|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 354 Records
-
1991 (2) TMI 329 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Restriction on commencement of business, Grant of recognition to stock exchanges ... ... ... ... ..... curities Act, there are penalties provided under the Act including prosecuting the company. Section 19 of the Securities Act clearly provides that no person shall, except with the permission of the Central Government, organise or assist in organising or be a member of any stock exchange (other than a recognised stock exchange) for the purpose of assisting in entering into or performing any contracts in securities. If there is any violation of this provision, it is for the petitioner to approach the authorities concerned to prosecute the first respondent. The petitioner can also inform respondents Nos. 11 to 13 about such violation, for taking appropriate action. It may be an additional ground to point out that the persons who are trying to organise the stock exchange are violating the law even before recognition is granted. These are matters to be taken before respondents Nos. 11 to 13 by the petitioner. I find no merit in this writ petition and it is, accordingly, dismissed.
-
1991 (2) TMI 304 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... lling under tariff item 40.05, and also the goods namely all rubber products in the form of plates, sheets, and strips unhardened whether vulcanised or not, and whether combined with any textile material or otherwise falling under sub-item 2 of the item 16A. Therefore, the intention of the Government is not only to exempt goods falling under Tariff Item 40.05 but also all rubber products etc. Any other interpretation of the Notification would be to amending the notification which is not the function of this Tribunal. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that vulcanised micro cellular rubber sheets fall under Tariff Item 40.08 under the new tariff they are entitled for exemption under the Notification No. 71/68 as amended by Notification No. 246/86. 13. emsp As regards the limitation, since goods are eligible for exemption the question of liability for payment of duty does not arise. Consequently the question of suppression of facts does not arise. 14. emsp We allow the appeal.
-
1991 (2) TMI 303 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Worker - No. of workers - Computation of - Exemption Notification 46/81-C.E. ... ... ... ... ..... he consequential surrender of their license was accepted. The letter also mentions the reason as due to insufficient sales, whereas the Collector records in his order ldquo the fact that the factory had employed 10 or more workers during the relevant time, is further supported from the value of goods cleared by the factory which was Rs. 23.36 lakhs during 1984-85 for 8 months, while the total value of clearances during 1982-83, 1983-84 was Rs. 28.87 lakhs and Rs. 27.67 lakhs respectively. rdquo 5. emsp In the result, therefore, on an overall consideration of the evidence on record, the conclusion of the Collector that the appellants had employed more than 9 workers during the period from 20-6-1983 to 19-6-1984 and were therefore, not entitled to exemption under Notification 46/81, demanding duty from them for this reason is well founded, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the quantum of penalty is also reasonable. The appeal is, therefore, rejected.
-
1991 (2) TMI 295 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Evidence - Penalty - Confiscation of Indian currency ... ... ... ... ..... d. As already held by the Supreme Court in the decision reported in AIR 1985 SC 866 this evidence of coaccused cannot be the sole basis for conviction of appellant Hansraj Baid. It must be corroborated by independent evidence. Even otherwise, we have already held that the statement of Jagdish Prasad Soni cannot be treated as a voluntary statement as he had retracted the same at the earliest opportunity when he was produced before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on 9-5-1985. Therefore, on the basis of such a retracted statement, the appellant Hansraj Baid cannot be fixed with the liability and more particularly when the gold in question was not at all seized from him or from any other place. In these circumstances, we hold that the imposition of penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the appellant Hansraj Baid is also not in accordance with law and the same is hereby set aside. 12. emsp In the result, both the appeals are allowed and the appellants are entitled for consequential reliefs.
-
1991 (2) TMI 294 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Reference to High Court - Limitation - Delay ... ... ... ... ..... has opposed the prayer and submitted that sufficient cause has not been given in the reference application. 4. emsp We have perused the COD application and heard the submission of both the sides. 5. emsp We find that the department has not been able to show sufficient justification for condoning the delay. This Tribunal has repeatedly held that all the concerned have to take due care to keep in mind the time factor and delay merely on account of processing of the file cannot be condoned unless good and sufficient reasons are indicated. 6. emsp From the submissions of the department itself it appears that even the order of the Board for filing the reference application was admittedly passed after the expiry of the normal period and due care has not been taken in ensuring timely filing of the application. 7. emsp In the circumstances, we are not inclined to condone the delay and reject the application. 8. emsp Consequently, the reference application is dismissed as time barred.
