to the prospective exporters are in character executive. The Union Government and its Officers are on the authorities of this Court, not entitled at their whims to ignore the promises made by its Government. rdquo The other two judgments of the Honourable Apex Court in the case of M/s. Bengal National and M/s. Bhiwani Textile, relied upon by the appellant firm are also relevant and fully cover the appellant rsquo s case for demand of duty. The appellants having cleared the goods in accordance with the Department rsquo s directions given after due deliberation on the point, no demand for the said period can be confirmed against them. 5. emsp Accordingly, while holding that the product in question was correctly classifiable under Tariff Item (erstwhile) 15A(2) by following M/s. VMT rsquo s decision, we set aside the demand of duty confirmed against the appellant firm in view of our above discussions. 6. emsp Appeal is disposed of in above terms.
-
1998 (2) TMI 267 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Shortage in stock - Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... not point to any consistent approach but in the absence of proper enquiry to pin them down to any definite specific irregularity in this regard, the benefit of doubt has to be extended to them for acceptance of the plea that for the 30 drums in question chemical test had not been carried out and the goods were not yet ready for despatch. The goods were also in the finishing section within the factory premises only. In the circumstances, the confiscation of these goods (30 drums of plasticisers) and imposition of penalty on that score deserve to be set aside. We order accordingly. 9. emsp For the foregoing reasons, while upholding the finding regarding demand of duty on the 5 drums and the imposition of penalty of Rs. 1000/- under Rule 9(2), we set aside the order insofar as the confiscation of goods found unaccounted for and the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed under Rule 173Q. The appeal is partly allowed. The amount of duty should be quantified by the adjudicating authority.
-
1998 (2) TMI 266 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Limitation - Delay in filing appeal ... ... ... ... ..... , Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji - 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 (S.C.), wherein the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court has observed that a liberal approach is needed in condoning the delay and that if there was a sufficient cause for condonation of delay, then the delay should be condoned. He also referred to the Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. Akry Rasayan - 1997 (89) E.L.T. 81 (Tribunal). We find that in both these appeals no sufficient grounds have been established for filing the appeals late. The only ground taken is that they wanted some more information from the adjudicating authority. We find that these requests have also been made when the period for filing the appeal was already over. 8. emsp In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any material on record to justify interference with the view already taken by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) in the matter. As a result, both these appeals are dismissed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 265 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Value of clearances - Valuation - Demand - Clandestine removal - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... and show cause notice was issued on 16-9-1982. There is no truth in the contention that the Department was all along aware of the true facts. Significantly, this submission was not made before us in the appeals 876, 1109 and 1105/85-A. A clear case of wilful misdeclaration of value and suppression of facts with intent to evade duty has been made out and larger period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Act was rightly invoked. We find no ground to interfere in Appeal E/468/90-A 25. emsp Order dated 29-12-1984 is set aside to the extent of the demand based on two diaries on alleged illicitly manufactured goods. The other findings in the order and imposition of penalty on each of the appellants are confirmed. The case is remanded for quantification of duty demand after deleting the duty referable to alleged illicitly manufactured goods. Appeals No. E/876/85-A, 1109/85-A and 1110/85-A are partly allowed as indicated. 26. emsp Appeal E/468/90-A is dismissed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 264 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Removable bearing liner - Demand - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... or concerned. We order accordingly. He will decide about the question of classification taking into account all relevant material, in accordance with principles of natural justice. 5.2 emsp On the question of demand of duty being barred by time, we are inclined to agree with the ld. Consultant that the appellants could have a bona fide belief in not declaring it specifically in the classification list, when it is admitted by the adjudicating authority ldquo .... it is capable of being working as a part in ball mill rdquo and it does not have the nomenclature of bearing housing or plain shaft bearing. Therefore, we hold the demand as barred by time. Consequently, demand of duty confirmed against the appellant in the impugned order is set aside. 5.3 emsp In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, question of imposing any penalty on the appellant does not arise. Hence the penalty of Rs. 2,000/ imposed on the appellant is also set aside. 5.4 emsp Appeal disposed of in above terms.
-
1998 (2) TMI 263 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Absorbent cotton covered by “surgical absorbent lint” - Eligible to exemption under Notification No. 35/86-C.E.
-
1998 (2) TMI 262 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ppellants herein. We are of the view that in view of the categorical definition of lsquo parts of general use rsquo in Section Note (2) of Section XV, the goods are specifically covered under Tariff Heading 73.15 read with Section Note (1)(g) of Section XVI. This cannot at all be covered under Tariff Heading 84.32 as contended by the appellant firm. Reliance placed by the appellants on an earlier order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not of much help to the appellants inasmuch as the said Order-in-Appeal basically relates to the practice of the Customs House. He has not gone into the contends of the Chapter Notes mentioned above. Therefore, reliance placed by the appellants herein on the earlier Order-in-Appeal of the Commissioner (Appeals) would not be of any help to him, particularly when the lower authorities have specifically relied on the two Section Notes mentioned above. We do not find any substance in the pleas of the appellants. Consequently. we dismiss the appeals.
-
1998 (2) TMI 261 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Modvat - Duty paying document ... ... ... ... ..... ments were fake or manipulated. Since the documents were acceptable as duty paying documents, therefore, Modvat credit on the strength of these documents was admissible. The only point that remains about these documents is that if the documents showed Rs. 1,000/- as the duty paid on the input material whether the credit could be restricted to Rs. 920/- per MT. The fact is that during the material period the rate of duty on the input was Rs. 920/- per MT. Therefore, Modvat credit to the extent of Rs. 920/- only would be admissible to the appellants and I allow the credit accordingly. Since I have held that the Modvat credit at the rate of Rs. 920/- per MT on the strength of the documents produced will be admissible to the appellants, the question of deemed Modvat credit does not arise. In the circumstances, I refrain from commenting whether deemed Modvat credit was admissible or not. 6. emsp In view of the above findings, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal allowed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 260 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... was seen that even according to Department instruction so long as the description and sub-heading for the inputs and also the final product was there, the benefit of Modvat credit could be allowed if it was established that the inputs are received and had been used in the manufacture of final product. Tribunal in the case of Bihar Caustic and Chemical Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Patna reported in 1993 (64) E.L.T. 332 (Tribunal) 1993 (44) ECR 591 held that Modvat credit cannot be denied on minor variation in description/classification of inputs. 5. emsp In the present case the appellant has declared the strips of iron falling under Chapter Heading No. 72 of the Tariff as input. It was not the case of the Department that the input in question had not been used in the manufacture of final product. Following the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Shri Ramakrishna Steel Industries (supra) the inpugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
-
1998 (2) TMI 259 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... assification of the items under sub-heading 39.22 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and has also extended the benefit of exemption Notification 132/86. During the period in dispute in the present case i.e. May, 1989 to August, 1990, the relevant heading was 39.26 which covers all other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of Headings 39.01 to 39.14 and noting that Heading 39.26 which has been arrived by the lower Appellate authority is the correct heading, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal of the Revenue.
-
1998 (2) TMI 258 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Confiscation of conveyance - Redemption fine ... ... ... ... ..... identified. I am, therefore, of the view in the over-all facts and circumstances of the case that the truck has been rightly confiscated by the adjudicating authority. 4.2 emsp There is, however, some case, as urged by the ld. Advocate, for reduction in the redemption fine inasmuch as the truck was seized in June, 1994 i.e. more than 3.5 years ago. The truck is still lying in the custody of the department. Due to non-operation of the truck for a long period on account of fixing a very high security for provisional release its position might have deteriorated substantially. It has also caused a loss of business to the appellant for this period. Further, the appellant had no knowledge about the mis-doing of the driver. Keeping in view, the over-all facts and circumstances of the case, I reduce the fine from Rs. 30,000/- to Rs. 15,000/-. 4.3 emsp But for the modification in the quantum of redemption fine, the Appeal is otherwise rejected. Appeal disposed of in the above manner.
............
|