Delhi Court August 1999 Judgments

Vardhman Spg. and General Mills Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)LC769Tri(Delhi)

1. Common issue is involved in all the appeals, therefore, appeals are being taken up together. The appellant filed Appeal Nos. E/2131 to 2135/97-D against the Order-in-Original Nos. 15 to 19/CE/97, dated 24-9-97 whereby the Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,37,51,576.49 and Appeal No. E/1959/97-D is filed against the Order-in-original Nos. 9 to 13/CE/97, dated 4-9-97 vide which the Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,24,68,800.90. In the impugned orders the Commissioner of Central Excise held that Unit No. 1 and Unit No. 2 of the appellant are one factory and the exemption provided under Notification No. 35/95-CE., dated 16-3-95 and under Notification No. 8/86-CE., dated 23-7-96 is not available to the appellants.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Cotton and Acrylic Yarns falling under Chapters 52 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. Prior to 15-5-95 the appellants paying dut...

Agarwal Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)LC51Tri(Delhi)

1. This is an application to take action against the respondent for the non-implementation of the order passed by this Tribunal. The short facts necessary for disposal of this petition are as follows :- 2. Petitioner who was the appellant in Appeal C/295/98-A imported a consignment of photographic lenses. It was his case that the goods imported are of Hong Kong origin. He declared the value on that basis at Rs. 2,35,463.47. On examination by the Customs authorities, the goods were found to be of Japanese origin. By the impugned order in the appeal, value was enhanced to Rs. 25,84,163.00. On this basis, Commissioner ordered confiscation of the goods under Section lll(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 5 lakhs. A penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs was also imposed on the appellant.3. During the proceedings before the Customs authorities relating to the release of the goods, appellant deposited Rs. 15 lakhs in the office of DRI...

Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Power Master Industrial

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT560TriDel

1. Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 25-5-1993 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). In the impugned order, the product universal joints' was classified under sub-heading 82.04 of the Central Excise Tariff.2. Ld. JDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that the universal joints is specifically covered under the Tariff Heading 84.83 of the Central Excise Tariff. As this universal joints transfer the power, therefore, it should be classified under Heading 84.83 and it is not a tool by itself. He, therefore, prays that the appeal be allowed.3. Shri S.A. Pandiyan, Manager (Marketing) of the respondents submits that universal joints, manufactured by the respondents is an extension to the hand tools. He submits that it is used as hand operated spanner.He submits that this universal joints can be used with a nut or other fastner worked upon with the arm of the operator. He, further, submits that its function is not to transfer power in a mechan...

Satya Paper Mills Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT347TriDel

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 14-10-1998 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh who dismissed their appeal and confirmed the Order-in-Original dated 21-8-1997 of the A.C., Central Excise.2. The facts, as made out from the impugned order, giving rise to the present appeal may briefly be stated as under :- Appellants claimed Modvat credit of Rs. 593/- during the period 7/96 to 12/96 on Squirrel Jet Nozzles by treating the same as Capital goods but their claim was rejected by the A.C. Central Excise vide order dated 21-8-1997 on the ground that these goods did not fall within the definition of 'Capital goods' under Rule 57Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules.3. Feeling aggrieved by the order of A.C, the appellants went in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected their appeal and upheld the order of the A.C. through the impugned order dated 14-10-1998. They have now come up in appeal before the Tribunal.4. None appeared on behal...

Subham Polymers Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT718TriDel

1. When this appeal came up for final hearing on 24-3-1999 on account of non-appearance of the appellant, appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Actually, the appellant had sent a representation to this Tribunal requesting to dispose of the appeal in the light of the Final Order No. 5738/97, dated 29-12-1997 passed by the West Zonal Bench, Mumbai in their own case. A copy of the said decision was also sent along with the said representation. Thus without noting the said contention of the appellant, the appeal happened to be dismissed. Now the appellants pray for restoration of the appeal and for disposal of the same on merits.3. Appellants in this representation sent to this Tribunal prayed for disposal of the case on merits. So it was not proper on the part of the Tribunal to dismiss the same on the ground of non-prosecution.Consequently werestore the appeal.4. In the impugned order, the Commissioner found that the appellant had recovered excess amount on account of freight and in...

Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Shreeram Steel Indus. and Engg.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(116)ELT389TriDel

1. In this appeal, preferred by the Revenue, the issue involved is whether the benefit of Notification No. 202/88, dated 20-5-1988 is available to the respondents, M/s. Shreeram Steel Industries & Engineering Works.2. When the matter was called, none one was present on behalf of the respondents in spite of notice nor there is any request for adjournment. We, therefore, heard Shri S. Ramanathan, ld. JDR, and perused the records.3. The ld. D.R. submitted that the respondents bought the material, which was described as Tollable/re-rollable scraps and availed the benefit of Notification No. 202/88 in respect of finished products manufactured out of such material. The Assistant Collector, under adjudication order, confirmed the demand holding that rollable/re-rollable material is not a specified input under Notification No. 202/88. The notification specifically mentions that the inputs by the description such as angles, shapes and sections of iron or non-alloy steel, etc. The ld. JDR, ...

Mewar Textile Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT622TriDel

1. M/s. Mewar Textile Mills was given an exemption from payment of sales tax, as part of Rehabilitation Scheme. However, they continued to collect Sales Tax from their buyers and kept the amount with themselves. The Central Excise authorities held in the impugned order that the amount realised by the Textile Mill, being only part of the price of the goods and not sales tax payable, should form part to the assessable value while paying Central Excise duty. In the appeal now it has been contended by the Textile Mill that the amount realized by them was in the nature of sales tax and they kept the amount with themselves only because of the Scheme of Rehabilitation. Therefore, the amount collected as tax should be attributed to Sales Tax payable and should not be included in the assessable value.2. As against the aforesaid submission of the appellant, ld. DR has submitted that what is deductable under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Central Excise Act, is only the 'Sales Tax payable'. In the i...

Fraternity Plasto Fab (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C.E.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT904TriDel

1. By the impugned order, the ld. Commissioner demanded duty on the shortages noticed at the time of stock taking and on clearance of HDPE Granules without payment of duty and also imposed a penalty. Being aggrieved by this order, the appellants have filed the captioned appeal.2. The facts of the case in brief are that on a surprise visit to the appellants' factory premises on 19-8-1995, Officers verified physical stock of finished products as well as raw materials and found as under :-________________________________________________________________Sl. Description Stock as on Stock found on DifferenceNo. 19-8-1995 physical verifi- as per RGl/ cation1. HDPE Bags 5265 Nil (-)5265 (Non-Laminated)2 HDPE SACKS 32668 Nil (-)32668 (Laminated)4.HDPE Fabric Nil. 96Rolls/ (+)96Rolls/ 92000mtrs 92000mtrs5.HDPE Granule -- Nil (+)127 Bags/ 3175 Kg. 3175kg They also resumed certain records considered to be incriminating. On a scrutiny of a Register Fraternity Plasto for the month of April, 1995, wh...

Wason and Company Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT671TriDel

1. Matter called. None for the applicant. We, however, find that the notice of hearing in the stay petition has been issued by registered post on 17-8-1999. Therefore, we have proceeded to hear the learned JDR on the stay application filed by the applicants herein. The stay application prays for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of Rs. 28,955 /-as duty on 492 pairs of shoes which have been held to be not accounted for by the lower authorities out of the 1000 pairs of footwear cleared for export. Case of the applicant before the lower authorities was that after the clearances of the goods for export under bond in terms of Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules the goods before being loaded for export at Custom House, New Delhi had to be kept in godown of a transport company. There was a fire accident in the godown of M/s. U.P. Punjab Transport Company at 3405, behind LIC Building, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi where the goods were kept. The footwear which could be salvaged and brought...

Digvijay Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. A search was conducted at 54, Janpath, New Delhi in the premises of M/s. Bhagat Industrial Corporation and Shri R. D. Bhagat on 28th February, 1996 and concluded on 23rd March, 1996. Shri R. D. Bhagat is the chairman of the said company as well as the present assessee-company. Books of accounts, documents etc. were found and seized which were later on handed over to the Dy. CIT, Special Range, Amritsar holding jurisdiction over the case of M/s. Bhagat Industrial Corporation. On scrutiny of the seized materials the said Dy. CIT was of the opinion that the unexplained advances/loans and income on the basis of loose sheets and books of accounts relating to M/s. Digvijay Chemicals Ltd. i.e. the present assessee were required to be examined by the AO assessing M/s. Digvijay Chemicals Ltd. Being satisfied in the matter the aforesaid Dy. CIT, Amritsar handed over the relevant seized materials under s. 158BD to the AO of M/s. Digvijay Ltd. i.e. the present assessee.2. On receipt of the sei...