Latest Cases

Sawalka Auto Indus. (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Kolkata-i

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in : (2002)LC753Tri(Kol.)kata

.....investigations they came to know about the fake nature of the invoice.in these circumstances penalty should not have been imposed upon the appellant. ld. advocate also relies upon the tribunal's order no.a-802/kol/2001, dated 31-8-2001 vide which penalty under identical circumstances was set aside.3. shri t.k. kar. ld. sdr appears on behalf of the revenue and reiterates the reasoning of the authorities below for imposition of personal penalty upon the appellant.4. after giving my careful consideration to the submissions made from both the sides i find that there is no clear finding by the authorities below on record that the appellants was also involved in the wrong availment of modvat credit on the basis of the fake invoices issued by the dealer. they had produced the invoice to the superintendent for defacement and on being approached by the revenue had readily debited the amount in question. in this view of the matter i am of the opinion that penalty should not have been imposed upon the appellant.accordingly i set aside the imposition of personal penalty upon the appellant and allow the appeal with consequential relief to them.

Nutech Packagings, Sh. Mukul Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2002)(82)ECC295

.....order-in-original under appeal.2. the perusal of the impugned order shows that the appellants, m/s nutech packagings, are engaged in the manufacture of boxes of duplex paper board and varnished printed paper sheets. during the course of transit checking, the preventive officers of the central excise intercepted their three wheeler loaded with 6984 sheets of unprinted and laminated duplex paper board. in a follow up, it also revealed that they were availing modvate credit on their inputs i.e. duplex paper board etc. under rule 57-a of the central excise rules. they were removing the modvat able inputs either as such or after some processing for job work under the covers of challans which were not in the prescribed proforma. nor any duty was debited at the time of removing of the goods. the statement of shri rajveer jain, accountant of the company was recorded who admitted the removal of the goods found in the vehicle without payment of duty. he also could not offer explanation for the unaccounted stock of the finished goods valued at rs. 2,89,065.50 the details of the modvat able inputs removed without debiting the duty had been detailed at page 16 of the impugned order.....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Marvel Vinyls Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2002)(145)ELT649TriDel

.....by the deputy commissioner confirming the demand of duty of rs. 10,32,303/-, directing to pay interest and imposing penalty of rs. 1.0 lakh.2. the facts of the case briefly stated are that the respondents herein are engaged in the manufacture of pvc sheeting and films falling under chapter 39 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. the respondents herein submitted their declaration under rule 173b claiming therein the shrinkage of their product namely pvc sheeting at a rate of 7.5% in cases where the product was sold/cleared in metres and 5% i.e. 100 pieces were being accounted for in cases of 105 pieces, where the product was sold/cleared in numbers. since this concession appeared to be inadmissible to the respondents herein central excise authorities issued show cause notices stating as to why shrinkage should not be disallowed and why penalty should not be imposed. the deputy commissioner while adjudicating the case disallowed the shrinkage in terms of lengths and pieces and imposed a penalty.3. arguing the case for revenue shri m.m. dubey, learned dr submits that the respondents herein claimed deduction of shrinkage as a percentage of the product and in terms of pieces. he.....

Ram Kumar Agarwal Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2003)(160)ELT186TriDel

.....(noticee no. 2 in the show cause notice), but he has not come up in appeal.2. on 16-12-1990 acting upon an intelligence, raid was conducted on the factory premises of the appellant known as m/s. ganesh bullion refinery at indore. he himself was, however, not available at the factory at that time, but his employee shri shravan kumar was present there and he was melting the silver. on conducting search, two silver brick weighing 318.595 kg. of foreign origin were recovered and the same were seized as no document regarding the legal acquisition of the same could be produced by shri shravan kumar, an employee of the appellant, at that time or by the appellant himself on any subsequent date. a show cause notice was accordingly issued to both of them. shri shravan kumar admitted the recovery of the silver bricks and maintained that he was melting the silver on the direction of the appellant as he was only an employee with him on monthly salary. the appellant himself denied the allegations as made out in the show cause notice and maintained that in his absence his employee, shri shravan kumar might have accepted the silver bricks for melting from any other party and as such he was not.....

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Vs. Commr. of Cus., Visakhapatnam

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2002)LC508Tri(Bang.)alore

.....reported in 2002 (139) e.l.t. 193 etc. it has-been contended that these decisions make it clear that actual removal of the goods mentioned in sub-section (6) of section 15(1) is not to be equated with physical removal of the goods in all cases. instead, the completion of the condition for the clearance of goods from bonded warehouse should be treated as equivalent to actual removal. it has been submitted that once "out of charge" order is given, the goods are no more to be treated as warehoused goods.5. as against the above submissions on behalf of the appellants, the departmental representative has pointed out that the language of section 15(1)(b) stipulated that the date for the purpose of duty is "the date on which the goods are actually removed from the warehouse".the dr therefore contended that the statutory requirement of "actually removed" can be satisfied only upon physical removal of the goods. she also pointed out that such an interpretation is not contrary to the provisions of section 68 of the customs act either since that section states that the importer of any warehoused goods may clear them for home consumption on fulfilment of the requirements of that section......

In Re: Eih Limited and ors. Vs. Mashobra Resort Limited and ors.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

.....for grant of interim prayers as sought for in ca no. 52 of 2002 in cp no. 12 of 2002 and if so, what are the interim reliefs to be granted.2. the facts of the case are that the 2^nd respondent-the govt of himachal pradesh-owned a property known as "wildflower hall" in simla.with the view to develop the property into a 5 star deluxe hotel, it entered into a joint venture agreement (jv) with the 1^st petitioner (known as oberoi group) on 10.10.1995. the jv provided for incorporation of the 1^st respondent company to develop and manage the proposed hotel. as per the joint venture agreement, the 2^nd respondent was to hold not less than 25% shares while the 1^st petitioner ad its group were to hold not less than 36% and not more than 55% shares in the 1^st respondent company. the contribution by the 2^nd respondent was to be in kind, that is the transfer of the wildflower hall to the company for a value of rs. 7.5 crores against which shares were to be issued. the 1^st petitioner and its group were to invest rs 20 crores forwards share capital and the responsibility to construct the hotel and make it commercially operational was to be with the 1^st petitioner. the board of the.....

Director General (investigation Vs. Plastic Packers

Court : Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission MRTPC

.....products, namely, low density polythene bags and high density polythene bags. it has been clarified that the respondent is a small scale manufacturer of polythene tubes, sheets and bags and different rates of discounts/ commission were paid on two different products and not on the same product. it is also stated that the respondent is also pleading gateways under section 38(l)(h) of the act and the respondent's market share is 0.45% in delhi which is quite negligible and is unlikely to have any material impact on competition.while total production of these products in nct of delhi is 1,00,000/- mt per annum, the respondent's production is 450 mt per annum only.moreover, as the respondent is a small scale manufacturer of polythene bags, its market area is confined mostly to delhi and, in view of the competition, it has to give discounts to obtain orders. learned advocate for the dg concedes that the respondent has offered discounts @ 5% and 7% of the value of the orders received on two different products and is also entitled to the benefit of gateways pleaded on its behalf. in that view of the matter, the present enquiry is closed and the notice of enquiry dated the 13th.....

S. Padmanabhan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam

Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ251CAT

.....the respondents to grant the consequential benefits thereof. (d) pass such other orders of directions as deemed just, fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. (i) the charges in al are vague, cryptic, ambiguous, non-speaking and hence incapable of being effectively defended. the charges were based on materials collected behind his back hence his request for conducting the enquiry as provided under rules 11 (2) of railway servants (discipline and appeal) rules, 1968 was just and proper. rejection of the same by reasons stated therein was opposed to the mandatory principles of natural justice and hence the same was violative of articles 14 and 16 of the constitution. (ii) annexure a-5 was highly arbitrary, ultravires rule 11, opposed to the mandatory principles of natural justice and hence unconstitutional. a-5 was based on materials gathered behind his back. (iii) annexure a-9 was without jurisdiction, arbitrary and unconstitutional. a-6 appeal was addressed to the second respndent competent authority who alone was bound to decided a-6. the 4th respndent had no power whatsoever to reject a-6. a-9 was illegal, ultravires rule 22 of the discipline and.....

P.C. William and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2003)(3)SLJ264CAT

.....propose to consider the merits of the order passed by the disciplinary authority, besides the order passed afresh in appeal.7. it is an indubitable fact that the disciplinary proceedings against the applicant were validly initiated under rule-9 of the rules, 1968.the proceedings were initiated by the competent authority and the order of punishment has also been passed by the disciplinary authority, who was competent to inflict the punishment. the legal competency of the authority which decided the appeal of the applicant is also not under challenge.8. the order of punishment passed by the disciplinary authority has been challenged by the applicant primarily on the ground that the applicant has not been meted out fair treatment in the inquiry with the result, the entire inquiry stands vitiated and, therefore, the order of punishment cannot be allowed to stand. the learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that the inquiry officer has fixed 10.1.91, 17.1.91 and 24.1.91 for the purpose of inquiry but on those dates no effective proceedings were taken and on 30.1.91, on which the applicant appeared before the inquiry officer and sought adjournment on valid ground, it was refused.....

Chanda Ram Bunkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2003)(1)SLJ386CAT

.....the applicant in service forthwith on the post of addl. commissioner of customs & central excise with all consequential benefits.2. in brief facts of the case as stated by the applicant are that while he working on the post of additional commissioner, customs & central excise, the applicant was served with a memorandum of charge-sheet on 4.11.87. the allegations against the applicant are that he contracted second marriage while having a spouse, without permission of the central govt., thereby violated the provisions of the rule 3(1)(iii) and rule 21(2) of the ccs (conduct) rules, 1964. it is stated that after issuance of the charge-sheet, enquiry officer was appointed. the applicant filed a detailed reply alongwith certificate dated 5.1.75 issued by the sarpanch, gram panchayat, norangpura, distt. jaipur, by which it was made clear that the first marriage of the applicant was solemnized in the year 1959, when the applicant was only 14 years of age and this marriage was dissolved in the year 1973, as per customs and usages prevalent in the community and thereafter, the applicant was married to smt. badami in february 1974, much before the applicant joined in govt......