|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 286 Records
-
1991 (9) TMI 202 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
MODVAT Credit ... ... ... ... ..... taken by the Tribunal in the case of Usha Marin Industries Ltd. v. CCE reported in 1990 (46) E.L.T. 392 wherein it was held that in the absence of Dynodrive being specifically described in the declaration filed under Rule 57G MODVAT credit on Dynodrive used as input in the manufacture of final product would not be permissible even if Dynodrive falls in the category of Electric Motors which were included in the declaration filed by the manufacturer. 6. The appellants have relied on the Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of CCE, Bombay v. Goodlass Nerolac Paints reported in 1986 (26) E.L.T. 57 (Tri.) 1986 (8) ECR 639 wherein it was held that the procedural aspect can be ignored once the authorities are satisfied about the receipt and the utilisation of duty paid raw material. The facts in this case before us being different, in view of the decisions quoted above the case law cited by the respondents do not help them. 7. For the reasons indicated above the appeal is allowed.
-
1991 (9) TMI 201 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Exemption notification ... ... ... ... ..... through proper channel from the jurisdictional Assistant Collector as the Chief Bond Officer, and they had calculated and paid the differential duty for the period 1-11-1985 to 26-11-1985. This letter of 23-1-1986 was addressed to the Assistant Collector as a reply to the Inspector rsquo s letter of 27-12-1985 treating it as a letter from the Assistant Collector as is evident from the first para of that letter. There is also substance in the submissions made in this regard by the Ld. SDR that the appellants as licensee of Private Bonded Warehouse are bound to pay the differential duty on receipt of a notice in terms of Sec. 59 C.A. lsquo 62. In the result, therefore, there is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the lower authorities and in this view of the matter, the appeal is rejected and the stay is also disposed of as the issue in the appeal, itself, has been taken up and decided as above. The appellants are liable to pay the differential duty from 8-10-1985.
-
1991 (9) TMI 200 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation of damaged goods ... ... ... ... ..... nd sweepings could not be ruled out greater probability being in sweepings, torn bags and slack bags in the descending order. Even if we take 50 per cent depreciation in value, as contended by the appellants, this cannot be extended to the 43 per cent bags found in sound original condition. This contention can be extended to the goods which are liable to contaminate. On that basis, about 26 to 27 per cent (i.e. 50 per cent of 53 per cent bags) would be the overall depreciation in value. On the basis of available evidence, we are of the view that 30 per cent overall depreciation allowed by the lower authorities is quite reasonable, even though the lower authorities have arrived at that level of depreciation on the basis of test reports of the contaminated goods. 9. As regards the appellants rsquo reliance placed on the Credit Notes of the supplier, I agree with the Ld. brother Shri Brahma Deva that they cannot be considered as conclusive of the extent of depreciation in value.
-
1991 (9) TMI 199 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Medicines - Patent or proprietary medicines ... ... ... ... ..... n as laid down in 3(a) of the said Act or as per the Ayurvedic Formulary of India then such certificates of trade usage and commercial parlance will have no evidentiary value to consider the products as exclusive ayurvedic. This is the proposition laid down in Amrutanjan case, which is not in any way different from the view expressed in earlier rulings. 32. Shri Gujral further contended that the certificates produced by the manufacturer would clearly indicate that the product in question is pure ayurvedic. Unfortunately none of the physician had examined the synthetic nature of the ingredients nor they had stated that ayurvedic science recognised its uses by usage and tradition. Nor it had stated that the preparation had been exclusively ayurvedic. Therefore, the certificates lost its evidentiary value and its rejection by the learned Additional Collector is totally justified. 33. Therefore, there is no merit in the appeal and it is liable to be rejected. Ordered accordingly.
-
1991 (9) TMI 198 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Set-off of duty ... ... ... ... ..... ed JDR reiterated the contents of the impugned Order, though he has no comments to offer in view of the said judgment of the Apex Court. 5. We have considered the submissions. From the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Eastend Paper Inds. Ltd., supra it is clear that anything that enters into and form part of manufacture process and is required to make the article marketable must be deemed raw material or component parts of the end-product. It is not in dispute that manufacture of P. and P. foods becomes complete only by packing them in unit containers and closing them. From this itself it follows that the 58 mm caps and Coproco adhesive used by the appellants in fixing the lables on the unit containers mean to contain P. and P. foods, are raw materials. Thus, following the ratio of the said decision of the Apex Court we set aside the impugned Order and allow these two appeals with consequential relief to the appellants, if any.
-
1991 (9) TMI 197 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... Chapter IVA. The imposition of penalty on the appellant for these contraventions is, therefore, fully provided in the law and is quite juistified. Keeping the fact that the appellant has been given the benefit of doubt in relation to goods recovered from B-38, Nizamuddin West, we reduce the penalty from-Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only). The appeal is modified only to this extent and is otherwise rejected. 12. Before we part, we would like to mention that the Director General, Revenue Intelligence, New Delhi may like to look into the reasons why the investigating officers of his Directorate did not collect the Lease Agreement for B-38, Nizamuddin West for further investigation from the landlord and others, specially when Shri Rajesh Suneja had stated that he had signed the agreement at the instance of his brother-in-law and had really nothing to do with the premises. A copy of this order shall be sent to the Director General by name for this purpose.
-
1991 (9) TMI 196 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Natural Justice - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... be lying in the godown hypothecated to NSIC is also required to be re-examined at length and a finding was required to be recorded, inter alia, on the point whether there were any tubes in NSIC godown and if so whether they were good or defective and the bearing of these aspects on the case. 11. Further in so far as the charge of undervaluation is concerned, the Collector has merely observed that ldquo I also find that the party was clearing colour TV sets to the value of Rs. 3000 but the Collector does not state that if the goods were undervalued, how they were reassessed and how the revised value was arrived at. 12. It was necessary that full details indicating, inter alia, the basis of assessment were indicated and a clear and specific order was passed in this respect as well. 13. The learned Collector may keep these observations in mind while read-judicating the case and may pass appropriate orders after allowing the appellants an opportunity of being heard in the matter.
-
1991 (9) TMI 195 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation ... ... ... ... ..... rs. Later Smt. Charanjit Kaur, wife of Shri Jagir Singh claimed the VCR and also produced the baggage receipt against which Shri Jagir Singh had imported a similar VCR. Under these circumstances in as far as the seized VCR is concerned, I am inclined to extend the benefit of doubt to the appellants and accept their contention that being the property of Shri Jagir Singh it was not liable for confiscation. 8. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order in so far as it relates to the confiscation of the seized VCR is set aside and the VCR is ordered to be released to the owner. The order upholding the confiscation of the seized video cassettes is, however, confirmed. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the owner of cassettes is given the option to redeem the video cassettes in question on payment of a fine of Rs. 2,000/- only. The personal penalty on each of the appellants is reduced to Rs. 500/- only. 9. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1991 (9) TMI 194 - CEGAT, BOMBAY
Reference to Supreme Court ... ... ... ... ..... the appeals covered by a common order based on the decisions on References made to two different High Courts. 13. Having regard to all these factors, we propose to the President in terms of Section 35H of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the following question of law, for submission to the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court of India for consideration - ldquo Whether Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, as it stood prior to amendment effected on 6-10-1988, is subject to the provisions of limitation prescribed under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 or Whether it is independent of Section 11A aforesaid and can be invoked for recovery of Modvat credits even covering the period beyond six months from the date of credit? rdquo 14. Files containing (i) the orders of the Bench - Order No. 2310 to 14/90-WRB, dated 24-10-1990 as also the earlier detailed order reported in 1990 (31) ECR 680, (ii) copy of the Reference Applications made are also submitted herewith.
-
1991 (9) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Accessories ... ... ... ... ..... hototype setting machine, one is not clubbing a bullock cart and a racing car together, because the latter two are known by different names, even though they may have the same function of transportation. The analogy cited in the appeal, therefore, does not hold good. 13. We do not think that the argument that the ribbon in this case is specially designed for the printer would take it away from the category of ribbon just because it is different from a ribbon used in a typewriter. The fact that the former is used only once, whereas the typewriter ribbon is used more than once still does not place the two in a category different from the category of ribbons. They both continue to be ribbons even though they may be made for different purposes or of different materials and may have short or long life. Thus, after detailed consideration of the arguments taken before us, we are of the view that the prayer made in the appeal is devoid of any merit. The appeal is therefore, rejected.
