Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(38)ECC16
1. The above appeals are filed by the Department and directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, dated 9-2-90 exonerating the respondents of the charge under Section 27(7)(b) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, the "Act" for short.2. On prior intelligence, the Central Excise authorities recovered from the residential premises of respondent Assainkutty 308.400 gms. of new gold ornaments and initiated proceedings against the respondents on the ground that K.P. Mohamed, the Managing Partner of M/s. M.P.C.Jewellery, Koduvally, Kerala, was transacting business in gold without accounting for the same in the statutory register and in contravention of law through Assainkutty, the other respondent herein, and the proceedings in respect of the charge of contravention of Section 27(7)(b) and Section 55 of the Act against respondent K.P. Mohamed and the charge of abetment against the other respondent culminated in an order of adjudication at the hands of the Addi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(59)ELT560TriDel
1. These are the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 48,04,619.00 demanded from applicants, M/s. Rotex Textile Mills (P) Ltd. and for waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty of Rs. 10 lakh imposed on them and also for the waiver of penalty of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on applicant, Sh. N.K. Chakraborty, Managing Director of M/s.Rotex Textile Mills and of Rs. 10,000/- on applicant, Sh. Rajan Nair who is an employee of the above-said applicant firm by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-Ill in his order dated 29-6-1991. Sh.Hidayatulla, Sr. Counsel, appeared for M/s. Rotex Textile Mills and Sh.N.K. Chakraborty and Ms. Rangaswamy for the applicant, Sh. Rajan Nair.Shri Hidayatulla, Sr. Counsel, submitted that the applications are not being pressed on the aspect of prima facie case, but that they would plead undue financial hardship to the applicants in making the pre-deposit of the duty and penalty demanded. In this regard, the Sr.Counsel referred to the extension of validity p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(58)ELT330TriDel
1. M/s. Lucas-TVS, Padi, Madras-600050 has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that M/s. Lucas-TVS Limited, Madras had imported various parts of Hitachi Vacuum Housing Assembly, Rotor Assembly, Centre Plate, O Ring (A), O Ring (B), Oil Seal and Ball Bearings, vide Bill of Entry G.M. No. 809/90 Line No. 93 dated 27th July, 1990. The appellants had claimed the benefit of Notification No.33/88-Cus. and had sought clearance and wanted the goods to be assessed at the rate of 10% + 30% + C.V. nil. The appellants had contended that the goods were covered under Serial No. 2 (ii) of the said notification. The relevant entry in the said Notification No.33/88-Cus. reads as under:- Sl. No. 2 : Auto Electricals, viz., (i) Starter Motor & (ii) Alternator/Generator.It was contended by the appellants before the Assistant Collector that the vacuum pump alternator is used on the fuel efficient light com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(41)LC347Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s Taj Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Agra, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise Kanpur. The said appeal was presented in the Registry on the 17th day of October, 1991 Thereafter, a stay application, duly supported with an affidavit, was also presented in the Registry on the 8th day of January, 1991. The stay application was listed for hear, earlier and the Tribunal had disposed of the stay application vide Stay Order No. 129/9 A dated 2nd July, 1991, and had dispensed with the pre-deposit of the duty amount of Rs. 2,42,918.47 and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the condition of the applicants depositing Rs. 1,20,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty thousand only) within eight weeks from the date of the receipt of the order. The said stay order passed by the Tribunal was challenged by the appellants before the Hon. Allahabad High Court, and the Allahabad High Court via Order dated 24th June, 1991, had set aside the order passed by the T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(59)ELT437TriDel
1. The appeal is directed against the orders of Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi rejecting the appeal on the ground that their claim for refund of duty of Rs. 2,60,693.75 under Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962 ('Act' for short) was not entertainable because it had not been established that the goods in question had been lost. The Asstt. Collector had treated the refund claim as one under Section 27 of the Act and had rejected it as time-barred. The present appeal to the Tribunal has been made on the ground that apart from the fact that the International Airport Authority staff at Delhi airport had not been able to locate the goods at the time when the Custom Authorities looked for them for physical examination, it was only on 20/21 December, 1990 that the International Airport Authority of India finally wrote to the appellants that the goods had not been traced. The relevant portion of this letter IGIA/Cargo/52-VT/1453/90/17938, dtd. 20/21 December, 1990, a photocopy of wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(39)ECC109
