|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 276 Records
-
1992 (7) TMI 196
Wood and articles of wood ... ... ... ... ..... under Item 15A(2) of the erstwhile Tariff. As we have observed, this ruling is under the old tariff which is not appropriate and specific to the product in question under new tariff. 14. In the case of Khandelwal Metals case (supra), the matter pertained to imposition of additional customs duty in accordance with Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act. This ruling is not pari materia with the present case. The learned DR referred to L.M. Van Diamond Tools India Ltd. case (supra). In this case, the Bench has held lsquo since we have found that the goods could be classified with the aid of headings, sub-headings, section notes and chapter notes, there is no necessity to turn to the rules of interpretation of the Tariff Schedule. This ruling is more appropriate to the reasoning adopted by us. There is no merit in these appeals and the appellants contentions have to be rejected by upholding the reasoning given by the Collector (Appeals) in the impugned orders. Appeals dismissed.
-
1992 (7) TMI 195
Exemption - Procedure not followed ... ... ... ... ..... lowing the procedure. It is also noted, further, that in some of the classification lists, which are on record, there appears to have been a practice by the appellants to show in an annexure that the steel seats are supplied to M/s. Premier Automobiles Ltd. giving part numbers thereof. In such a situation, it cannot be held that the failure to follow Chapter X procedure prescribed under the Notification was due to mala fide on the part of the appellants herein. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of in the light of the ratio of the Tribunal rsquo s decision (supra) with the direction to the Department that the exemption under the Notification should be extended on the appellants satisfying the department post facto that they have substantially complied with the terms of Notification No. 167/79 by showing that the goods cleared from their factory have been in fact used for further manufacture of excisable goods in the factory to M/s. Premier Automobiles Ltd. Ordered accordingly.
-
1992 (7) TMI 194
Appeal - Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ..... sident that the appeal before the Tribunal is maintainable. As regards further plea of the learned SDR for the Revenue that the impugned order apparently shows to have been passed by the Dy. Collector of Customs and therefore, the appeal cannot be entertained by the Tribunal is of no avail inasmuch as if any factual error has taken place in indicating the designation of the authority passing the impugned order and that error is challenged by one of the parties, even though on the point of jurisdiction, this can be heard by the Forum in which the appeal is presented. We have found and in fact there is no dispute on this point that Shri B.K. Gupta had been functioning as Additional Collector of Customs on the date of passing the impugned order. Dated 10-7-1992 (P.C. Jain) Member (Technical) 19. In view of the majority opinion, the application and appeals may be listed for hearing in due course. (S.K. BHATNAGAR) VICE PRESIDENT Dt 29-7-1992 (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM) MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
-
1992 (7) TMI 193
CLASSIFICATION ... ... ... ... ..... both the Tariff Acts of Customs and Excise are pari materia and the headings also identically worded. In the circumstances, the ratio of the Simplex Mills Co. is to be applied to the facts of this case also. The importer has also argued and made out the same points as held in Simplex Mills Co. case. The contention of the learned consultant that note 7(b) of Chapter 59 refers also to textile fabrics of a kind used for technical purposes when they are endless also falling under Chapter 59 carries lot of force in the light of the ratio of the Simplex case referred to above. The note 7(b) of Chapter 59 need not necessarily include textile products in the piece, cut to lengths are simply cut to rectangular (including square) shape and also it need not be an article as has been held by the Collector (Appeals), in view of the example textile fabrics endless given in the bracket in note 7(b) of Chapter 59. We, therefore, allow the appeal by applying the ratio of the above noted case.
-
1992 (7) TMI 192
Classification ... ... ... ... ..... der which the same is classifiable. This sub-heading is clearly ruled out because of the very nature of the paper which is coated only on one side with wax and on the other side with a material not specified in the sub-heading. Once we come to this conclusion, the only other sub-heading available for classification of the subject goods is the residuary sub-heading 4811.90 under which the goods have correctly been classified. 10. It is not necessary for us to refer to the Explanatory Notes of the CCCN for our purposes because the sub-heading of the tariff can be easily interpreted on a plain reading and, even if we did refer to the Explanatory Notes, the appellants rsquo contention that the paper could be coated on one side with one material and the other side with another material is not supported by any authority. Nor do the wordings of sub-heading 4811.40 as we have seen, justify such an interpretation. 11. In view of the above discussions, the appeal fails and is rejected.
-
1992 (7) TMI 191
Tetramethyl Tetraphenyl Trisiloxane ... ... ... ... ..... lly defined organic compound is based on the facts given in the authentic technical books available here. 1, 2, 2, 3 Tetramethyl 1, 1, 3, 3 Tetraphenyl Trisiloxane is listed as an organic compound in Lange rsquo s Hand Book of Chemistry by John A. Deen (copy enclosed). The structural formula and other constants is given for the product as under Ch3 1 (C6 H5)2 Si ndash O - Si - O - Si (C6 H5)2 111 CH3 CH3 Ch3 Formula weight 484.8 Density 1.0720 Refractive Index 1.55125 Boiling point 2350.5mm Flash Point 221 Since the product is an organic compound having fixed formula weight, density, Refractive Index, Boiling point etc. it merits consideration as a separate chemically defined organic compound. 11. In the light of the above reports of the Chief Chemist, we have no hesitation in holding that the goods are chemically defined organic compound classifiable under Heading 2931.00 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1985. 12. In the result we uphold the impugned order and reject both appeals.
-
1992 (7) TMI 190
Classification of goods ... ... ... ... ..... appellants product to impart perfume. For this reason and also in view of the fact that the appellants had themselves claimed in the literature which they were supplying along with the product that it was perfumed, their contention that the goods in question could not be deemed as lsquo perfumed rsquo hair oil has to be rejected. 8A. In view of the above discussion we hold that even prior to 17-3-1985 when Explanation III was added to Item 14F of the Central Excise Tariff, the disputed product for the purposes of classification had to be treated as lsquo perfumed hair oil rsquo and was therefore classifiable under Tariff Item 14F(ii)(b). 9. Since we have held that the disputed product was a lsquo perfumed hair oil rsquo classifiable under Tariff Item 14F(ii)(b) even prior to 17-3-1989 it is not necessary for us to examine the question whether the refund claim filed by the appellant was filed within the statutory time limit. 10. In view of the foregoing the appeal is rejected.
-
1992 (7) TMI 189
Processing of cotton fabrics produced on powerlooms undertaken by independent processors ... ... ... ... ..... and not the full duty. Further, it was clarified that in accordance with which cotton fabrics produced on exempted category of powerloom units, even if subsequently processed with the aid of power, are not subjected to the additional excise duty or the handloom cess, leviable under the respective Acts. 8. In view of the above clarifications with reference to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the cases of Andhra Sugar Ltd., and Dunlop India Ltd., (supra) and in the case of Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Ltd., (supra) that the meaning ascribed by the authorities issuing notification in question is a good guide of contemporaneous exposition of the position of law, we do not find any justification in denying the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. G.S.R. 1087 dated 18-6-1963. In the view we have taken, we set aside the impugned order and, accordingly, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief.
-
1992 (7) TMI 188
... ...
... ... ..... tandard Company has entered into an agreement with M/s. Dolomite Werke GmbH for the supply of know-how and the same has been described under Schedule-2 and Schedule-3 provides for payment of fees for design and engineering. In view of the know-how mentioned and in view of earmarking of payment fees towards design and engineering and in view of the fact that it does not relate to equipment imported by the appellants for the purpose of manufacture of the goods, we are of the view that the engineering fees paid to M/s. DOLOMITE WERKE towards design and engineering charges are not includible in the assessable value. In this context, we rely on an Order in a connected appeal No. C/2710/89-A in the case of Collector of Customs, Visakhapatnam v. M/s. Visakhapatnam Steel Project 1992 (62) E.L.T. 572 (Tri.) where the terms and conditions of the contract and payment schedule are exactly similar. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal of the Department and confirm the Order of the Collector.
-
1992 (7) TMI 187
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... on the goods at the hands of the appellants, herein, under Item 68 CET by showing that after the machining and turning adopted by the appellants, a new product known differently in the market has come into existence as a result of process of manufacture. 5. The argument that this was not a fit case for exercising a power of review by the Collector, is not acceptable because that power under Central Excises and Salt Act at the material time given to the Collector, it is well settled, is essentially one of Superintendence of the work of the subordinates by a superior authority and will apply to those situations where such superior authority examines an adjudication order passed by a subordinate to satisfy himself as to the legality, propriety as well as the correctness of such adjudication order which has been done in this case. In the result, on merits, it is held that there is a lot of substance in the appeal and accordingly the impugned order is set aside and appeal allowed.
-
1992 (7) TMI 186
Value of clearances - Clubbing of ... ... ... ... ..... an and Balamurli v. CCE, Madras reported in 1988 (38) E.L.T. 54 and Priya Corporation v. Collector of Central Excise reported in 1990 (48) E.L.T. 26 relied upon by the learned SDR do not help the department rsquo s case since in those cases the facts were different. In the cases cited on behalf of the Revenue it was held that the affairs of both the units were being controlled and managed by the same person and the fragmented units with inadequate machinery were created only with the objective of depriving the exchequer of legitimate tax. On the other hand the various circumstances which have been held against the appellants by the lower authorities have been plausibly explained by the appellants and there is no evidence that in their case the two units were in reality owned and controlled by the same person or body of persons or the two units were only a facade to avoid 2 of the exemption. 12. In the above circumstances we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals.
-
1992 (7) TMI 185
Rate of duty ... ... ... ... ..... made by the Warehouse-keeper. Delivery of the goods by the Warehouse-keeper, except the two packages is well before 8-12-1982 and after 6-11-1982, the date of endorsement by the Customs Inspector, Incharge of the warehouse directing the Warehouse-keeper to deliver the packages to the importer. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, therefore, indication of the date of removal of the goods, as mentioned in the warehouse register i.e. 21-12-1982 becomes a mere formality. On the facts and circumstances of this case removal of the goods from the warehouse is the date of delivery of each package by the Warehouse-keeper to the importer. It is apparent that all the packages except the two packages were handed over to the importer well before 8-12-1982 and therefore, in respect of all those packages the old rate of duty would apply. Only in respect of two packages which have been delivered after 8-12-1982 the new rate of duty would be applicable. 5. Appeal disposed of accordingly.
-
1992 (7) TMI 184
Appeal - Evidence ... ... ... ... ..... order to enable one of the parties to remove certain lacunae in presenting its case at the proper stage, and to fill in gaps. Of course, the position is different where the appellate court itself requires certain evidence to be adduced in order to enable it to do justice between the parties. The Supreme Court would not permit additional evidence to be placed in appeal when there was sufficient opportunity for the appellant to place all the relevant matters before the High Court itself. rdquo We respectfully follow the decision of the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court and are of the view that by the present application the applicant is trying to fill in the gaps and lacunae in the appeal pending before us and there is also no sufficient cause, and the applicant has not been able to show that he was prevented by sufficient cause in not filing this evidence before the lower authority. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the application. The miscellaneous application is rejected.
-
1992 (7) TMI 183
... ...
... ... ..... ds - (a) .......... (b) the value, apportioned as appropriate, of the following goods and services where supplied directly or indirectly by the buyer free of charge or at reduced cost for use in connection with the production and sale for export of imported goods, to the extent that such value has not been included in the price actually paid or payable, namely - (i) to (iii)....... (iv) engineering, development, art work, design work, and plans and sketches undertaken elsewhere, than in India and necessary for the production of the imported goods. 13. A reading of Rule 9(1)(b)(iv) makes it clear that the engineering fees for the production of the imported goods alone is to be included in the transaction value. In view of our finding that the engineering fees paid does not relate to the production of the imported goods, Rule 9(l)(b)(iv) is not applicable and Collector is justified in setting aside the Order of the Assistant Collector. 14. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
-
1992 (7) TMI 182
Benefit of exemption ... ... ... ... ..... e, does not stand to reason that such irregular lumps can be converted straightaway into Rubber Chappals without first converting them into vulcanised sheets having adequate strength and regular shape. It has therefore, to be held that in the manufacture of Rubber Chappals, the lsquo Rubber Compound unvulcanised in primary form rsquo falling under sub-heading 4005.00 was first being utilised at the intermediate stage by the appellants in their factory for the manufacture of unhardened sheets of vulcanised rubber falling under Chapter 40 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Under these circumstances, we are inclined to agree with the appellants that the Collector rsquo s order holding that the lsquo Rubber Compound rsquo in question was not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 152/87 was erroneous and not sustainable. 10. In view of the above discussion we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.
-
1992 (7) TMI 181
Knitting Machine Needles ... ... ... ... ..... classified as domestic machines. The leaflet of the models of knitting machines produced by the appellants, herein, also shows that these are similar machines as above and include automatic punch card operated Model 1K 924 and the machines have similar capabilities. Therefore, on an application of the ratio of the above Cegat decisions to the facts of the present case, it is seen that the description of the machines for which the needles are imported is as machines being used in cottage industries without any indication in the leaflet of them being designed for household use. The features and capability of the machines are versatile enough for them to be considered as industrial machines. Therefore, it cannot be held that these machines fall under the excluded category at Serial No. 14 in the Table to the Notification 69/87, and, accordingly, the needles imported for these machines will be eligible for exemption under Notification 69/87. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
-
1992 (7) TMI 180
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... uty paid prepared vat dyes, duty was recoverable on the goods after they had attained the form of paste after completion of all connected processes of manufacture. 14. In view of the foregoing, we hold that (i) Solubilised vat dyes manufactured by the appellants out of duty paid stand- ardised/formulated vat dyes falling under Chapter 32 of the Central Excise Tariff were exempt from duty in terms of Notification No. 180/61-C.E., dated 23-11-1961 (as amended). (ii) The process of conversion of duty paid formulated/standardised vat dyes into paste does not amount to manufacture. (iii) Formulated/Standardised dyes converted into paste were chargeable to duty at stage when the goods attained the form of paste after completion of all related processes of manufacture and accordingly differential duty would be recoverable from the appellants on such clearances during a period of six months preceding the duty of the show cause notice. 15. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
1992 (7) TMI 179
Modvat Credit ... ... ... ... ..... d by a proper Gate Pass, issued or endorsed in their name, the matter may be dealt with on merits, within the parameters of Rule 57-1 as far as issue of notice is concerned. 7. Summing up the position, the appeal is allowed as far it relates to the goods covered by all the Gate Passes except No. 142. The appellants are entitled to the consequential reliefs. As regards the goods covered by the said Gate Pass No. 142, the appeal is allowed by way of remand of the matter to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Digboi for de novo decision keeping in mind our following observations. If the Gate Pass No. 142 has been endorsed in favour of the appellants, the benefit of Modvat credit is to be allowed. If it has not so been endorsed, and the goods are not covered by a valid Gate Pass, the matter is to be dealt with by the Assistant Collector within the parameters of the amended Rule 57-1. The operative part of the order was announced in the open court at the end of the hearing.
-
1992 (7) TMI 178
Reference to High Court ... ... ... ... ..... release of the mould it has to be deemed as akin to a tool or appliance used in relation to the manufacture of the final product. 4. I have heard Shri Y.N. Chopra, learned Consultant on behalf of the appellant and Shri Ashok Mehta, learned DR, for the respondent and have gone through the record of the case. 5. On perusal of the application filed by the applicant it is seen that except stating the facts of the case no question of law arising out of the order passed by the Tribunal has been listed for being referred to the High Court. The Tribunal had arrived at the decision that Silicon Spray being in the nature of a Chemical could not be deemed as akin to an appliance or tool which are excluded from the purview of the Modvat in terms of the Explanation to Rule 57-A. The order passed by the Tribunal was based purely on appreciation of facts and no legal point emerges out of the order. In view of the above this Reference Application is not maintainable and the same is rejected.
-
1992 (7) TMI 177
Exemption Notification ... ... ... ... ..... sessment on the basis of GPZ bearings of USSR origin. This determination is patently erroneous as unbranded goods cannot be comparable in price to branded goods and also goods of one country of origin cannot be said to be comparable with goods manufactured in an other country. There was also no basis for the adjudicating authority to determine the value of cups and cones in the ratio of 30 70. Therefore, the assessable value determined in the impugned order cannot be held to be correct and has to be discarded. The invoice value of the goods is to be accepted as the transaction value of the goods under Section 14(1) of the Customs Act. 15. We, therefore, hold that the imported goods are eligible to be benefit of concessional assessment under Sl. No. 6(c) of Notification 70/89-Cus., dated 1-3-1989 and that the invoice value is to be accepted as the value of the goods under Section 14(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. 16. The impugned order is hereby set aside and the appeal allowed.
............
|