-
1991 (2) TMI 287 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Photo composing machine - Keyboards ... ... ... ... ..... ith key boards. 3. ........................ 4. ........................ 5. ....................... A simple perusal of the notification shows that the main condition for extending the benefit of the notification is the same and it should be used in the printing industry and it should fall under Chapter 84 or Chapter 90. 6. The machine has been assessed under Heading 84.34. In view of Section Note 3 to Section XVI and Note 5 to Chapter 84 and the legal position discussed above, we are of the view that it would be appropriate if the 4 Nos. of 5404 (40K) VDI offline keyboards for English/Devnagari imported by the respondents are assessed under Heading 84.34 of CTA, 1975. 7. In the result, the revenue rsquo s appeal is dismissed. The revenue authorities are directed to give consequential effect to this order. We are dismissing the Revenue rsquo s appeal keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. This order need not be treated as a precedent for other cases.
-
1991 (2) TMI 286 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appellate Tribunal - Jurisdiction of Special Bench vis-a-vis Regional Bench ... ... ... ... ..... rwise, inasmuch as an appliance or equipment could be one made of paper also. However the issue as to what constitutes equipment/appliance has already been considered at length and decided by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Weldeker Laminates Private Limited, reported in 1990 (49) E.L.T. 538-WRB and this order has been followed by this Bench in the case of M/s. Century Laminating Company Private Limited decided by order No. A/16/91-NRB/ dated 4-12-1990. 30. Following the ratio of the above order we hold that the silica coated release paper cannot be considered as equipment/appliance and is therefore not hit by the exclusion clause. 31. In view of the above discussion, we find that the department has not been able to show that modvat credit has been wrongly availed of. As such we are not required to go into the question of time bar and the appeal succeeds, on merits. 32. The order of the Assistant Collector and the Collector (Appeals) are set aside and the Appeal is accepted.
-
1991 (2) TMI 285 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Authorised representative ... ... ... ... ..... refore, the settlement of the suit by the defendant rsquo s counsel was without the authority of their client and was not binding on the client. This full Bench Ruling was followed in the case of K. Sankaranarayana Pillai v. M/s. Mysore Fertilizer Company (AIR 1979 Kerala 167). 27. In the case of Registrar of Restrictive Trade Agreements, New Delhi v. Allied Distributors and Co. and Bengal Potteries Ltd. (1976 Tax Law Reporter 1599), Monopolies Restrictive Trade Practices Commission held that the oral authority of an Advocate not instructed by the Solicitors on record was not sufficient to seek an adjournment before the Commission. 28. In the absence of any precedents, the first principles of law have to be applied. For the reasoning set out in paragraph 22 of the order recorded by my learned Sister, I agree that the Order III Rule 5 CPC does not apply to the proceedings before the Tribunal. Sd/- (Jyoti Balasundaram) Member (J) I agree. Sd/- (N.K. Bajpai) Member (T) 3-2-1992
-
1991 (2) TMI 284 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... econdly the matter involved theft and requires knowledge of local conditions. 4. The learned counsel stated that only point of law relating to legality of import and validity of licence etc., are involved and the matter does not require any knowledge of local conditions and there is no doubt regarding facts in ascertaining a knowledge of local conditions are necessary was involved. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We observe that the public notice 1/87 gives this facility to all appellants and does not distinguish between importers and letter of authority holders. Further prima facie no knowledge of local conditions appears to be necessary in view of the submissions of the learned counsel. 6. As such the appeal may be listed for hearing before this Bench in due 7. The learned counsel stated that she has already filed an early hearing application. 8. The Registry may check up and list the same in due course. 9. The Miscellaneous application is accepted.
-
1991 (2) TMI 283 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Recovery of arrears of revenue ... ... ... ... ..... ment although it does not appear such a loan has yet been sanctioned. 36. In the circumstances it would appear that for the purposes of Section 22(1) of the 1985 Act, withholding of the Sales Tax declaration forms on account of non-payment of arrears of Sales Tax dues is a similar process such as execution and distress. It follows that the Sales Tax authorities cannot in such circumstances withhold such forms except with the consent of the BIFR. It is made clear however that the withholding of declaration forms on any other ground is not being considered in this judgment. 37. Therefore it is directed that the Sales Tax Authorities will not withhold the declaration forms on account of non-payment of arrears of Sales Tax dues. The Sales Tax authorities will however be at liberty to make an application to the BIFR for its consent to the withholding of Sales Tax Declaration forms under the 1956 Act. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1991 (2) TMI 282 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
MODVAT Credit ... ... ... ... ..... production of the said tubes which are used for packing the explosives which are present in the final product and are an integral part thereof can thus be said to be used in the manufacture of final products themselves. To compartmentalise the process of manufacture will not be permissible. As the Supreme Court had held in Collector of Central Excise v. East End Paper Industries - 1989 (43) E.L.T. 201 1990 (26) E.C.R. 10 anything required to make the goods marketable must form part of the manufacture and any material used for the same would be component part of the end-product. Applying this test, the Blow Moulded Tubes are component parts of the explosives. The materials used for production of such integral component parts are undoubtedly used in the manufacture of the final products. 7. In view of the foregoing position, we uphold the appellants rsquo contention and allow the appeal. The impugned order is set aside. The appellants will be entitled to consequential benefits.
-
1991 (2) TMI 281 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ing, it is clear that the product wall or ceiling coverings based on textile base fabric on which PVC film is laminated is classifiable under Chapter 39. There is no dispute of the product being in rolls of a width less than 45 cms. It is being used for wall or ceiling decoration and also consists of plastic permanently fixed on material other than paper. The plastic layer (on the face side) being grained, embossed, coloured, designed, printed or otherwise decorated is also not in dispute. Therefore, the Chapter Notes 1 and 2 to Chapter Note 59 is not applicable to this case. Chapter 59.03 applies to Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics. This Chapter 59 has no application to wall covering of plastics which falls specifically under Chapter 39. There is no infirmity in the reasoning given by the Collector (Appeals) in the impugned order. There is no merit in the appeal and it is liable to be rejected and we order accordingly. Appeal dismissed.
-
1991 (2) TMI 280 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ms, vanishing creams, cold creams, make-up creams, cleansing creams, skin foods and skin tonics, face powders, baby powders, toilet powders, talcum powders and grease paints, lipsticks, eye-shadow and eye-brow pencils, nail polishes and varnishes, cuticle removers and other preparations for use in manicure or chiropody, sun-burn preventive preparations and sun-tan preparations, barrier creams to given protection against skin irritants, personal (body) deodorants, depilatories . It may be seen that the item covered not only preparations for the care of the skin but also beauty or make-up preparations and manicure or pedicure preparations. Moreover, eye brow pencils were specifically mentioned in the entry. In our opinion eye brow pencils came in for specifications because they were a beauty or make-up preparation and not because they were a preparation for the care of the skin. 5. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we see no merit in the appeal which we consequently dismiss.
-
1991 (2) TMI 279 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Exemption to S.S.I. units - Value of clearances ... ... ... ... ..... that the value of clearances referred to therein are of the ldquo said goods rdquo and the expression ldquo said goods rdquo , as may be seen from the opening paragraph of the notification, refers to Synthetic Organic Dyestuffs and Synthetic Organic Derivatives falling under Item 14D, CET. Therefore, the clearances of any other goods, in the present case Paints and Varnishes, would not be clearances of the ldquo said goods rdquo and the value of such clearances should not be taken into account. From the show cause notice dated 19-4-1983, it is apparent that the value of clearances of goods falling under Item 14 have also been taken into account in computing the aggregate value of clearances. Once this value is excluded, it is seen that the aggregate value of clearances of goods falling under Item 14D was well within the stipulated limit of Rs. 15 lakhs. In this view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant.
-
1991 (2) TMI 278 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Adjudication - Non-speaking order ... ... ... ... ..... amine the matter at length which he has obviously not done. 10. The department has also not shown any evidence circumstantial or otherwise of any attempt to remove the goods clandestinely. The learned Additional Collector rsquo s order is silent on this aspect also. 11. During the course of the hearing before us the learned SDR could not clarify as to how it was a case of violation of 57F(l)(i) and 57G(3)(a) if the quantity had been duly accounted for in the RG-23A and was still lying within the factory premises 12. We note that the learned DR also could not show any evidence to contradict the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. 13 In the above circumstances, it is apparent that the case was made out only on the basis of assumptions and presumptions and suspicion and was not based on evidence. Hence, the learned Additional Collector had erred in passing the impugned order and imposing penalty. 14. I, therefore, set aside the order and accept the appeal.
-
1991 (2) TMI 277 - CEGAT, MADRAS
MODVAT Credit - Declaration ... ... ... ... ..... t admit of any such interpretation. The Respondents themselves have stated that in respect of that portion of goods which had been cleared outside the factory they have reversed the MODVAT Credit on instructions from the Departmental authorities and they will continue to do that. The plea of the Revenue that it is difficult to apportion the MODVAT Credit between the goods cleared outside the factory and that used as intermediate product is not acceptable as it may not be difficult to work out the input-output ratio in respect of intermediate product. In fact that has been asked .to be done by the Supdt. as pleaded by the Respondents. In any case just because there is some difficulty in apportioning the credit, this cannot be a reason for denying a substantive concession allowed under the law. In view of above, we hold that there is no infirmity in the findings of the learned lower appellate authority and the plea of the Revenue has no force. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal.
-
1991 (2) TMI 276 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
... ...
... ... ..... Policy AM 1981. 10. The classification on the basis of predominant contents is generally accepted as proper test. The other elements found are supplements to the said item and mixture thereof does not alter the main characteristic of the item, which remains to be the raw material for soap manufacture. 11. When the Tribunal has not applied the test arbitrarily but in the context of the other evidence on record indicating that the item imported is basically the Palm Fatty Acid, there appears no question of law arising out of the order calling for reference to the High Court. 12. Rest of the points raised are all factual aspects, and in the nature of challenging the order on its merits. Provisions of Sec. 130(1) of the Act are not in the nature of permitting filing of an appeal against the order and hence none of them can be said to have been giving rise to the issue of law, calling for any reference. 13. In the result, we find no merits in the prayer and hence reject the same.
-
1991 (2) TMI 275 - CEGAT, MADRAS
MODVAT Credit ... ... ... ... ..... te authority to have given findings on the plea of the appellants for facility under Rule 57F(2) after taking into consideration the scope and terms of Notification 214/86. In this context it will also be relevant to go into the aspect of whether the product emerging at the hands of the job worker is a marketable commodity as such and could be considered as goods for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty and, therefore, as finished excisable goods for the purpose of Rule 57A read with Rule 57F and Notification 214/86. We observe that the learned lower appellate authority has not examined the matter in all its aspects and we, therefore, hold that the learned lower appellate authority rsquo s order is not maintainable in law and is, therefore, set aside. We order that the learned lower appellate authority shall examine the matter de novo in the light of what we have stated above after giving an opportunity to the appellants of hearing. The appeal is thus allowed by remand.
-
1991 (2) TMI 274 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification of goods ... ... ... ... ..... in effective performance and hence assessable under Tariff Item 15A(1). The description of Tariff Item 15A is specifically for artificial and synthetic resins and plastic materials and other materials and articles. The tariff item speaks of no percentage or main characteristics which would be the criterion for classification under the tariff. The product which is packed in a dual container, when mixed is to be an adhesive. The separate packing is to retain the properties of a resin and a hardener till they are mixed together to serve the purpose of adhesives as the product after mixture has a limited life. Obviously, this mixture cannot be kept stored for a long time. Therefore, going by the ratio of the decision cited supra 1983 (13) E.L.T. 998, the end use is relevant for classification and an adhesive would be classifiable under Tariff item 68. The appeal filed by the Revenue has no merits and is dismissed. The cross objection filed by the respondents are also disposed of.
-
1991 (2) TMI 273 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Additional customs duty on second hand machinery ... ... ... ... ..... held by the Collector (Appeals) that the second-hand scrap cannot be deemed to be manufactured for levy of central excise duty is incorrect, in view of the decision of the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court cited supra. The appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. 7. As for the additional ground on classification raised by the learned consultant, the following case laws would indicate that new grounds raised should be as per procedures set forth in Rules 8 and 10 of the CEGAT (Procedure Rules) (i) 1989 (41) E.L.T. 522 (Tribunal), Gaurav Paper Mills v. Collector of Central Excise. (ii) 1986 (25) E.L.T. 225 (Tribunal), Lohia Machines Ltd., Kanpur v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta. Had the learned consultant urged this new ground as per procedure, the same would have been taken up for consideration, whether or not the raising of the fresh grounds was tenable. But at this point of time when the issue was raised during the time of hearing, the same could not be taken up for consideration.
........
|