1. The classification of the products listed below, manufactured by the appellants herein, arises for consideration in this appeal:- 2. The assessees claim classification of all these items under Heading 3506.90 CET as "Prepared glues and other prepared adhesives n.e.s. or included namely; adhesives other than those based on plastics", while the Department seeks classification of the items figuring at Sl. Nos.(a) to (f) as "compounded rubber unvulcanised in primary form" under Heading 4005.00 CET and the item at Sl. No. (g) as "Chemical Preparation n.e.s. or included" under Heading 3823.00.3. The assessees filed a classification list No. 2/88 on 6-6-1988 declaring Sl. Nos. (a) to (f) under Heading 4005.00 and Sl. No. (g) under Heading 3810.00. Subsequently, on 8-7-1988, they submitted a fresh classification list No. 3/88 declaring all 7 products under Heading 3506.00 and claiming the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 175/86 dtd. 1-3-1986 available to SSI Units. The goo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(59)ELT604TriDel
1. The appellant have challenged the correctness and validity of the Order-in-Appeal dated 29-12-1989 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi by which he has rejected the appeal of the appellant which had arisen before him as a result of remand by the CEGAT, New Delhi vide Order No. A-397/89 dated 27-9-1989.2. The facts of this case are that the Preventive Officers of the Customs, Kanpur noticed an advertisement in daily newspaper 'Dainik Jagran' Kanpur dated 1-6-1986 advertising for sale of an Akai VCP alongwith national Video Camera. The officers visited the house of the advertiser, the appellant, on 11-6-1986 and searched the same under search warrant. He was not in his house at the time of the search and the search warrant was executed on his wife Smt. Kira Awasthi in presence of two independent witnesses. On search, goods of foreign origin, valued at Rs. 41,000/- as mentioned in panchnama/recovery memo dated 11-6-1986 were recovered. His wife, on demand, could not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(41)LC530Tri(Delhi)
1. These are the appeals filed by the department against the orders of Collector (Appeals) No. 21/87 dated 28.1.1987 and No. 150/87 dated 30.6.1987.2. The learned DR stated that the dispute relates to classification of the respondents' products. The rival entries are 85.46/85.47 and 6804.90. The department's contention is that they are classifiable under 6804.90 as asbestos cement products on the grounds mentioned in the appeal.3. The learned Counsel drew attention to the cross objections filed by them. He reiterated the contention that the goods are classifiable under 85.46/47 as the items are electrical insulators/insulating materials and fittings.4. He also drew attention to the definition of the word 'insulators' in Longman's dictionary and extracts from 'Engineering Encyclopaedia' the materials hand book I.S.I, specification, the B.T.N. and the case law.5. We observe that the appellants had filed a classification list seeking classification of their products described at S. No. 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1992)(39)ECC40
1. In both these appeals, common question of law and facts arises and hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law.2. The Revenue has filed this appeal No. 3920/88-C against the order of Collector (Appeals) who has rejected the application filed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Visakhapatnam under Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962 against the final assessment order passed in respect of Bill of Entry No. 010/2/6.86 covering the import of 4,675 mt. tonnes of Low Ash Metallurgical Coke (LMM Coke) imported by M/s.Ferro Alloys Corp. Ltd. The goods were cleared on assessment on PD basis pending production of documents and chemical test result. The consignment was assessed and cleared free of duty extending the benefit of Notification No. 166/80-Cus., dated 19-84980 and the Bill of Entry was assessed finally on 10-11-1986 without charging to duty. The learned Additional Collector held that the consignment should not have been granted the benefit of notification in ques...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1993)(67)ELT183TriDel
1. The present miscellaneous application emerges from Tribunal's order No. 328 to 330/1991 dated 18-4-1991/6-6-1991. Shri R.K. Habbu, the learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the applicants. He has pleaded that the Tribunal should exercise its powers in terms of provisions of Rules 40 and 41 of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982. Shri Habbu pleaded that after the remand of the matter by the Tribunal, the Collector has issued a show cause notice and he pleaded that the Tribunal should issue certain directions to the Collector. In support of his argument, he relied on a decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Scientific Instruments Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs and another reported in 1980 (6) E.L.T. 89 (Cal.) where the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court had held that when an order is set aside by an appellate authority and is remanded back with specific direction, the power and jurisdiction of the lower authority is limited to...
Tag this Judgment!