Chennai Court December 2009 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Cce, Chennai Vs. M/S. Viki Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2009
Per Jyoti Balasundaram On hearing both sides, we find that the lower appellate authority has relied upon Tribunal s decision in D.S. Metals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai 2003 (160) ELT 973 holding that centre column and bottom plates are part and parcel of moulds and are constituted as moulds and hence entitled to the benefit of MODVAT credit under Rule 57Q of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Revenue has not been to show that the operation of the above order has been stayed or stands reversed. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere with the impugned order which followed the above cited decision and accordingly reject the appeal....
M/S.Y2k International and Others Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2009
Per Jyoti Balasundaram M/s.Y2K International (hereinafter referred to as the importers ) presented a Bill of Entry for home consumption dated08.07.1999 for clearance of 336 pieces of Mother Boards (PPCB) for an assessable value of Rs.3,24,768/-. The unit price of the consignment which was supplied by M/s.Trinity Infotech, Hong Kong was USD 22 per piece (CIF). The value declared appeared to be low and, therefore, the case was taken up by SIIB, for examination and investigation. The consignment was opened and found to contain 336 nos. of Pentium-II Mother Boards, and 336 nos. Mini Boards, CDs, manuals and cables with fittings. The Mini Boards known as Daughter Boards were not declared in the Bill of Entry. It was also noticed that the cotemporaneous import prices of Mother Boards of various models were in the range of USD 35-45 per piece and the selling price of the Daughter Boards alone range from USD 5-7 per piece. As a result, the declared price of the subject Mother Boards worked out...
Cce, Chennai Vs. M/S. Nivaran Herbal Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2009
Per Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy Heard both sides. The respondents had taken a registration for manufacture of 8 ml. ‘Velvette’ brand shampoo. The present proceedings started with detection of clearance of 8 ml. shampoo and 100 ml. shampoo without payment of duty. The adjudicating authority has confirmed a demand of Rs.2,11,874/- and has imposed a penalty of equal amount under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in addition to imposing a further penalty of Rs.25,000/- under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and demanding interest under Section 11AB of the Act. The lower appellate authority has set aside the demand except for an amount of Rs.387/- and the penalty leading to this appeal by the Department. 2. Shri V.V. Hariharan, learned Jt. CDR appearing for the Department argues that the impugned Order-in-Appeal requires to be set aside for the reason that the same has been passed without taking into account the voluntary statement made by the Director and ...
M/S. Britannia Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Che ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2009
Per Jyoti Balasundaram The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution as none appears inspite of notice, with liberty to apply for restoration....
S. Thinagaran Versus the Chief of the Army Staff, Sena Bhavan, New Del ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2009
ACA Adityan The applicant in this application, has filed W.P.No.14793 of 2007 before the Honourable High Court, Madras, which has subsequently been transferred to this Tribunal, after the formation of Armed Forces Tribunal, and renumbered as T.A.No.26 of 2009. 2. The averments in the affidavit to the application in brief are as follows:- The applicant has served the Army for about 21 years. The applicant was a Junior Commissioned Officer in the rank of Nb/Sub in 871 Med Regiment. The applicant was examined by the Invalidating Medical Board, Military Hospital, Danapur, on 10th February 2006 and thereafter, he was discharged from the said hospital after examination on 27th February 2006. The applicant was discharged from service on the ground that he was suffering from Alcohol Dependence Syndrome. The applicant was not given copy of the proceedings of the Medical Board at any time. The applicant was sent home from the Unit on AFMSF 16 (Ver 2002) on 15th March 2006. The applicant was not ...
R. Ranjit Versus Union of India, Rep by Its Secretary, Ministry of Def ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2009
ACA Adityan The applicant in this application, has filed W.P.No.23667 of 2008 before the Honourable High Court, Madras, which has subsequently been transferred to this Tribunal, after the formation of Armed Forces Tribunal, and renumbered as T.A.No.31 of 2009. 2. The applicant filed this application seeking disability pension from the respondents contending that the order of rejection of disability pension by the second respondent is liable to the set aside, since the disability under which he was suffering viz. Myalgia Neck made him to voluntarily retire from service on 01.10.2007 and on that score he was also discharged by the third respondent stating that you have been discharged at your own request with effect from 01.10.2007. In the written statement filed by the second respondent, the second respondent has stated that subsequently the Ministry of Defence has considered the plight of the army personnel, who retire voluntarily from service due to their medical disability, and has p...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Tiruchirapalli Vs. Henkel Spic (i) Ltd ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2009
Per Jyoti Balasundaram We have heard both sides on the appeal of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who has accepted the contention of the assessees that M.R.P adopted and duty to be discharged is at the retail price of Rs.8/- on a multipack of three sachets of detergent powder is correct. 2. We find that the detergent powders are packed uniformly and offered to all buyers at uniform price conspicuously indicating on the wrapper (Buy 2 and Get 1 free) on each of the packages. The goods are not cleared as an individual pack but as unit pack of 2 + 1. The MRP of Rs.12/- has been scored out and another MRP Rs.8/- has been printed on the package. The Board’s circular dt. 28.10.02 clarifying the earlier circular dt. 24.5.02 states that once an MRP is scored out and another MRP printed on the package, it cannot be said that a package has two MRPs printed on it since the scored out MRP cannot be considered as an MRP either by the seller or by the consumer and h...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pondicherry Vs. Tanfac Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2009
Per Jyoti Balasundaram The respondents herein are registered manufacturers of inorganic chemicals. They imported various goods in terms of Value Based Advance Licence (VBAL) during the period August-94 to August 95 and availed the benefit of exemption from payment of Customs duty as per Notification No.203/92-Cus. dt. 19.5.92 as per which exemption is admissible subject to the condition that export obligation is achieved within the licensing period by exporting the goods manufactured in India in respect of which no input stage credit is obtained under Rule 56A or Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. However, respondents had availed input stage credit of Rs.1,38,783/- and as this was contrary to the requirement of the notification, the assessees reversed the credit or paid credit amount in cash through PLA on various dates between May to August 1995. Thereafter, the assessees applied to the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade (JDGFT) for conversion of value based advance lice...
Cheran Spinner Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2009
Per Jyoti Balasundaram The issue in the present appeal namely as to whether MODVAT credit is admissible on High Speed Diesel Oil stands settled against the assessees by the apex court s decision in Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad Vs Associated Cement Companies Ltd. - 2005 (180) ELT 3 (SC). Following the ratio of the above judgment, we uphold the impugned order denying credit, and reject the appeal....
Sabcol Concepts Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2009
Per Jyoti Balasundaram M/s.Sabcol Concepts are engaged in the import and trading of Dyestuffs which find application in the leather industry. They imported goods from M/s.Irweld UK Ltd., Finsgate, London and it was found that the importers were related to the supplier; the transaction value was not accepted; reference was made to SVB section to determine the acceptability of the transaction value and inclusion of other charges; the Dy.Commissioner passed an order wherein trade discount of 20% and local agency commission of 10% were to be loaded to the transaction value and pending provisional assessments to be finalized by loading the invoice value by 30% . The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the finding of relationship between the assessees and its supplier but upheld the order relating to loading of transaction value by 30%. His order was challenged by the assessees before the Tribunal which vide final order dt. 4.9.02 remanded the case for fresh decision. The Commissioner (Appeals)...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »