Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Cestat Calcutta Court October 2001 Judgments Home Cases Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Cestat Calcutta 2001 Page 1 of about 82 results (0.065 seconds)

Jayanta Glass Industries Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

1. The appellants' factory was visited by the officers of DGAE, Calcutta on 29.8.96, who searched their factory premises and seized various records/documents for the alleged evasion of duty. During the post seizure investigations the appellants deposited in toto, an amount of Rs. 9,19,286/- (rupees nine lakh nineteen thousand two hundred eighty six) under the cover of various letters. The first such amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (rupees five lakh) was deposited by pay order dt.2.9.96 and the appellant vide their letter dt. 2.9.96 addressed to the Deputy Director General stated that - "kindly deposit this amount in their suspense amount subject to adjustment of excise duty after scrutinising our records held by him". To the same effect were the other letters dt. 3.9.96, 6.9.96 and 23.9.96 when some more amounts were deposited by the appellant.2. Subsequently show cause notice was issued to the appellant on 6.1.97 proposing confirmation of demand of duly of Rs. 13,00,000/- (approx.)(rupees t...

Jainendra Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

1. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the appellants. Accordingly I have heard Shri D.K. Bhowmik, ld. JDR for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the appeal on the ground that the appellant has not complied with the stay order dt. 18.1.2001 passed by him directing the appellant to deposit an sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh) towards penalty in terms of the provisions of Section 129E of the Customs Act.2. The appellant in their memo of appeal have contended that after the stay order dt. 18.1.2001 was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), they moved a modification application on 23.2.2001 and thereafter on 23.3.2001 enclosing therewith a copy of the certificate of income issued by the Anchal Adhikari, Sadar, Patna showing the appellant's annual income as Rs. 35,000/- (rupees thirty five thousand) only. The said miscellaneous application filed by the appellant for modification of the stay order were not considered by the Co...

Jaynarayan Dutta, Kush Ghosh, Vs. Commissioner of Customs (P), West

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

1. The prayer in all the four stay applications is to dispense with the condition of predeposit of personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) imposed on the appellants vide the impugned orders.2. I have heard Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, l.d consultant for the appellants and Shri D.K. Bhowmik, ld.JDR for the Revenue.3. As per the evidence on record one truck carrying foreign origin silk yarn was intercepted by the customs officers on 7.7.96. As the occupants of the truck could not produce legal documents showing possession of the said foreign origin silk yarn, the same was seized by the officers along with the truck. Statement of the driver, khalasi and various other connected persons were recorded during post seizure investigations. Based upon the above fact show cause notices were issued which culminated into the impugned orders vide which silk yarn was absolutely confiscated. The truck in question was also confiscated with an option to the owner to redeem the same on paym...

Kasa Impex Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

1. The appellant duly represented by Shri G.C. Sarkar, ld. Advocate is praying for dispensing with the condition of predepoist of penalty amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- imposed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise Calcutta and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Shri G.C. Sarkar, ld. Advocate submits that they have deposited the entire amount of duty of Rs. 4,23,121.70. Explaining the factual position, he submits that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of bars, road s and non-alloy steel. The said duty has been confirmed against them on the ground that they have removed their inputs as also final products from their factory without payment of duty. He submits that as there was confrontation going on between them and the land-lord in the factory premises they were compelled to clear the goods in a hurry without complying with the Central Excise Formalities. He submits that they had deposited the duty amount even prior to the issuance of the show-cause notice.3. Shr...

Orissa Bridge and Construction Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in : (2002)(146)ELT84Tri(Kol.)kata

1. The issue involved in the present appeal is as to whether the fabrication of Cutting Edge, Plain Shuttering Plates, Well steening Shuttering Plates, Well Curbe Shuttering Plates, Girder Shuttering Plates, Pier Shuttering Plates, Vertical Props and Derricks etc. From Steel angle, MS Plates, MS Sheets, HR Sheets and pipes amount to manufacture and result in emergence of marketable product os as to charge duty of excise on the same. The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhubaneswar vide his impugned order has confirmed the demand of duty of Rs. 1,32,377.55 (rupees one lac thirty two thousand three hundred seventy seven and paise fifty five only) against the appellants and has imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 16,500/- (Rupees sixteen thousand five hundred only) by holding that the appellants had manufactured the said items and no duty has been paid on the same.2. We have heard Shri S.K. Majumdar, learned Advocate for the appellants, and Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, learned SDR for t...

Mcnally Bharat Engineering Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in : (2002)(141)ELT74Tri(Kol.)kata

1.1. The appellant M/s. McNally Bharat Engg. Co. Ltd. entered into a turnkey contract with M/s. Hirakud Power Co. Ltd. for setting up of a complete coal handling plant for transporting coal from cold storage area to power plant. The said contract was complete involving design and engg., full works, fabrication works at site, supply of mechanical and electrical goods, erection, commissioning of the entire system, site testing and satisfactory performance test of the complete coal handling plant with all equipment, accessories, instruments and necessary controls. For the erection of the said plant, which runs 10 1 K.M. in length, the appellant used its own shop manufactured items as also the bought out items. The appellants were issued a show cause notice dt. 6.3.98 by the Commissioner of Central Excise, BBSR.demanding central excise duty to the tune of 1,23,70,938.30 (one crore twenty three lakh seventy thousand nine hundred thirty eight & thirty paisa) on the alleged ground that d...

Balai Chandra Das Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

1. After dispensing with the condition of predeposit of penalty of Rs. 2,000/-, I take up the appeal itself with the consent of both the sides.2. On 18.2.99, the BSF officers intercepted one mechanized boat and seized 20 cartoons of Bagda Seeds loaded in the same boat. The appellant herein, Shri Balai Ch.Das, claimed the ownership of the said Bagda Seeds and stated that the same were purchased by him from Kolkata and were meant for cultivation in fisheries situated at Uttar Barun Hat, Dist. 24 Parganas (North). Subsequently, in his petition dated 11.3.99 addressed to the Assistant Commissioner, he submitted all the relevant documents showing the purchase of the Bagda Seeds and the licence issued by the Govt. of West Bengal, Department of Fishery in the name of Anju Paul.3. The appellant was issued a show-cause notice proposing confiscation of Bagda Seeds along with notice to the boat owner proposing confiscation of the boat. The said show-cause notice culminated into the impugned orde...

Hindusthan Udyog Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

1. After dispensing with the condition of predeposit of the duty amount of Rs. 13,912.00 (Rupees thirteen thousand nine hundred and twelve), I take up the appeal itself with the consent of both sides.2. The said amount has been confirmed against the appellant company by denying them the benefit of MODVAT Credit in respect of the imported Copper Alloy Bar. The said Copper Alloy Bar was cleared by the appellants on payment of counter-veling duty of 15%. MODVAT Credit was availed on the same and subsequently, the same was cleared as such to M/s. Hindusthan Parsons Ltd. by debiting the same quantum of MODVAT Credit originally taken by them. The lower authorities have denied the said MODVAT Credit by observing that no declaration was filed by the appellants under the provisions of Rule 57G.3. Shri B.N.Chattopadhyay, learned Consultant for the appellant company draws my attention to a letter dated 21.2.97 written to the Assistant Commissioner intimating that on receipt of the consignment, t...

F.G.K. thermal (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

1. Miscellaneous Applications is for a prayer to direct the Commissioner to refund the amount deposited by the appellant is terms of the Stay Order passed by the Tribunal. We find that vide Final Order dated 2.1.2001 the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for de novo adjudication. As reported by shri K.K. Banerjee, learned Advocate the adjudication proceedings have been initiated by the Commissioner as yet.2. Inasmuch as the matter has been remanded in January, 2001, we expect the Commissioner to complete the de novo adjudication proceedings at an early date. Alternatively, the Commissioner may consider the appellant's request of return of deposit made by them during pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal. Miscellaneous Application is disposed of in above terms....

Dhariwal Steel (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in : (2002)(145)ELT71Tri(Kol.)kata

1. All the four appeals i.e. two filed by the appellants and two by the Revenue are being disposed of by a common order as the issue involved in all of them is identical. The dispute relates to the excisability of the structurals manufactured by the appellants. The matter had travelled up to Hon'ble Supreme Court and has been remanded by the Apex Court with directions to determine the excisability of the structurals after examining as to whether any new identifiable goods come into existence as a result of manufacture and as to whether the said goods are marketable.2. We have heard Shri S.K. Roychowdhury, ld.adv. for the appellants and Shri D.K. Bhowmik, ld.JDR for the Revenue.3. We note that Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Raipur v. SAE India Ltd.-2001 (45) RLT 873 (CEGAT-Delhi) has remanded the matters to the adjudicating authority for deciding the issue afresh in the light of the directions as contained in the above referred decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In...