Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (9) TMI 103

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside impugned order No. V.Adj. (SCN) (AEM) 15-28/2000, dated 29-9-2000; (bb) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring the proceedings initiated under Rules 57-I and 57-U in the impugned Show Cause Notice as lapsed in view of substitution thereof by Notification No. 11/2000 CE (NT), dated 1-3-2000; (c) Pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships will be pleased to restrain the respondent No. 2 from proceeding ahead with adjudication of impugned Show Caus .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted 31-3-1999; (vii) Five show cause notices and order of demand by Assistant Commissioner dated 26-11-1997; (viii) Order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 24-6-1999. According to him the issue as to classification of the petitioners' products, the issue as to entitlement of petitioner to encash accumulated Modvat credit and/or utilization of Modvat credit, obtaining of rebate has been dealt with in the aforesaid proceedings and all orders of the Adjudicating Authority or the Appellate Authority wherein the petitioner had succeeded were being reagitated by way of impugned show cause notices. That in fact department had preferred appeals before the Tribunal and the said appeals are pending. Therefore also, it was submitted th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading No. 3003.20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and which attracted "NIL" rate of duty in the relevant period. Whereas, on the basis of investigation6. conducted, as mentioned in the Statement of Facts, it was noticed that M/s. CHL have Fraudulently obtained the rebate claim totally amounting to Rs. 2,76,416/- for the year 1995-96 to 1998-99 (upto May, 1998) as detailed in Annexure - "B-l" to this Show Cause Notice. They have also availed/utilised wrong Modvat credit (short reversed on goods cleared to domestic market) totally amounting to Rs. 95,74,196/- under Rule 57A for the period April, 95 to August, 96 as detailed in Annexure "B-2 to this Show Cause Notice and Rs. 1,02,16,695/- under Rule 5 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Astra Pharmaceuticals (supra) that brand name is one by which the product is identified and asked for. In view of the brand names used on the products by the appellants, the products become PP medicines by virtue of second part of explanation given in Note 2(ii) to Chapter 30 and the product becomes chargeable to duty. However, since the appellants are using the brand names on their product when the same is exported under bond, they are not required to pay duty. Therefore, the provisions of Rule 57C cannot be made applicable in this case and the appellants are not required to reverse the Modvat credit availed by them on the inputs used in the manufacture of exported goods. The finding of the adjudicating authority, that since the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nce to different show cause notices and the orders made by the authorities from time to time, suffice it to state that all the issues raised in the impugned show cause notices have come up for consideration before the Adjudicating Authority or the Appellate Authority and concluded in favour of the petitioner partially. The basic issue as to classification has been categorically decided in favour of the petitioner. 12.Though the petitioner has raised the issue regarding its request to cross examine certain officers of the department not being granted, in light of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is not necessary to deal with the same at this juncture. The Affidavit-in-Reply filed by the respondent authority makes various avermen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates