|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 315 Records
-
1987 (1) TMI 397 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Penalty for wrongful with holding of property ... ... ... ... ..... s is susceptible of continuance and does not end on the date on which it is initially committed. The last contention of learned counsel for the petitioner was that the Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur, was under a duty to suspend the order in pursuance of section 389, Criminal Procedure Code, and he urged that the word may used in section 389(1), Criminal Procedure Code, should be interpreted as containing a mandatory provision. There is no force in this argument also. Section 389, Criminal Procedure Code, gives discretionary power to the appellate court and the discretion has to be exercised judicially. Admittedly, the petitioner had retired from the employment of the company on September 1, 1978, and it would amount to giving him a reward for his trespass if he is allowed to continue a moment more. The Sessions Judge was right in rejecting the application of the petitioner under section 389, Criminal Procedure Code. This petition has no merit in it and it is hereby dismissed.
-
1987 (1) TMI 396 - SUPREME COURT
Applicability of section 12(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act of 1947 - Held that:- Allow this appeal and set aside the order of the High Court quashing the show-cause notices impugned in the writ petition by the original writ petitioner dismiss the writ petition instituted by the respondents, with liberty to the parties to raise all contentions on facts and law barring the contention that section 12(2) of the Act is not attracted.
-
1987 (1) TMI 381 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Demand - Limitation - Appeal ... ... ... ... ..... l that the party was put no notice, that the Department was likely to undertake a review of the position as soon as the Show Cause Notice was issued on 24-9-1980. We were also given to understand during hearing that in fact duty was paid from that date under protest, and passed on to the consumers. We, therefore, think that it will be both justified in law, as well as in equity if the demand for excise duty by reference to T.I. 68 for these products is held enforceable with effect from the date of the Show Cause Notice, i.e. 24-9-1980. rdquo In the present case also, the position was that the Department were earlier charging duty under Tariff Item No. 68. The merits of classification not having been disputed before us, we find that it would be fair and correct to order that duty under Tariff Item No. 14 be charged from the date of the show cause notice and not earlier. In the light of the above discussions, we set aside the penalty imposed. We allow the appeal in these terms.
-
1987 (1) TMI 376 - CEGAT, MADRAS
Adjudication ... ... ... ... ..... nted by an Assistant Collector is a statutory order which could be revised by the same authority. It was held that an Asst. Collector giving a ldquo net export order rdquo cannot revise under law his own statutory order and the same can only be revised or reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the Act by a superior authority. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Industrial Cables (India) and Another v. Union of India reported in 1986 (25) E.L.T. 33 has taken the same view. The Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ajay Exports referred to supra has taken a similar view. I have had occasion to refer to the various rulings and followed the ratio decidendi thereunder in the single Member case in Customs Appeal No. 218/86 dated 20-8-1986. Following the ratio of all the aforesaid decisions, I am inclined to hold that the impugned order is without jurisdiction and is not legally tenable and in this view of the matter I set aside the same and allow the appeal.
-
1987 (1) TMI 375 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ting plates and held it classifiable under heading 84.34 of CTA as claimed by the appellants. Shri D.K. Saha, Departmental Representative agrees that this decision covers the question of classification for the purposes of basic customs duty of Toyobo Printing plates and he has nothing particular to say against this decision. 3. There would appear no good reason to depart from the earlier decision of the Tribunal (supra). Following the same, the goods Toyobo Printing plates are held properly classifiable under heading 84.34 of CTA. Its classification under heading 37.01/08 is set aside and substituted by the above said heading with consequential relief to the appellants. The appeals are thus allowed.
-
1987 (1) TMI 374 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Gold control ... ... ... ... ..... held that the party obliged to carry out a statutory obligation, if acts deliberately in defiance of law or was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest or acted in disregard of its obligation, penalty may be imposed. In the instant case it cannot be said that there was a technical or a venial breach of the provisions of the Act or there was bona fide breach on the part of the appellant. On the other hand, I am satisfied that the appellant failed to carry out the statutory obligations and acted deliberately in defiance of law and in conscious disregard of their obligation as held by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case. 8. As regards the applicability of Section 75, it would suffice to say that when the case is fully covered by Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, as held by me earlier, the question of applicability of the residuary Section 75, ibid. does not arise. 9. In the light of the foregoing discussions, the appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merits.
-
1987 (1) TMI 373 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... aring in person and that the matter may be decided on the basis of the written submissions. None has appeared for the appellants for hearing today. We have perused the records and heard Shri K.C. Sachar for the Department. 3. There is no dispute that the appellants had reached from the customers the duty element also. Their claim for exemption in respect of initial clearance of Rs. 5,00,000.00 has been upheld and it is or that basis that duty has been ordered to be refunded. Since duty was not payable in respect of the clearances with reference to which refund had been claimed the lower authorities were correct in holding that the assessable value will be inclusive of the duty recovered from the customers (though not payable by the assessee) and that the duty refundable will have to be calculated with reference to the said assessable value only. In the circumstances the rejection of the refund claim in part by lower authorities was correct. This appeal is therefore dismissed.
-
1987 (1) TMI 372 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ed the claim saying that the discount was specially extended to this claimant and, therefore, the inclusion of the discount was in order. The Appellate Collector rejected the appeal against this order of the Assistant Collector by order No. C/3/1517/79 dated 20-11-1979 saying that the appellants had not produced any documentary evidence to clarify the nature of the discount and that the invoice did not throw any light or it. The appellants themselves said to him in their appeal memorandum that the discount was allowed after prolonged discussion. This, according to the Appellate Collector showed that the discount was not available in the usual course of supply to all buyers. He accordingly rejected the claim. Mr. Gopinath said that there is no appeal against that order and, therefore, the Tribunal cannot go into the question of the discount now. He is correct. 6. This appeal/revision petition is rejected as the appellants accept the correctness of the countervailing duty levy.
-
1987 (1) TMI 371 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Unwinding of bobbins does not amount to taking them into use ... ... ... ... ..... loying the process of unwinding, which in all probability would have been a mechanical process. Putting the bobbins through such process, in my view, would not amount to taking them into use between the time of their import and export. If the said bobbins, after the nylon twine wound around them was removed, were to be used by the appellants for the process of winding yarn on them and unwinding the same from them, there possibly could exist a case for saying that the bobbins were taken into use, but I do not Find that there is any such allegation or finding against the appellants. In the circumstances, I do not consider that the bobbins had been taken into use. 4. In the above view of the matter, it must be held that the action of the customs authorities in granting draw back at the reduced rates was not correct. The appellants must be granted draw back at 98 of the duty paid in terms of Section 74 of the Customs Act. I, therefore, allow the appeals with consequential relief.
-
1987 (1) TMI 370 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... this plea. While so we fail to understand why duty is sought to be levied on the present goods which is only molten iron. 6. We also find that Notification 54/65 dated 20-3-1965 envisages exemption of molten iron falling under Item 25 used in the factory of production for the manufacture of pig iron from payment of excise duty leviable. Thus the stage in which the duty is leviable is the manufacture of pig iron. The Department has not proved that the appellants have removed the molten metal clandestinely without transporting them to the steel melting shop. As the records of the appellants have been accepted as the basis to work out the loss their explanations should also be approved in the absence of evidence to the contrary. We are of the view that the authorities below have not adverted to all these vital aspects which have a definite bearing in respect of the controversy involved. In the result we hold that the impugned order cannot be sustained and the appeal is allowed.
-
1987 (1) TMI 363 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Adjudication - Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... question of jurisdiction is concerned, are on par with the case reported in 1988 (14) ECR 169 SBD mentioned above. 4. We have considered the pleas advanced on both sides. In view of the non-rebuttal of facts that the White Card Board in question were imported by the appellant companies through Madras Custom House and they gave an undertaking to the authorities in the Madras Custom House, the competent authority to initiate action against the appellant companies could only be those in the Madras Custom House. Collector of Customs, Cochin has no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings for violation of the conditions of the Notification 117/78, dated 9-6-1978 when such an undertaking was given by the appellant companies to the Asstt. Collector or Collector of Customs, Madras. Relying on Tribunal decision in the case of Metro Exports mentioned supra, we allow the appeals on the question of jurisdiction itself without going into the merits of other questions involved in the appeals.
-
1987 (1) TMI 361 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Transformer coil ... ... ... ... ..... declaration, which resulted in a demand for over 4.5 million rupees, the Collector imposes a penalty of Rs. 1500/- less than 0.03 per cent hardly a punishment commensurate with a misdeclaration of such a magnitude. If there was a deliberate misdeclaration, the Collector must, if he is to carry conviction, impose a penalty that will fit the crime. Otherwise, one will be free to infer that he did not regard the short levy a result of deliberate misdeclaration. This omission to impose a fitting punishment convinces me that there was no deliberate misdeclaration. I hold that no deliberate misdeclaration must go unpunished and so conversely, if there is no punishment there could not have been deliberate misdeclaration. The Collector does not state any reason to justify such a low penalty. 18. I, therefore, hold that the short levy was not caused by deliberate misdeclaration, and so the demands are time barred. For this reason, the Collector rsquo s order is invalid and I quash it.
-
1987 (1) TMI 360 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... opportunity to avail of personal hearing. rdquo It is claimed that the order in the said appeal is liable to be set aside for this additional reason also. 10. We are satisfied that in both these appeals the orders of the lower authorities are liable to be set aside for the reason that the orders produced to demand differential duty on the basis of an alteration in the classification already approved but that the appellants were never disclosed the basis on which alteration had been ordered (that is to say) the Deptt. sought to levy duty on the basis of alteration in the classification list of the customer but that the basis for such alteration even in the customers classification list was never disclosed to the appellants though they had specifically demanded disclosure thereof. We are thereof satisfied that both appeals are to be allowed on this ground itself. 11. Accordingly both the appeals are allowed and the orders of the lower authorities in both matters are set aside.
-
1987 (1) TMI 359 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... We also see from para 8 of the revision application (the appeal before us) the assessee rsquo s statement that they had submitted before the authorities, contracts, bills, gate passes and other factory records to prove that though fents were sold by weight, the value per square meter was also available in the record. 8. In the premises, I would propose an order allowing the appeal, setting aside the impugned orders of the lower authorities and remanding the matter to the Asstt. Collector with a direction to determine the duty liability of the goods in question in terms of Notifn. No. 127/69, dt. 29-4-69, after extending to the appellants an opportunity to adduce evidence as to the value of the fents and, thereafter, grant to the appellants consequential relief, if any, on the Assistant Collector being satisfied regarding such value. I agree with the order proposed by Shri G. Sankaran. In accordance with the majority opinion, this appeal is allowed as set out in para 8 above.
-
1987 (1) TMI 352 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... t render it liable to duty as chewing tobacco. This is in accordance with the conclusion reached by the Tribunal in the Ramchandra Suchandary case (supra) with which we are in agreement. We accordingly hold that the product in issue is classifiable under Item No. 68, CET. Consequently, the orders of the lower authorities are set aside. 10. ensp The appellants have, in their memo. of appeal, claimed that if the product is held to be classifiable under Item No. 68, CET, they would be eligible for exemption under one or the other of several notifications cited by them. This issue has not come up before us for adjudication since there is no finding of the lower authorities on this claim evidently because they held the product to be not classifiable under Item No. 68, CET. We do not, therefore, pass any orders on this claim of the appellants. It will be open to the appellants to agitate the matter before the appropriate authority. 11. ensp The appeal is allowed in the above terms.
-
1987 (1) TMI 351 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ecified .......... rdquo . The argument of Smt. Saxena is that the word ldquo all sorts rdquo would establish that even medical tapes would fall within this item. The speech of the Finance Minister would negative this contention. Smt. Saxena rsquo s explanation of the Finance Minister rsquo s speech is that he meant to exclude from Item 60 only those goods that would fall under Item 14-E. Item 14-E could cover only such tapes as would fall under the description Patent and Proprietory medicines. Therefore, it would be improper to construe the Finance Minister rsquo s speech (extracted above) to conclude that he meant to exclude from Item 60 only medical tapes as could be called Patent and Proprietory medicines but not other medicated tapes. 9. ensp We therefore hold, following the decision of the Tribunal cited supra, that the Collector (Appeals) was correct when he held that the product in issue was not covered by Item 60 CET. 10. ensp These appeals are accordingly dismissed.
-
1987 (1) TMI 346 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... g to particular shapes, the strips left their character of strips, plain and simple and became laminations or stampings. The strips that have been formed, shaped and worked upon would never be strips again to be used as such. 18. ensp The next point urged was that the appellants would not be entitled to claim of refund when they have not contested the approval of the classification list. According to the appellants the Department asked them to file the classification list in that manner and hence they were entitled to file the refund application. The Department relied on the decisions 1983 E.L.T. 1853 and 1984 (15) E.L.T. 260 (supra). We are of the view that it is not necessary to go into this question as the case fails on the merits. 19. emsp Hence, on a careful consideration of all the facts, we are of the view that the Appellate Collector was right in coming to the conclusion that the resultant product is excisable under Tariff Item 28A. The appeal is, therefore, rejected.
-
1987 (1) TMI 345 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Steel Castings and identifiable machine parts ... ... ... ... ..... accessories/parts and no longer as mere castings. There might be a case for saying that they are, in spite of this, steel casting but there is also a case for saying that they are no longer castings but have become ball-mill balls and equipments, and in that class they will move out of the category of castings. The argument by M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. that these are not machine parts and are not parts of the ball mill is only half true if one takes into account the fact that they are not fitted in the grinding mill. But the mill cannot grind, however much it may run, without the balls in the drum. The balls perform an essential part in the grinding by the ball mill and must, therefore, be classed as parts of the ball mill. A component, whose absence will disable a machine or appliance, must be regarded as an essential ingredient or part of that machine. The assessment of the balls and cylpebs under item 68 is not unjustifiable, and accordingly this appeal is rejected.
-
1987 (1) TMI 344 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Measuring and checking instruments ... ... ... ... ..... in dispute in that case (even if they were designed to be used as parts of boilers) were classifiable not under Chapter 84 but under Heading 70.21. In the present case, the literature produced by the appellants makes it clear that the reflex glasses (which are the goods under consideration in the present appeal) are important components of liquid level gauges. Heading No. 90.24 specifies, in terms, level gauges. Parts of level gauges would, therefore, be rightly classifiable under Heading No. 90.29. Therefore, the reflex glasses before us, being parts of level gauges, would fall under Heading 90.29(1). Having regard to this position, we feel that the decision in the D.E.S.U. case (supra) is not of any help in arriving at the correct classification of the goods in the present case. 6. emsp In view of the foregoing, we hold that the goods imported are correctly classifiable under Heading 90.29 of the Customs Tariff. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1987 (1) TMI 343 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Remission of duty on goods unfit for cosumption or marketing ... ... ... ... ..... sent instance there was neither such an application nor such an order. This was for the reason that the destruction took place in the course of testing and, according to the appellants, the fact of these poles being unfit for marketing became known only by reason of such destruction in the course of testing. That is to say, the destruction has been completed by the time the fact of non-marketability became known. 10. emsp Duty becomes payable only at the time of removal from the factory or the bonded warehouse. In this case no such question of removal from the factory arose since the poles were destroyed during the course of testing within the factory itself and hence no occasion for removal thereof from the factory could even arise. 11. emsp In view of these peculiar circumstances of this case I agree with the order that no duty could be demanded on the poles which were rendered unfit for use during the course of testing. I therefore agree that the appeal is to be dismissed.
........
|