-
1991 (9) TMI 192 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Valuation - Transaction value ... ... ... ... ..... he price mentioned in the Bill of Entry and not on the basis of mere suspicion and surmises. The decision in the case of Basant Export Corporation v. CC 1989 (43) E.L.T. 65 that in the absence of sufficient evidence and proof of the transaction being motivated by extra commercial consideration the charge of undervaluation cannot be sustained, has also been relied upon by the appellants. However, these decisions are not relevant and do not help the appellants in view of our finding that the transaction value of 1500 kgs. of Selenium Metal Powder imported by the appellants was not determinable on the basis of the contract entered into by M/s. Smit Corporation, Bombay for the import of 25 tonnes of Selenium Metal Powder of 99.9 purity at the rate of US 7.5 per kg. CIF from M/s. T. Yamada and Co. of Japan. 13. In view of the foregoing, we hold that the assessable value of the goods shall be determined on the basis of CIF price of US 16.53 per kg. The appeal is otherwise rejected.
-
1991 (9) TMI 191 - CEGAT, MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... the respondent cannot be treated in any way different from the credit taken in respect of any other goods which have suffered duty and the provisions of refund etc. under the MODVAT Scheme will apply as would apply in any other case. Just because the goods were manufactured by an assessee working under DEEC Scheme it does not make any difference so far as the goods in the hands of the respondent are concerned. As mentioned earlier, if any objection has to be taken it has to be against the taking of the MODVAT credit and utilisation of the same for the manufacture of the Cans under the DEEC Scheme by the manufacturer of the Cans. The learned appellant-Collector has not set out in the grounds of appeal nor any plea has been made before us to how under Rule 57F(3) the respondent is disentitled to the benefit as allowed by the learned lower appellate authority. In view of the above, I hold that there is no merit in the plea of the Revenue and the appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
-
1991 (9) TMI 190 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Natural justice ... ... ... ... ..... unal remanded the case to the Collector (A) because he had not given opportunity to the Deptt. before passing order in the appeal rdquo . We have also perused the order passed by the Collector (Appeals). Nowhere there is mention of the appellant rsquo s prayer for grant of personal hearing in the impugned order. We are of the view that when an appellant makes a prayer before an appellate forum for grant of personal hearing, principles of natural justice require that the personal hearing should be granted. Accordingly, we are of the view that there was a denial of principles of natural justice. We set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Collector (Appeals) having jurisdiction. We further order that the Collector (Appeals) shall observe principles of natural justice and grant personal hearing to both the sides and dispose of the appeal within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. 3. This also disposes of the Cross-objection filed by the respondents.
-
1991 (9) TMI 189 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Order denying exemption to unsegregated waste based on Revenue Audit objection set aside ... ... ... ... ..... on-cellulosic waste whereas the goods in question were waste yarn (hard waste). He also submitted that the authorities having alleged non-segregation of waste yarn in the show cause notice could not later contend that the goods were not waste yarn. We observe that Notification 272/83 could have been applied if there was any basis for the allegation in the show cause notice that the goods were non-cellulosic waste and, on the evidence indicated in the notice, a finding to that effect had been recorded. We do not find any such allegation in the show cause notice. In these circumstances too, the finding that the goods were non-cellulosic waste has been recorded without any basis and order is liable to be set aside. We, therefore, reach the same conclusion. In this view of the matter, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order with consequential relief to the appellants. 15. The Miscellaneous Application is also disposed of in the light of the order allowing the appeal.
-
1991 (9) TMI 188 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Claim for reclassification ... ... ... ... ..... ding, that is to say, application of natural starch to one or both sides of the fabric (d) black-filling, that is to say, application of starch to one side of the fabric (e) cropping, that is to say, cutting away mechanically of loose ends from the fabric and (f) hydro-extraction, that is to say, mechanically extracting or mechanically squeezing out water from the fabric 19. It will, thus, be seen that in the absence of any evidence to show that Polypropylene Liner Cloth imported by the appellants answers to the description of processed fabrics as indicated hereinabove, the subject goods are not eligible for exemption from additional duty (countervailing duty). Therefore, the plea taken in the additional ground of appeal also fails. 20. After detailed consideration of all aspects of the matter, we find that both on the question of classification as well as on the liability to countervailing duty, the appellant rsquo s case merits rejection. The appeal is, therefore, rejected.
-
1991 (9) TMI 187 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Confiscation of Indian currency ... ... ... ... ..... it was seized. The confiscation of the amount under Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not legal on the ground that the Department never alleged that this amount was the sale proceeds of Smuggled Gold and he was not even asked to show cause as to why it should not be confiscated under Section 121 of the Customs Act. So also, the appellant was not asked to show cause as to why he should not be penalised under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The ingredients under Sec. 112 were not mentioned in the show cause notice clearly. Even in the discussion there is no mention of sub-clause (a) or (b) of Section 112 of the said Act or under which sub-clause the appellant was proceeded against. For all these reasons, the confiscation of the amount in question the imposition of penalty is hereby set aside. Accordingly, the appeal filed by Shivaji Sargar is allowed and it is ordered that the amount of Rs. 1,00/300.00 seized and confiscated shall be returned to Shri Shivaji Sargar.
-
1991 (9) TMI 186 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... cessories of the motor vehicles and Headings also says that ldquo This heading covers parts and accessories of the motor vehicles of Headings 87.01 to 87.05, provided the parts and accessories fulfil both the following conditions (i) They must be identifiable as being suitable for use solely or principally with the above-mentioned vehicles and (ii) They must not be excluded by the provisions of the Notes to Section XVII (see the corresponding General Explanatory Note). Since it is specifically excluded from corresponding General Explanatory Note, on this ground also it cannot be considered to be part of the vehicle for the purpose of classification. From all the points of view, we concur with the findings of the Collector (Appeals) that Shut Off Cocks and Servo Brake Valve would be classifiable under the sub-heading 8481.80 and their parts under 8481.99. In the view we have taken, we uphold the impugned order and accordingly appeal filed by the Department is hereby dismissed.
-
1991 (9) TMI 185 - CEGAT, MADRAS
MODVAT Credit - Intermediate product ... ... ... ... ..... nue rsquo s plea is that the caustic soda lye and flakes are in the nature of final products. We observe that as to what is intermediate or final product, the Scheme of MODVAT has to be read in the context of the manufacturing process of a particular assessee. So long as it can be shown that the inputs have been used for manufacture of any in process materials which are used in the manufacture of final product, the said material manufactured out of the inputs before it is finally used in the manufacture of the declared final product will have to be treated as intermediate product. There is nothing on record to show nor is there any plea that caustic soda lye and casutic soda flakes which emerged during the manufacturing process by use of the inputs were not used as in process material for the manufacture of declared final product. In view of above, we hold that the lower appellate authority rsquo s order is maintainable in law. We, therefore dismiss the appeal of the Revenue.
-
1991 (9) TMI 184 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Modvat Credit ... ... ... ... ..... e dated acknowledgement of the declaration in March, 1987. The expression immediately before in certain provisions has been held to be synonymous with preceding the date. Even in the context of Rule 57H(1), the said expression was interpreted to cover inputs received before obtaining the dated acknowledgement but which were available for verification Soft Beverages (P) Ltd. v. Collector of C. Ex. reported in 1989 (44) E.L.T. 66 (CEGAT-SRB) Madras . Here the availing of the credit was, as stated above, not immediately before March, 1987 when declaration under Rule 57G was filed. Further, the inputs which had contributed to the credit could not be said to be available being unutilised till then. What stock of such inputs were available represented receipts which were exempt from duty and hence not covered under Modvat Scheme as had been held by the Assistant Collector. In the circumstances, we are convinced the appellants do not have a case. We, therefore, dismiss their appeal.
-
1991 (9) TMI 183 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA
Appeal - Condonation of delay ... ... ... ... ..... uced showing that the order could not be served on the aforesaid manner and in view of that fact the same was affixed on the notice-board of the Customs House. In such circumstances, in view of the affidavit filed by the applicant(s) we give the benefit of doubt to the applicants and the delay of one day in filing the appeal (joint appeal) is condoned. Accordingly, M.A. No. 142/89 of the applicant, Shri Ramesh Kumar Ghai is allowed. Another Miscellaneous Application No. 93/90 is filed for condonation of a separate appeal No. C-112/90 as per the direction of the Tribunal. Inasmuch as the M.A. No. 142/89 is allowed condoning one day rsquo s dalay in filing the original joint appeal No. C-427/89, we condone the delay in filing the Appeal No. C-112/90 allowing the M.A. No. 93/90 filed by Shri Satnam Dass Ghai. Accordingly, both the applications are allowed. Now, the Stay Petition No. 336/89 arising out of the original common appeal No. C-427/89 is posted for hearing on 3-12-1991.
............
|
