Delhi Court February 1999 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.
Medicamen Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)(83)LC334Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed against the order of the Collector (Appeals), Customs, New Delhi.2. Learned Consultant for the appellants submitted that on 25.1.1994, C.H.A. M/s. World Cargo Movers, Delhi submitted shipping bill No.010454 dated 25.1.1994 to the Customs Authorities at IGI Airport Unit, New Delhi for examination of one consignment containing 167 packages of ayurvedic herbal mineral product named TAB LIV-52 (on every pack of which is clearly written Ayurvedic Proprietary Medicine manufactured by M/s. Himalaya Drug Co., Bangalore for export to Russia, on behalf of M/s. Medicamen Exports. Inadvertently, the ignorant clerk of the CHA inserted in the body of the said shipping bill, DBK Rs. 16621.35, which was actually not admissible as the said ayurvedic drugs were not chargeable to Central Excise duty. On examination the concerned Supdt.of Customs, scored out 'DBK 6 No. 1202(B) 2% on the front page of shipping bill No. 010454 dt 25.1.1994: 'No objection to the export of the drug...
Brijwasi Udyog Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC867Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi classifying the following items manufactured by the appellants here under Heading 84.79 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985 as mechanical appliances having individual functions not elsewhere included or specified, and denying the benefit of Notification 118/88 (sic), dated 1-3-1988 which cover fire extinguishers.2. We have perused the records and heard Shri Negi, learned SDR since none appeared for the appellants in spite of notice for today's hearing.3. The appellants claim that all the items manufactured by them are used for putting out fire. Water/foam/DCP motor is fixed on the fire fighting vehicles and sites of large industrial units for fighting fire by spraying/projecting/dispersing of water/foam/dry chemical powder from outside source. This item is covered under IS : 8442 - 1997. Foam maker/foam chambers are fixed on oil storage tanks, installed at projects' sites of large industrial u...
Modi Rubber Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)(65)ECC131
1. M/s. Modi Rubber Ltd. have filed the appeal being aggrieved with the order dated 1-9-1997 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Ghaziabad.2. Briefly stated the facts are that the appellants manufacture tyres and avail of Modvat credit of the duty paid on inputs under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules. The Central Excise Officers conducted the physical stock taking of the finished goods in their factory premises on 31-7-1995. The officers found 570 tyres and 25 tubes less than the balance recorded in RG1 register involving duty amounting to Rs. 90,965/-. The officers also noticed that the appellants had made entries in their RG 23 Part I register only upto the month of May, 1995. The officers, after checking the receipt, issue and closing balance of the inputs, found shortage in the inputs worth Rs. 12,03,661/- involving of duty Rs. 2,36,937/-. Further, it was noticed that they had availed Modvat credit of Rs. 2,01,38,023/- in respect of which receipt was not shown in RG 23 Part ...
Bharat Starch Polymer Industries Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)(108)ELT288TriDel
1. The issue of classification of a product called "Corrugation gum powder" manufactured by the appellant herein arises for determination in this appeal - according to the assessee the item is a starch falling for classification under CET sub-heading 1103.90, while according to the Department it is a glue based on starch under CET sub-heading 3505.90.2. None appears for the appellant in spite of notice. Hence we heard Shri V.M. Udhoji, learned Departmental Representative and perused the records.3. The product is obtained by mixing starch powder with alcohol, sodium chloride and calcium hydroxide without the aid of powder (sic).According to the HSN Explanatory Notes at page 497, starch glues, obtained by treating starch with an alkali, fall under Chapter Heading 35.05. In the present case, starch is treated with calcium hydroxide which is an alkali, hence the item is not just a starch falling for classification under Chapter 11 but a glue based starch, on an application of the HSN Expl...
Sahyadri Dyestuff and Chemicals Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC208Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed with reference to the order of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune dated 31-5-1994.2. A notice was issued to the appellants for hearing on 18-9-1998 but, they have sent a letter dated 12-9-1998 requesting that the matter may be decided on the basis of merits of the case as explained in the appeal memorandum. The matter has come up on board again and in view of their prayer, we have gone through the records including the impugned orders and the appeal memorandum and heard learned JDR.3. Learned DR stated that the appellants submitted classification list classifying their products, amongst others, ink blue, ink blue special, waste of ink blue and reflex blue under Chapter 3215.00. They were, however, issued a show cause notice asking them as to why these products should not be classified under Chapter Heading 3204.30 and 3204.29. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the A.C. who held the products to be classifiable under Chapter Heading 3204.21 or ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Cyto Pharmaceuticals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)LC233Tri(Delhi)
1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue the issue for our consideration is whether the small scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E.was admissible to the respondents, M/s. Cyto Pharmaceuticals for the clearances made by them to their loan licencee, M/s. Group Pharmaceuticals. The respondents have pleaded before the Asstt.Collector of Central Excise, Bombay that the value of the clearances of their loan licencee could not be clubbed with the clearances effected by them. The adjudicating authority, the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise had confirmed the demand of central excise duty of Rs. 90,351.37 and had imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,000/-. On appeal, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay observed that both M/s. Cyto Pharmaceuticals and Group Pharmaceuticals were two independent manufacturers and the value of the clearances effected by M/s. Group Pharmaceuticals from their own factory could not be clubbed with the value of the clearances made by M/s. Cyto Pharmace...
Shree Raj Laxmi Processors Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT188TriDel
1. This is an application for restoration of the appeal which was dismissed for default of appearance vide Final Order No. E/520/90-D, dated 11th July, 1990. The applicants who are represented by Shri Hari Shankar and Shri Roop Singh, Advocates stated that they did not receive notice of hearing of the appeal fixed on 11 th July, 1990, that a miscellaneous application had been filed for modification of the stay order by which the appellants were directed to deposit some amount, that the miscellaneous application and the appeal were dismissed for default of appearance, that the copy of the final order which was issued by the Registry was never received by the appellants and that the appellants had intimated to the Tribunal vide letter dated 4th March, 1991 that they had shifted their premises. They submit that no communication was received regarding dismissal of the appeal even to the address indicated in their letter dated 4th March, 1991 and it is only in 1998 when the appellants inte...
Pradeep Khanna Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)(65)ECC466
1. All these miscellaneous applications seek direction to the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi and Joint Secretary [(TRU) CBEC] for filing affidavits as well as to produce documents in regard to the appellants' averment that the non-payment of duty on the goods was according to the advice of the Department itself and that facts about the appellants' activities were known to the Department and that there was no intent to evade duty attracting demand of duty for the extended period.2. During arguments, Shri A.K. Jain, learned Counsel submitted that the appellants had met Commissioner (TRU) as well as the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner and had apprised them about their activities and they had been advised that no duty was payable on the goods. He submitted that it is essential to obtain the affidavits and documents from the Revenue Authorities to ascertain the factual position.3. Shri A.K. Aggarwal, learned SDR opposed the miscellaneous applications and submitted that the...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Medley Pharmaceutical
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)(107)ELT312TriDel
1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal dated 6-10-1994 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (A), Pune. In the impugned order the ld. Collector held that tablets manufactured by the respondents are classifiable under sub-heading 3003.20 of the Central Excise Tariff.2. When the case was called, none appeared on behalf of respondents in spite of notice, therefore, the appeal is being taken up for final disposal in the absence of respondents.3. Ld. JDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that on the label of product the word "REMED" printed in the oval shape circle finds a prominent place on the label which is a trade name. He further submits that any use of the trade name or a registered mark or any other mark so as to indicate the connection in the course of trade the medicament will be treated as patent or proprietary. He therefore prays that the appeal be allowed.5. In this case a show cause notice was issued to the respondents stating therein that the pr...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Gandhi and Associates
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC587Tri(Delhi)
1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal dated 4-10-1991 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. At the outset, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the respondents have filed an application under Rule 23 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for bringing additional evidence on record. He submits that the respondents want to place on record, additional evidence in the form of two expert opinion given by two officers of Indian Institute of Technology in respect of the goods in question.2. Ld. JDR appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the expert opinion was not before the lower authorities. However, the opinion was obtained by the respondents in respect of the goods in question without the knowledge of the Revenue. He therefore, prays that the application be dismissed.3. Heard both sides. We find that the expert opinion is obtained by the respondents without the knowledge of the Revenue; and identity of the goods sen...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »