|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 301 Records
-
2002 (6) TMI 549
Customs House Agent - Licence - Revocation of - Adjudication - Cross-examination ... ... ... ... ..... a reading of paras 6, 7, 8 and 10 of the order recorded by the ld. Member (T). In these circumstances, I agree with the ld. Member (J) that the gravity of the offence is such as to warrant revocation of the CHA licence. I also find that in the case of Eagle Transport Services v. CC, Mumbai 1997 (96) E.L.T. 469 (T) 1997 (23) RLT 450 and Noble Agency v. CC, Mumbai 2002 (142) E.L.T. 84 revocation of licence has been upheld for the offence of sub-letting of licence for pecuniary benefit and failure to maintain accounts. Following the ratio of the above decisions, I hold that the revocation of licence is sustainable. I concur with the order proposed by ld. Member (Judicial) that the appeal is to be rejected. 23. emsp The file is now returned to the original Bench for recording majority order. Sd/- (Jyoti Balasundaram) Member (J) Dated 14-8-2002 ORDER The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (P.G. Chacko) Member (J) Dated 18-9-2002 Sd/- (Gowri Shankar) Member (T) Dated 18-9-2002
-
2002 (6) TMI 548
Appeal - Department’s Appeal - Demand - Limitation - Clubbing of clearances ... ... ... ... ..... peals succeed and the impugned order is set aside and appeals allowed. rdquo 16. emsp We notice that this Bench in the case of R. Venkatachalam v. CCE - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 192 likewise held that 9 units cannot be clubbed with the main unit merely because there is no common telephones, common business, common employees, and like allegations made in the present case. The Tribunal upheld the assessee rsquo s contention that 9 units therein were not dummy units nor they were in the nature of hired labour of the main noticee. Even grounds of limitation has been answered in assessee rsquo s favour. This judgment of the Tribunal has since been affirmed by the Apex Court as noticed in extracted from 2000 (118) E.L.T. A242. The Commissioner rsquo s (Appeal) before the Apex Court has since been rejected. In view of the findings and the judgments cited above, we uphold the contention raised by the Ld. Sr. Counsel and do not find any merit in this appeal and hence this appeal is rejected.
-
2002 (6) TMI 542
Remand - Natural justice ... ... ... ... ..... to why the time limit for issue of show cause notice should not be extended for a further period of six months .... rdquo . The impugned Order passed on 1-4-2002 has thus been passed even before the expiry of time given to the Appellants for explaining their side. It has been held by the Supreme Court in Assistant Collector of Customs v. Charan Das Malhotra, 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1477 (S.C.), relied upon by the learned Advocate, that ldquo the power under the proviso to Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 are not to be exercised without an opportunity of being heard given to the person from whom the goods were seized rdquo . As in the case no effective and reasonable opportunity has been given to the Appellant of being heard, the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh adjudication after considering the reply, if any, filed by the Appellants and after affording them a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 5. emsp The Appeal is thus allowed by way of remand.
-
2002 (6) TMI 539
Classification - Words and Phrases ... ... ... ... ..... indrical and of glass or earthenware rdquo . - The New Shorter Oxford Dictionary, jar ldquo A usu. cylindrical container of glass, earthenware or stoneware with no spout or handle (or with two handles). rdquo This definition contrasts with the definition of tin and can contained in this dictionary. Tin is defined as ldquo a container made of tin or (more usually) tin plate or aluminium rdquo and can is defined as ldquo A vessel for holding liquids, now spec. one of metal, and usu. cylindrical with a handle over the top, any cylindrical metal container, a bin. rdquo It is clear from these that whereas a jar is usually made of metal or earthenware, a tin or can is made of metal. The container in which the appellant packed was a tin or a can. Applying the principle of ejusdem generis it cannot be said that the metal container would be of a similar packing to the goods mentioned in the heading. They would therefore not be classifiable under that heading. 6. emsp Appeal dismissed.
-
2002 (6) TMI 538
Penalty - Mandatory penalty equal to the duty amount - Hearing - Adjournment ... ... ... ... ..... ne rdquo . In the present case as per the facts on record and the statements given by Shri Farooqbhai, partner of the firm, the appellants manufactured and cleared excisable man-made fabrics without payment of duty consciously and with full knowledge of law in contumacious disregard of the provisions of the Act and the Rules with an intent to evade payment of duty. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that imposition of penalty equal to the amount of duty is called for in terms of the provisions of 11AC. Shri Farooqbhai, partner of the appellant firm in his two statements has admitted that the clandestine removal of the excisable goods by way of their sale to some agents/dalals was in his full knowledge and therefore, imposition of penalty under Rule 209A on him is also fully justified. In the result, I find no ground to interfere in the order passed by the lower appellate authority. Both the appeals have no merit and the same are dismissed.
-
2002 (6) TMI 537
Appeal - Restoration of ... ... ... ... ..... aminates P. Ltd. v. UOI - 1998 (100) E.L.T. 335 (Gujarat) wherein the Gujarat High Court struck down Rule 20 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 which empowered the Appellate Tribunal to dismiss an appeal for default of appearance by the Appellants. 3. emsp Opposing the prayer Mrs. Neeta Lal Butalia, learned SDR, submitted that after receiving the covering letter in 1997 the Appellants, as per record available with the Department, did not take up the matter with the Registry and as such there is inordinate delay in applying for restoration of appeal. 4. emsp After considering the submissions of both the sides and seeing the original copy of the covering letter of the Tribunal dated 3-7-97 it appears that the Final Order No. E/981/97-B1, dated 26-6-97 remained to be enclosed with the covering letter. In view of this we allow the Misc. application and recall our earlier order and restore the appeal to its original number. The appeal is posed for regular hearing on 11th July, 2002.
-
2002 (6) TMI 530
Classification - Words and Phrases ... ... ... ... ..... indrical and of glass or earthenware rdquo . - The New Shorter Oxford Dictionary, jar ldquo A usu. cylindrical container of glass, earthenware or stoneware with no spout or handle (or with two handles). rdquo This definition contrasts with the definition of tin and can contained in this dictionary. Tin is defined as ldquo a container made of tin or (more usually) tin plate or aluminium rdquo and can is defined as ldquo A vessel for holding liquids, now spec. one of metal, and usu. cylindrical with a handle over the top, any cylindrical metal container, a bin. rdquo It is clear from these that whereas a jar is usually made of metal or earthenware, a tin or can is made of metal. The container in which the appellant packed was a tin or a can. Applying the principle of ejusdem generis it cannot be said that the metal container would be of a similar packing to the goods mentioned in the heading. They would therefore not be classifiable under that heading. 6. emsp Appeal dismissed.
-
2002 (6) TMI 528
Appeal - Restoration of ... ... ... ... ..... aminates P. Ltd. v. UOI - 1998 (100) E.L.T. 335 (Gujarat) wherein the Gujarat High Court struck down Rule 20 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 which empowered the Appellate Tribunal to dismiss an appeal for default of appearance by the Appellants. 3. emsp Opposing the prayer Mrs. Neeta Lal Butalia, learned SDR, submitted that after receiving the covering letter in 1997 the Appellants, as per record available with the Department, did not take up the matter with the Registry and as such there is inordinate delay in applying for restoration of appeal. 4. emsp After considering the submissions of both the sides and seeing the original copy of the covering letter of the Tribunal dated 3-7-97 it appears that the Final Order No. E/981/97-B1, dated 26-6-97 remained to be enclosed with the covering letter. In view of this we allow the Misc. application and recall our earlier order and restore the appeal to its original number. The appeal is posed for regular hearing on 11th July, 2002.
-
2002 (6) TMI 527
Writ Petition - Hospital equipments - Diagnostic centre - Exemption ... ... ... ... ..... d Ors - W.P. No. 16050 of 1999 (Madras High Court) , and Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. M/s. Jagdish Cancer and Research Centre - 2001 (132) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.) JT 2001 (6) SC 244, but in view of the judgment of the 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in M/s. Faridabad CT. Scan Centre v. D. G. Health Services and Ors. (2nd supra) the position is crystal clear and the matter is not res integra. The petitioners have referred to the judgments viz., K.P. Varghese v. I.T.O. (SC) - (1981) 131 I.T.R. 597, India Extrusion v. Commr. of Comml. Taxes (A. P.) - (2001) 124 STC 474, P.P.P. Industries v. Commissioner of Industries - (1994) 92 STC 110, and State of M.P. v. G.S. Dall and Floor Mills (SC) - (1991) 187 ITR 478, but we do not consider it appropriate to go through those judgments, since the controversy is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above. For the reasons given hereinabove, all the writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs.
-
2002 (6) TMI 520
Valuation - Date of import ... ... ... ... ..... t must be submitted by the master of the vessel to the preventive officer and after obtaining other documents permit entry inwards of the vessel from the moment when she is ready to discharge the cargo. In the case before us, the preventive officer could not board the vessel before 24-7-1996. He could only board the vessel on 24-7-1996. The Assistant Commissioner records that because of the stormy weather conditions no launch was plying in port till that day. The vessel was not berthed, or tied alongside a dock. It could not therefore be said that because of any lapse on the part of the department that entry inwards has not been granted. It could not have been granted till the officer went onboard which is on account of natural cause beyond his control. We are therefore of the view that the Commissioner (Appeals) rsquo s order does not reflect the correct position. 4. emsp We therefore allow the appeal, set aside that order and restore the order of the Assistant Commissioner.
-
2002 (6) TMI 519
Interest not payable on finalisation of provisional assessment - Payment of excise duty in instalments after finalisation of provisional assessment
-
2002 (6) TMI 518
Manufacture ... ... ... ... ..... king into smaller containers, including packing or re-packing bulk packs into retail packs or adoption of any other treatment to render the product marketable to the consumer shall amount to ldquo manufacture rdquo . 6. emsp In the case of the same appellants, Tribunal has held that the activity carried out by M/s. Nilgiri Herbals Pvt. Ltd. is not covered by the generic expression. ldquo Any other treatment to render the product marketable rdquo . Therefore the Tribunal has held that prior to the amendment by which Note 6 provided that the labelling or re-labelling of containers will amount to manufacture (this amendment was in 1997), the process of labelling or re-labelling could not be deemed to amount to manufacture. 7. emsp Following the ratio of the above decision which is directly applicable to the facts of the present cases. We set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals. 8. emsp The misc. application for early hearing of the appeals is dismissed as infructuous.
-
2002 (6) TMI 511
Warehoused goods at port - Destruction by fire - Damages - Destruction by fire - Whether act of god
-
2002 (6) TMI 510
Drugs - Bulk drugs - Jury Tap ... ... ... ... ..... does not stipulate that the goods should be used only for National Health Programme. Therefore, denial of the concession solely on the ground that the formulations are not sold in the context of National Health Programme is not justified. Similarly, the insistence of any declaration regarding the use of the formulations for National Health Programme is also not warranted rdquo . The Trade Notices, relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order were in respect of Sl. No. 2 of Notification No. 31/88-C.E., dt. 1-3-88 which provided a concessional rate of duty in respect of ldquo Other Bulk Drug rdquo and not even in respect of Sl. No. 1 of Notification No. 31/88 which provided NIL rate of duty in respect of ldquo Bulk Drugs specified under the First Schedule to the DPCO, 1987 rdquo . In view of this, the Appellants are eligible to avail exemption under Notification No. 8/94-C.E., dt. 1-3-94 in respect of lsquo Juri Tap rsquo . Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
-
2002 (6) TMI 509
Heat exchanger - Classification ... ... ... ... ..... ion under this heading the machine must contain a motor driven fan and elements for changing both for temperature and humidity. The heater core does not possess any of these elements. It does not have a fan nor have elements for changing temperature and humidity. Heading 84.15 does not have any sub-heading for parts. Classification under this heading is clearly ruled out. 5. emsp The reason that the Assistant Commissioner advances for classification of the machine under this heading is that the goods were supplied to M/s. Subros, manufacturers of automobile air-conditioners. This fact by itself is totally insufficient to determine the classification, and in any case cannot override the restriction contained in Heading 84.15. 6. emsp That being the case the alternative Heading 8419.90 which includes part of heat exchanger claimed by the manufacturer will apply. That claim appears to us to be correct. 7. emsp The appeals are accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside.
-
2002 (6) TMI 508
Demand - Limitation - Suppression of material facts - Extended period - Intention to evade duty
-
2002 (6) TMI 507
Car - Sale and execution of power of Attorney - Distinction between ... ... ... ... ..... . 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned Order, however, set aside the Adjudication Order holding that one of the condition of the Notification No. 258/98-Cus. was that the importer would not part with or sale the car within a period of five years that merely executing GPA (General Power of Attorney) in favour of somebody did not tantamount to sale. The Revenue has contended in Memorandum of Appeal, which has also been reiterated by the learned Departmental Representative that the respondents No. 1 had clearly parted with the car by executing the irreversible General Power of Attorney in favour of respondents No. 2. I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned Order and agree with the finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that execution of GPA does not tantamount to sale and therefore, it cannot be said that the respondent No. 1 has contravened the conditions specified in the Notification. I therefore, reject both the Appeals filed by the Revenue.
-
2002 (6) TMI 504
Confiscation - Re-export - EXIM Policy ... ... ... ... ..... pellant to obtain foreign exchange. The notice did not allege that the appellant deliberately obtained and imported substandard oil nor does the order of the Commissioner find this to be the case. The object contained in the policy of subjecting the goods to test to ensuring that imported food stuff are of the standard prescribed in the act would be achieved if the goods are not permitted to be utilised in this country and therefore are ordered to be reexported. As far as the requirement relating to foreign exchange is concerned, I am of the view that the general laws of the country should apply. For this purpose, the Joint Commissioner may make a full report of the matter to the Reserve Bank of India which is concerned with matters relating to foreign exchange, if he so desires. The goods may be permitted to be reexported within the period given in the Commissioner (Appeals) s order without any condition as to repatriation of foreign exchange. 5. emsp Appeal allowed in part.
-
2002 (6) TMI 494
Rectification of mistake - Adjudication - Res-judicata ... ... ... ... ..... missions made by the Senior Departmental Representative, the issue was decided in favour of the assessee. To rectify a mistake, not only it must be a mistake but it must be apparent from the records. Taking different stands by the Revenue at different stages cannot be considered to be a mistake apparent from the records. Furthermore not citing a decision of the Coordinate Bench or not considering that cannot be considered to be a mistake. We also observe that it is well settled position now that subsequent decision of a Tribunal or a High Court or Supreme Court not to form the basis for rectification of mistake as it was held in the case of Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chem. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Excise, Vadodara reported in 2000 (122) E.L.T. 282. In view of this position and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any mistake has crept in the order for rectification. In the result the misc. application for rectification of mistake is hereby rejected.
-
2002 (6) TMI 492
Valuation - Packing cost ... ... ... ... ..... tainer which had to be broken for retrieving the goods packed inside. Admittedly, the wooden crates are made of wooden planks. Even if such crates are to be opened by dismantling some wooden planks, it cannot be for a moment contended that the material cannot be further used for packing. Annexure II is a statement showing details of durable and returnable packing returned to the factory during the period 1994-95. It gives the name of the party, location, item name, quantity, truck numbers and name of the transport. From the statement it can be seen that the item is described as lsquo wooden box rsquo of certain numbers. In the nature of the packing which has been used by the assessee in this case, we have no hesitation to hold that they are durable in nature. In the result, we find no merit in the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellant is not entitled to claim cost of packing as deduction. We, therefore, set aside the order impugned and allow the appeals.
........
|
