|
Advanced Search Options
Central Excise - Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 219 Records
-
2007 (6) TMI 446 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Exemption - End-use certificate ... ... ... ... ..... 1997 (91) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). 3. emsp Heard both sides and perused the impugned order as well as the documents and citations referred by both the sides in the course of hearing. It is the case of the Revenue that for the belated submission of the certificate, the appellant was denied benefit. The appellants contention is that original certificates were filed duly before the authorities for examination and such fact remained undisputed. The amended certificate filed belatedly should not take away the benefit accrued. There is no question of any dispute on the notification itself. Therefore, the citation of Revenue is of no help to them. The only dispute being related to the condition prescribed by notification that was to be complied. The condition being submission of the certificate from Naval Authority and that having been fulfilled, denial of exemption to the appellant would defeat spirit of justice. In the result, the appeal is allowed. (Dictated and pronounced in the Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 445 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat ... ... ... ... ..... e excess Cenvat credit availed by him for the period 1-4-2003, 31-12-2003. The provision of Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, will be required to be read - ldquo Recovery of CENVAT credit wrongly taken or erroneously refunded. - Where the CENVAT credit has been taken or utilized wrongly or has been erroneously refunded, the same along with interest shall be recovered from the manufacturer and the provisions of sections 11A and 11AB of the Act shall apply mutatis mutandis for effecting such recoveries rdquo . (Emphasis supplied) From the above-reproduced provisions of Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, it clearly indicates that if an assessee takes Cenvat credit wrongly, then also the assessee is liable to pay interest to the Revenue. On the face of such clear cut provisions I am not convinced that the order-in-appeal is incorrect or infirm. 6. emsp Accordingly, I do not find any reason for the interference in order-in-appeal. The appeal is rejected. (Dictated in Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 444 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Penalty - Mens rea - Imposition of penalty for technical breach assailed ... ... ... ... ..... t be penalized. 2. emsp Ld. JDR appearing for the Revenue submitted that procedural lapses has invited penal consequence, to deter non-compliance to the law. Therefore, the penalty imposed was justified and does not call for interference. 3. emsp Heard both sides and perused the case records. There is no finding in the order of adjudication, imputing the appellant to the charges in the show cause notice, nor also contumacious conduct to the appellant is on record. In absence of mens rea, the appellant should not face penal consequence following the judgment of the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd. (supra). 4. emsp In the result, appeal is allowed. Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.
-
2007 (6) TMI 443 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Demand - Limitation - Extended period - Suppression - Valuation ... ... ... ... ..... about the practice of sending corrugated boxes from M/s. India Packaging Products (P) Ltd. to the appellants. Even on 23-10-2001, M/s. Padhmam Herbal Care (P) Ltd., for whom the appellants manufacture the plastic tubs, had also given an undertaking that the corrugated boxes will be used in their factory and their final products on which they discharged the duty liability includes the cost of boxes and tubs received from the appellant. In such circumstances, we notice that there is no revenue loss to the exchequer. Further, it was open to the Revenue to have taken timely action to issue the Show Cause Notice on time. This has not been done. Therefore, in our view, the impugned order deserves to be set aside on account of time bar. There is no material to sustain the charge of suppression of facts. Hence, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any. (Operative portion of this Order was pronounced in open court on conclusion of hearing)
-
2007 (6) TMI 442 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
SSI Exemption - Brand name ... ... ... ... ..... Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad 2004 (165) E.L.T. 228 (Tri.-LB) wherein it has been held that few clearances in the beginning of financial year on payment of normal duty pending determination of clearances of previous year cannot be considered as de facto opting out of exemption. The ratio of the case law in the case of Uma Sand and Resins Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida 2004 (166) E.L.T. 129 (Tri.- Del.) is squarely applicable to the facts of the case. In the present case, the appellants paid normal duty on the tubes bearing the mark lsquo STU rsquo on the belief that lsquo STU rsquo brand belongs to others. On this ground it is incorrect to deny the SSI exemption in respect of other clearances for which the appellants are rightly entitled for the SSI exemption. In these circumstances, the impugned order has no merit and the same is set aside. (Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in the open Court on completion of hearing)
-
2007 (6) TMI 441 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... Cenvat Regime rsquo and accordingly permitted the appellant to pursue only the lsquo penalty aspect rsquo of the dispute before CESTAT. rdquo 3. emsp From the above clearance given by COD, it is seen that the appellants have been allowed to pursue their appeal in respect of penalty only. As such, the appeal filed by them in regard to duty demand is dismissed as non-maintainable. 4. emsp Since it has been recorded in the Minutes of the COD that the issue in dispute is revenue neutral and we also find that the practice followed by the appellants in regard to sending the impugned goods to the job workers for minor working and subsequent despatch to the appellants rsquo customer was in the knowledge of the Department, we find no reason for imposition of penalty on the appellants. As such, the penalty imposed under the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed in respect of penalty proceeding only. SP also gets disposed off. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 440 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Valuation - includibility - cost of raw materials - cost of transport of the raw materials - Held that: - if the appellants had either opted to pay duty on the full value of the goods inclusive of the raw materials cost, then the Bhilai Steel Plant could have taken the credit on the duty so paid, or the appellants could have obtained the raw materials free of cost without payment of duty and supplied the bricks back to the Bhilai Steel Plant following the Rule 57F Procedure. The appellants have not strictly followed either of the procedures, but they paid duty on the job charges - appeal allowed.
-
2007 (6) TMI 439 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Cenvat/Modvat - ... ... ... ... ..... t a part of manufacture and the inputs used therein cannot be considered as pertaining to manufacture of the goods directly or indirectly. 3. emsp On a careful consideration of the matter, I notice that in the cited judgment, the Tribunal has held that inputs used for quality testing and testing of raw material for quality control is to be included in the process of manufacture of finished goods and the credit has been held to be eligible. Therefore, the denial of Modvat credit in respect of inputs used for quality control is not correct in law in the light of the cited judgment. The prayer of the appellant to this extent is allowed. However the finding recorded by both the authorities that Cenvat credit on inputs used in Research and Development cannot be extended is correct and proper as it is not a part of manufacture. To that extent, the denial of credit of Rs. 84,413/- is upheld. The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. (Pronounced and dictated in the open Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 438 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Refractory bricks and motors - Captive consumption - Penalty - Imposition of ... ... ... ... ..... f no consequence. While the appellants may be unable to sell the impugned goods which are defective ones, the same may be utilized in repairing and relining of furnaces/kilns in the factory of the appellants. 5.1 emsp In view of our finding as above, while we hold that the appellants are eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 217/96-C.E. in respect of the impugned goods which have been used within the factory of production, we are of the view that they are liable to some penalty for the fact of removing the impugned goods from the Bonded Store Room without proper entry in the account books and without intimation to the Department. Accordingly, while setting aside the duty-demand, we determine the penalty as Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five thousand) in place of the penalty of Rs. 2 lakh (Rupees Two lakh) determined by the lower Appellate Authority. We order accordingly. 7. emsp The appeal is partly allowed in above terms. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 437 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Valuation - Related person - Mutuality of interest ... ... ... ... ..... peal before this Bench and this Bench, relying on the above mentioned decision of this Bench in the case of CCE, Bangalore v. BPL Sanyo Utilities and Appliances Ltd., upheld the order of the original authority. 7. emsp In fine, we hold that in the present case, the appellant and M/s. BPL Ltd. are separate legal entities. There is no evidence that there is mutuality of interest between the two legal entities and that their relationship in any way affected the price. The difference between the sale price of M/s. BPL Ltd. and that of the appellant is only of the order of 8 which is not very high. The ratio of the above mentioned case-laws are clearly applicable to the facts of the present case. In these circumstances, there is no justification for taking the assessable value on the basis of the price at which M/s. BPL Ltd. sold the goods. We set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals. (Operative portion of this order was pronounced in open Court on conclusion of hearing)
-
2007 (6) TMI 435 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Demand and penalty ... ... ... ... ..... fication of the item under Heading 44.07 of the CETA Schedule. This classification dispute is similar to the one considered by this Tribunal in Final Order Nos. 1980-1981/2006 dated 27-11-2006 2007 (210) E.L.T. 710 (Tribunal) in Appeal Nos. E/989 and 990/2004 in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Calicut v. RUBCO Huat Woods (P) Ltd., wherein the Bangalore Bench classified a similar item under Heading 44.03 (presently 44.07). We have also heard the arguments of learned Counsel with reference to relevant HSN notes. We have also seen a sample of the goods. The appellants have made out prima facie case against classification of the item under Heading 44.09 and in favour of its classification under Heading 44.07. We have heard learned SDR also who has reiterated the findings of the Commissioner. 2. emsp For the reasons already noted, there will be waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the duty and penalty amounts. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 433 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
Demand - Clandestine manufacture and removal by 100% EOU - Penalty - Held that: - There is no dispute about the duty demand on finished goods diverted. Inasmuch as duty has been demanded on the diverted goods, the question of demand of duty on the inputs which has gone into the finished goods which stand diverted is not sustainable.
A composite penalty under different sections of the Customs Act and Central Excise Act together cannot be sustained. The penalty imposed on the company is not sustainable.
Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
-
2007 (6) TMI 430 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Inputs - Duty paying documents ... ... ... ... ..... the lower authorities, the lower authorities should have gone into and given some findings. I find that both the lower authorities have come to the conclusion that the appellants had failed to produce the documentary evidence to satisfy the duty paid character of the inputs, which is contrary to the evidence available on record. Hence to my mind for this limited purpose of verifying duty character of the inputs , the issue has to be remitted back to the lower authorities. 7. emsp Accordingly, the impugned order denying the Modvat credit to the appellant is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the adjudicating authority to verify the duty paid character of the inputs and come to a conclusion afresh. Since I have already held that the stock as declared by the appellants on 20-1-2003 have attained finality, the issue need not be gone into by the adjudicating authority. The appeal is allowed as indicated in above term with consequential relief, if any. (Dictated in Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 428 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Strictures against Commissioner - Re-adjudication - Delay ... ... ... ... ..... apsed. This is a fit case, which should be referred to the Hon rsquo ble Revenue Secretary and to the Chairman of the Board to take due notice of the matter and give direction to the Commissioner to comply with the direction given in this order for re-adjudication. It is more than six years that the direction of the Tribunal has not been complied with for re-adjudication. The duty involved is Rs. 57,41,330.80. Laxity on the part of the Commissioner in not re-adjudicating within the time is required to be looked into by the Chairman of the Board and appropriate directions be given. We grant the Commissioner 45 days from today to complete the re-adjudication and report compliance to the Tribunal on 10th August 2007. Failure to comply with the directions of this Bench would be viewed very seriously. Registry to send a copy of this order to the Chairman of the Board and to the Revenue Secretary. Misc. application allowed on the above terms. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 427 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Valuation - the appellants sold 90% of the goods to unrelated persons at arms length, and balance 10% of the goods captively used by the appellants themselves for further manufacture - applicability of Rules 8 & 9 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000
-
2007 (6) TMI 426 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Natural Justice - Violation of ... ... ... ... ..... erest of justice, the lower authority i.e. adjudicating authority is directed to issue copy of the show cause notice (along with R.V.D rsquo s), corrigendum thereof to the appellants and/or to the appellant rsquo s representative and/or Advocate within 12 weeks from the receipt of this order. On receipt of such show cause notice and relied upon documents, the appellants are directed to file reply to the adjudicating authority within three weeks from the date of the receipt of such show cause notice. On receipt of such reply from the appellant the adjudicating authority will grant an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant and decide the issue within four weeks from the date of receipt of reply to the show cause notice. 5. emsp Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the original adjudicating authority to follow the directions as given above and pass an order on merits. The appeal is allowed by way of remand. (Dictated in court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 425 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Refund - Limitation - Unjust enrichment - Classification dispute ... ... ... ... ..... by the amended law. The question of bar of limitation arising in this case can only be decided taking into account the day on which right to refund arose. In this case, right to refund arose on 25-8-1989 .and the appellant had filed refund claim on 13-9-1989. Therefore, the right arose on that day cannot be demolished by any plea of bar of unjust enrichment for the delay made in considering application of Appellant. During pendency of such application for a period of nearly six years, law relating to refund had undergone amendment in the year, 1991. Following the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of T.V.S. Suzuki Ltd. (supra), the claim of the appellant is entertainable. Added to this, the appellant is also entitled to the ratio laid down by the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court in the case of M.R.F. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras - 2004 (164) E.L.T. 383 (S.C.). 4. emsp In the result, appeal is allowed. Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.
-
2007 (6) TMI 422 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
Exemption to Registered Apex Handloom Co-operative Society ... ... ... ... ..... . 26/94 dated 1-3-94 and Notification No. 27/95 dated 16-3-95 which exempted clearances of such goods to a ldquo Registered Apex Handloom Co-operative Society rdquo . 3. emsp The dispute is whether M/s. Jamnagar Jilla Audhyogik Sahakari Sangh Ltd., was a Registered Apex Handloom Co-operative Society or not. The Manager, KVCI and District Registrar of Co-operative Societies certified it to be a Registered Apex Handloom Co-operative Society. However, the Government of Gujarat certified exactly to the contrary. Further, the Tribunal considered the issue as to whether M/s Jamnagar Jilla Audhyogik Sahakari Sangh Ltd. was a Registered Handloom Co-operative Society and held vide its Order No. C II/2168/WZB/02 dated 8-7-02 that the same is not a Registered Apex Handloom Co-operative Society. 4. emsp In the light of the above, no valid grounds have been adduced to interfere with the decision of the Commissioner. 5. emsp Therefore, the appeal is rejected. (Pronounced in the open Court)
-
2007 (6) TMI 421 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat/Modvat - Inputs - Refund of unutilised credit ... ... ... ... ..... and cannot be ignored. The matter therefore requires to be re-examined by the original authority. 5. emsp As regards the other 4 claims the finding of the Commissioner to the effect ldquo ....thus there has to be co-relation between the inputs used and final product exported lot wise rdquo has ignored the detail chart alongwith summary sheets filed by the appellants which they claim to be showing full particulars of each lot of grey fabrics contained in the exported fabrics ARE-1 wise. These charts were required to be examined and verified alongwith other revised statements which the appellant possess. The rejection of these four claims therefore requires to be reconsidered including the factual position as regards whether the appellants could have used the credit otherwise. 6. emsp The appeal is allowed as remand in above terms. The original adjudicating authority to re-determine the claims after following the principles of natural justice. (Pronounced in Court on 15-6-2007)
-
2007 (6) TMI 420 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
Refund - Unjust enrichment - Classification dispute ... ... ... ... ..... egard, he cites a decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Unit, New Delhi v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. - 2003 (155) E.L.T. 523 (Tri.-Del.). 4. emsp After hearing both sides and perusal of case records and the certificate obtained from the Chartered Accountant along with the Balance Sheet produced, we are satisfied that the ratio of the Tribunal rsquo s decision in the case of Maruti Udyog Ltd. cited supra, squarely applies to the present case. 5. emsp In view of our finding as above, we set aside the impugned Order and hold that the appellants are entitled to the refund of Rs. 14.98 crores (Rupees fourteen crores ninety-eight lakhs) as claimed by them, which was deposited by them earlier while their case was before the Tribunal and the Hon rsquo ble Supreme Court. We have not gone into the question of interest claimed by the appellants, as the refund itself is being allowed by us in the present Order today. Pronounced and dictated in the open Court.
........
|
