Delhi Court December 1998 Judgments

C.C.E. Vs. Radhekrishna Plastic Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT449TriDel

1. This Revenue appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal dated 21-2-1991 passed by the Collector (Appeals), by which the Collector by applying the Trade Notice No. 61/90, dated 20th June, 1990 has held that the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 53/88, dated 1-3-1988 in respect of waste and scrap. The Assistant Collector had confirmed the demand of Rs. 29,228.13 under the provisions of Rule 57-1 read with Section HA of the CESA, 1944. The assessee had stated that (i) they manufacture all sorts of plastic sheets falling under Chapter (iii) they maintained complete account of scrap which has arisen from the raw material prior to the date of opting of Modvat and afterwards.2. Therefore, such waste of plastic sheets cleared by them are exempted under Sr. No. 24 of the notification. The Assistant Collector did not accept the plea and held that such clearance of waste and scrap of plastic sheets without payment of duty was not covered by the notification. The learned Colle...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Reydertrac Exports

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(106)ELT379TriDel

1. The importers in this case imported 8 second-hand machines and filed three Bills of Entry for their clearance. Earlier also, similar machines had been imported by them. The clearance was claimed under OGL or in the alternative under additional licence presented by them. The Commissioner after issue of the show cause notice and after hearing the importers, held that the 2nd-hand machines could not be imported under the OGL. Relying upon the advice given in an earlier case by the officers of the DGFT, he held that the licences in the possession of the appellants could not cover the importation. He ordered confiscation of the machines. Observing that the machines had already been provisionally released, he specified a sum of Rs. 75,000/- to be appropriated from the bank guarantee furnished by the importers. He imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on the importing firm as also of Rs. 5,000/- each on three partners thereof. The present appeals have been filed by the Revenue. The grounds, a...

Laxmi Rolling Mills Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(110)ELT820TriDel

1. These are three application as under for the purpose of waiver of pre-deposit and stay of the demand of the Central Excise duty and penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise under three separate orders.M/s. Luxmi Rolling Mills Rs. 69,06,873.56 70 lakhsShri Vishwakarma Steels & Rs. 44,50,814.00 45 lakhsAllied Industries 3. As the issue involved in the three applications is the same these are being disposed of by this common order.4. Shri Gopal Prasad, ld. Counsel, submitted that the three applicants were purchasing used rail sleepers, rails, wheels etc. either from auction directly from the Railways or from the Traders who have purchased these materials from Railways. As these materials are re-rollable covered by SI. No. 2A of Notification No. 202/88, the benefit of the duty exemption provided under the said notification to the finished products was available to them. He, further, mentioned that when these materials were purchased by Railways, these were duty paid as...

Flexible Packaging Company Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT437TriDel

1. In these two appeals filed by M/s. Flexible Packaging Company, the common issue involved is about the availability of the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 to the factory, the address of which was not mentioned in SSI Registration Certificate. Accordingly both the appeals are being disposed of by one common order.2. The appellants have requested in their letter received on 23-11-1998 that their appeals may be decided on the basis of Appeal Memorandum and written submissions. Briefly stated the facts are that the appellants manufacture various products falling under Chapters 76, 39 and 48 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act and avail of the exemption under Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986; that they were having their factory at Gala Nos. 128 and 129 of New Satguru Nanik Industrial Estate, Gurgaon, that the Registration Certificate issued by Directorate of Industries showed the address only Gala No. 129. Two show cause notices dated 22-3-1991 and 4-10-1991 were i...

innit Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT311TriDel

1. These are three Appeals filed by the above mentioned appellants against two orders passed by Collector (Appeals) dated 29-11-1991 and another order passed by Additional Collector dated 28-8-1991. The issue in all these three Appeals being common, they were taken up together for hearing.2. When the matter was called none was present for the appellants. It appears from the record that they have prayed for disposal of the appeals on merits.3. We have heard Shri H.K. Jain, Id. SDR who explained the facts of the cases. We have also perused the records. Ld. SDR explains that the issue relates to denial of the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 by the Department to the appellants for three different periods on the same ground. The appellants, M/s. Innit Pvt. Ltd., are manufacturers of Paints and Varnishes under the brand name "Indeco" belonging to M/s.Comet Paints Ltd. The benefit of Notification 175/86 was denied to the appellants on the ground that no proof had been adduced to show that...

Trigon Metal Sections Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)LC347Tri(Delhi)

1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Vadodara by which he has held that the "library system" made of iron and steel, manufactured by the appellants herein falls for classification under CET sub-heading 9403.00 as an item of furniture, other than furniture items covered by CET sub-heading 9402.00 and are not eligible to the benefit of exemption in terms of Sl. No. 4 of the Table annexed to Notification 80/90 which grants exemption to steel furniture items, excluding book cases, etc. None appears for the appellants in spite of receipt of notice; hence we heard the learned DR and perused the records.2. It is not disputed that the product is a book shelf or a book rack from which books can be taken out or placed from the front or the back.A book shelf or a book rack is recognisable as a furniture article and, therefore, classification under CET sub-heading 9403.00 is appropriate and not under CET sub-heading 7326.90 as other articles of iron...

V.K. Oils (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT137TriDel

1. Captioned two appeals have been filed against the findings of the Collector holding that "the value of Spent Nickel Catalyst was required to be added for working out the value of Nickel Sulphate/Nickel Carbonate to be supplied to the units of Noticee No. 2. The Collector, therefore, confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 6,20,931.00 against M/s.V.K. Oils (P) Limited and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1.5 lac on M/s. V.X.Oils (P) Limited and also a penalty of Rs. 75,000/- imposed on M/s.Hindustan Lever Limited. Being aggrieved by this order, these two appeals have been filed by the appellants.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that on 8-9-1993, Central Excise Officers visited to the factory premises of M/s. Hindustran Lever Limited who are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods and availing the credit of duty paid on the inputs. A scrutiny of the records showed that they were transferring Nickel Catalyst after availing Modvat credit, to M/s. V.K. Oils (P) Ltd. under Rule 57F(2) ...

Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Griffons Laboratories P. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(110)ELT958TriDel

1. The issue involved in the appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the benefit of Notification No. 48/77 dated 1-4-1977 is available to the P or P medicine manufactured by the respondents for their loan licencee.2. Shri H.K. Jain, ld. SDR, submitted that the explanation (a) to notification provided that if the manufacturer is a company, no foreign company should hold the share therein and is one foreign company was holding the share of the respondent company, the benefit of notification is not available to them. He also submitted that it is now well settled law that the person who actually manufactures the excisable goods is considered as manufacturer for the purpose of excise rules. Ld. SDR also contended that the decision of Gujarat High Court relied upon by both the lower authorities as reported in 1980 (6) E.L.T. 759 (Guj.), has not been accepted by the Government as an appeal has been filed in the Supreme Court. Further in respect of Explanation (a) held to be ultra vires by the...

Harish Kumar Verma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 9.11.1995 terminating his services under the proviso to Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'Temporary Service Rules') with immediate effect on payment of one month's pay and allowances in lieu of notice.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as a direct recruit Stenographer Grade 'III' by letter dated 19.10.1982.One of the conditions in the appointment letter is that he will remain on probation for a period of two years which may be extended or curtailed at the discretion of the appointing authority. According to the applicant, he had successfully completed the probation period on 22.9.1984 i.e. after two years service as Stenographer Grade-Ill.Learned Counsel has submitted that since the respondents have not extended the probationary period, the applicant is deemed to have been confirmed in the post of Stenographer at the end of t...

Airport Authority of India Vs. Ms. Promila

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999(48)DRJ820; [1999(82)FLR257]

ORDERY.K. Sabharwal, J. 1.The respondent in terms of order dated 31st December, 1992, was engaged by the appellant as one of the typist till regular arrangements are made to fill-up the post. The advertisement for regular post i.e. Assistant Grade-III was issued on 4th June, 1996. The age limit prescribed for the post is 'Below 25 years' When the post was advertised the respondent had crossed the age of 25 years and had become over age. Thus, the respondent represented to the appellant and sought relaxation of 9 months in the age limit so as to enable her to become eligible for consideration for the post of Assistant Garde-III. This was declined. The respondent was given one month notice stating that her services shall not be required after 10th January,1997 and she can seek employment elsewhere wherever she may be eligible. 2. The aforesaid action of the appellant was challenged by the respondent in the writ petition which has been allowed by learned Single Judge in terms of the judgm...