Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 141 to 160 of 699 Records
-
2004 (3) TMI 692 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Warehoused goods ... ... ... ... ..... a bonded warehouse for home consumption. It has been further held that it is that date which is relevant for the purpose of rate of custom duty and any additional duty thereon. 4. emsp In view of this fact, Ld. Counsel did not press much on the grounds of appeal and admitted that the issue is covered against the party by the Apex Court judgment. 5. emsp Ld. DR sought for dismissal of the appeal as the issue is no longer res integra. 6. emsp On a careful consideration we notice that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly come to the conclusion that the duty has to be paid on rates at which it was prevalent on the date on which it was removed from the bonded warehouse in terms of the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of Kiran Spinning Mills. The said judgment has been reiterated by the Larger Bench of the Apex Court in the case of LML Limited (supra). Therefore, after hearing both sides the appeals are dismissed following the ratio of the Apex Court judgment noted supra.
-
2004 (3) TMI 691 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Valuation - Machine - Transaction value ... ... ... ... ..... ed without sufficient cause. It is not the case of the department that the conditions for rejection of value under Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules exist in this case. The Apex Court in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. 2000 (122) E.L.T. 321 held that transaction value can be rejected only when the provisions of Rule 4 are satisfied. The ratio of this judgment applies in the present case. It is not important whether the machine under import is used or not. The price paid or payable for the machine is D.M. 1,80,000/-. The Commissioner (A) observes that there is clear cut evidence of an attempted under invoicing whereas the original authority does not make any such allegation. That is the reason why he did not impose any penalty. According to the original authority the case before him is of accepting or rejecting the transaction value. We find no justification in rejecting the transaction value in this case. 8. emsp The appeal is allowed. The order of the Commissioner is set aside.
-
2004 (3) TMI 690 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... the goods is enough to allow them Modvat credit, is wholly misconceived and cannot be accepted. The description of the goods as plastic tubes, is quite distinct from the description as plastic bobbin and cones. The plastic tubes in the common parlance, are never called plastic bobbin and cones. The plastic tubes are classifiable under different Tariff Heading detailed above, while plastic bobbins and cones are classifiable under another Tariff Heading referred to above. At no stage, the appellants took this position which have been now put forth by the learned Counsel in his arguments before me. It had never been their case before the adjudicating authority or the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants could not be allowed Modvat credit on the goods which they never declared in that declaration. Therefore, Modvat credit of Rs. 10,843/- has been rightly denied to the appellants. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order and the same is upheld. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 689 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Stay of order ... ... ... ... ..... 1546 (S.C.). He also states that the respondents have not proved licit import acquisition of the impugned goods and hence the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in allowing release of the same based on a conjecture that the foreign marked goods might have been manufactured within India. 2. emsp After hearing the learned DR and perusal of case records, I am of the prima facie view that the balance of convenience lies in favour of the Department in staying the operation of the impugned order-in-appeal. As such, the impugned order is stayed during pendency of the appeal and regular hearing of the case is fixed for 3-5-2004.
-
2004 (3) TMI 688 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Confiscation and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... e, it is found that (a) there is no appeal filed as regards the determination of duty of Rs. 2,04,400/- as determined as submitted by learned Advocate for the appellants and he does not press for the same. The duty demand is therefore confirmed. (b) Since duty demands are not contested, the penalty under Section 11AC is also confirmed. (c) However, keeping in mind that the removals are still within the same boundary, from manufacturing unit to trading unit of the same corporate body, the confiscation of the same and redemption fine as imposed is not called for. Penalty and duty under Rule 173Q is excessive, the same is reduced to Rs. 50,000/-under Rule 173Q after setting aside order of redemption fine. (d) Since the corporate persons remain the same i.e. there are no two persons, separate penalty on the same corporate body for abetting under Rule 209A cannot be upheld. One cannot abet ones own self. Penalty of Rs. 50,000/- is set aside. 4. emsp Appeals allowed in above terms.
-
2004 (3) TMI 687 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Pyrantal citrate and epoxide - Marketability of - Demand - Limitation - Suppression of facts ... ... ... ... ..... mes of the intermediate products in their classification list, which amounts to suppression. His plea that the appellants were under the honest impression that such disclosure was not necessary cannot be accepted. They have been in the business of manufacture of bulk drugs right from 1983. Further, it is seen from the classification list filed by them that they have been declaring one of their intermediate products namely DSP. In regard to marketability we accept the evidence as pointed out by the ld. DR to indicate that the goods are marketable. 11. emsp Having regard to what has been discussed above, we uphold the demand on Pyrantal Citrate for the period August 1987 to 1st March, 1988. Demand on epoxide is upheld for the same period. Demand for duty on DSP set aside for recalculation of duty on the above basis has to be carried out by the Commissioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case penalty is reduced to Rs. 50,000/-. 12. emsp The appeal is thus partly allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 686 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Adjudication - Natural justice ... ... ... ... ..... e notice to the appellants for appropriating the amount already paid by them towards duty of excise on the amortized value of the tools (used for the manufacture of MV components supplied to TELCO). This submission has not been contested. 6. Having regard to the undisputed fact that the original authority rejected the refund claim in gross violation of the principles of natural justice as also to the fact that the Commissioner (Appeals) denied natural justice to the party to the extent of raising an additional ground for rejecting the refund claim without notice to them, we are unable to sustain their proceedings. We would remand the case to the original authority for de novo adjudication of the refund claim. Accordingly, the orders of both the lower authorities are set aside and this appeal is allowed by way of remand. The original authority is directed to frame the issue correctly and decide thereon afresh in accordance with law as well as the principles of natural justice.
-
2004 (3) TMI 685 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Confiscation of goods - Seizure of goods from assessees premises ... ... ... ... ..... of those goods if the same were not claimed by M/s. Chanchal Trading Co. But the abovesaid company had not laid its claim to the goods. Therefore, the appellants are bound by the statement made by Gobind Gupta, their representative. For having failed to explain the mode and the manner in which the excisable goods were acquired by the appellants, the same had been rightly, in my view confiscated under Rule 173Q. The fact that the appellants had voluntarily paid the duty without raising any objection goes a long way to believe their version that no duty could be confirmed against them. The argument of the Counsel that without serving show cause notice, no confiscation of the goods could be done also cannot be accepted as in the show cause notice copy of which was sent to them, confiscation of the goods was proposed. 5. emsp In view of the discussion made above, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order and the same is upheld. The appeal of the appellants is dismissed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 684 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Valuation - Freight ... ... ... ... ..... the amount of freight and transit insurance beforehand and to show in the sale invoice. In many cases, the actual amounts are shown only on receipt of freight bills from the railways or the transport company. There is therefore, no justification to disallow the deduction towards freight and transit insurance merely on the ground that these amounts were not exhibited in the invoice beforehand. Such an approach would render the specific provision of Section 4(2) nugatory. Consequently, refund is admissible subject to the condition that it is not hit by time bar and the claim is established on due verification of the freight bills, invoices, and gate passes by the Assistant Collector. rdquo 3. emsp We have perused the records and considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that claim of the appellant meets legal and factual requirement. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed. The appellants shall be entitled to consequential relief.
-
2004 (3) TMI 683 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Appeal - Restoration of ... ... ... ... ..... ommissioner, Central Excise cannot make the orders passed by the Tribunal non-applicable. If they are aggrieved with the Stay Order or dismissal of their appeal for non-compliance the remedy available to the Applicants was to approach the higher Appellate forum. We observe that the Applicants have approached the Hon rsquo ble High Court of Delhi. However, there also they sought leave to withdraw the application with liberty to approach the Tribunal for modification of the Order. The High Court has dismissed their application as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. The learned D.R. has rightly emphasized that there is no order by the High Court that they should approach the Tribunal for hearing of the appeal. As the Applicants had not complied with the Stay Order passed by the Tribunal their appeal was dismissed and there is no reason for restoring their appeal merely because in a subsequent order the Commissioner has taken a different view. We, therefore, reject the application.
-
2004 (3) TMI 682 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Refund of interest ... ... ... ... ..... der passed in appeal or revision under the Act, refund of any duty becomes due to any person, the proper officer, may refund, the amount to such person, without his having to make any claim in that behalf. The provision indicates the importance attached to an order of the appellate or revisional authority under the Act therefore, an order which is appealable under the Act is not challenged then the order is not liable to be questioned and the matter is not to be reopened in a proceeding for refund which if we may term it so is in the nature of execution of a decree/order. In the case at hand it was specifically mentioned in the order of the Assistant Collector that the assessee may file appeal against the order before the Collector (Appeals) if so advised. rdquo 6. emsp In view of the legal position stated above, the present refund application is not maintainable. Commissioner was right in rejecting the same. That order is confirmed and the appeal of the assessee is rejected.
-
2004 (3) TMI 681 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Cenvat/Modvat - Capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... find that the appellants initially availed credit on the capital goods at the time of removal of goods for repair. The appellants reversed the credit under the provisions of Rule 57S(7) of the Central Excise Rules. When the capital goods were removed from the factory for repair, only an intimation to the Assistant Commissioner is sufficient. The appellants produced the copy of shipping bill under which the goods were exported. It was specifically mentioned that the goods were exported for repair. The appellants also produced copy of the Bill of Entry under which the goods were imported which also shows the shipping bill number under which the goods were exported. There is no dispute regarding receipt of capital goods in the factory after repair. Therefore, the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of the capital goods cannot be denied on the ground that the appellants followed wrong procedure. In these circumstances, the appeal in respect of credit of Rs. 3,24,401/- is allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 680 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... in by weight. 6. emsp In view of the above, there is no basis to uphold the valuation adopted in the impugned order and the same is required to be set aside. We do so and direct that the goods to be assessed at the transaction value. 7. emsp Coming to the issue of requirement for import license, as already noted, the importer does not dispute that license was required for the import of used and second hand monitors and that the goods became liable to confiscation for violation of that requirement. Therefore, the confiscation of the monitors under Section 111(d) and imposition of penalty are required to be sustained. We do so. However, the amounts fixed by way of redemption fine and penalty are required to be suitably modified inasmuch as they were fixed keeping in view the higher value fixed, after rejecting the transaction value. Accordingly, redemption fine is reduced to Rs. 2 lakhs and penalty is reduced to Rs. 1 lakh. 6. emsp The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
-
2004 (3) TMI 679 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... find merit in the appellant rsquo s submission, that they were entirely unaware of the non-inclusion of the value of bulb in the price of ldquo Lamp CTR Room rdquo and there was no suppression of facts to evade duty. There is bona fides in their contention that the omission in including the value of bulb in the moulded headliners was not the result of any attempt to evade duty by them. They merely went by the prices declared by the suppliers free supply items. The adoption of such prices cannot invite the allegation of suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. The records of the case do not disclose any mala fide conduct by the appellant and therefore, proviso to Sections 11A and 173Q are not attracted. The imposition of penalty on the appellant was not justified. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. 4. emsp During the proceedings of the case the appellants had deposited part of the penalty amounting to Rs. 50,000/-. The same shall be returned to the appellant forthwith.
-
2004 (3) TMI 678 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... redit on the input on the basis that the packing and forwarding charges were separately charged in the invoice, and they have invoked Rule 57A for such disallowance. 2. emsp We, however, do not find any support in Rule 57A to disallow the credit of duty which has been paid on the inputs used in the finished products merely because the supplier has indicated separately the charges for packing and forwarding. The appellants are entitled to take credit of the duty which has been actually paid on the inputs used in the finished product. We, therefore, set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeal with consequential benefit to the appellants.
-
2004 (3) TMI 677 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), AHMEDABAD
Demand - Anti-dumping duty (ADD) - Interest - Demand - Anti-dumping duty ... ... ... ... ..... t they are eligible for concessional rate. The discussions in the previous paragraphs have made it clear that they are not entitled for the concessional rate of ADD. (vi) Their last claim is that they are not liable to pay interest on the duty demanded from them. As per Section 47 of the Customs Act, 1962, if the importer does not pay the duty within the time stipulated in the Section, from the date on which the Bill of Entry was returned to him for payment of duty he shall pay interest. In case of provisional assessment, the date of final assessment is the date on which the Bill of Entry is considered to be finally returned. The appellant, therefore, will be liable to pay interest after final assessment of the Bill of Entry as per provisions of Section 47 of the Customs Act, 1962. ORDER 26. emsp The appeal is rejected. The appellant, therefore, will be liable to pay interest after final assessment of the Bill of Entry as per provisions of Section 47 of the Customs Act, 1962.
-
2004 (3) TMI 676 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - SSI exemption ... ... ... ... ..... her person. 3. emsp Opposing the prayer, Sh. H.C. Verma, learned DR referred to the specific finding in the impugned order to the effect that ldquo the appellants have vide letter, dated 15-10-2001 admitted that the logo lsquo ATR rsquo was not being used from 31-3-2000 rdquo that in view of this it cannot be claimed by them that they were not using the logo since 1-4-99. In reply, the learned Advocate submitted that it is specifically mentioned in the letter, dated 15-10-2001 that the communication that they were using the brand name/logo till March, 2000, is not true because they had completely stopped using the logo lsquo ATR rsquo on their labels w.e.f. 1-4-99. 4. emsp After considering the submissions of both the sides, we are of the view that the applicants have made out a strong prima facie case in their favour. Accordingly, we stay the recovery of the entire amount of duty and penalty during the pendency of the appeal, which is posted for regular hearing on 18-5-2004.
-
2004 (3) TMI 675 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
... ... ... ... ..... notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any order or direction of the Appellate Tribunal or any Court or in any other provision of the Act or Rules made thereunder rdquo . In view of such provisions, the appellants cannot claim that the incentive was intended to be given to them for meeting out the dues outstanding against them with the Central Financial Institutions. The Tribunal has already in the case of Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. has held that as per Sec. 11D, no one is authorised to retain an amount collected as Central Excise duty and that ldquo with the introduction of Section 11D it became essential for everyone to deposit forthwith any amount so collected as duty of excise that with the coming into force of Section 11D, therefore, it was essential for everyone, who had collected any amount representing Central Excise duty, to deposit with the Govt. rdquo Thus, following the ratio of the said decision, we reject the appeal, filed by the appellants.
-
2004 (3) TMI 674 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Refund - Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... Section 11B of the Central Excise Act being a holiday, the refund claim filed under the said Section 11B on the next day would be deemed to have been filed within time. A similar view has been taken by this Tribunal in CCE v. Seal Narrow Tapes Pvt. Ltd. 1998 (98) E.L.T. 476 . The Chartered Accountant representing the appellants has also relied on the limitation Act and has, in this connection, cited the decision in the case of CCE v. S.A.I.L 1992 (61) E.L.T. 732 (Tribunal) . The reliance placed on the Limitation Act, however, cannot be accepted inasmuch as it has been held by the Apex Court that the provisions of Limitation Act are not applicable to quasi-judicial proceedings. 3. emsp Having found that there is no delay in the filing of the refund claim, I hold that the refund claim is liable to be allowed. The proper officer, shall, accordingly, refund the amount of duty to the assessee. 4. emsp The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and this appeal is allowed.
-
2004 (3) TMI 673 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Capital goods ... ... ... ... ..... terms of Rule 57G is permissible on the ground that these are ldquo inputs rdquo . 2. emsp These submissions were not accepted and hence the instant appeal. 3. emsp Heard both sides. 4. emsp The dispute relates to the credit taken in May 2000. The ldquo capital goods rdquo defined under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules 1944, did include the goods falling under Central Excise Tariff Heading No. 84.19. This fact is not disputed by the revenue. The lsquo lsquo Pickling Bath rdquo manufactured from the steel plates (on which credit is taken) do fall under Heading No. 84.19. If that be so, the steel plates being the component of goods listed under Rule 57Q are undoubtedly eligible for Modvat credit in terms of Rule 57T/Q. 5. emsp In the absence of allegation of any other grounds to deny the credit.. I hold that the appellants are entitled to take the credit. Accordingly the appeal succeeds, the same is allowed and the orders of the lower authorities are consequently set aside.
............
|