Delhi Court December 2000 Judgments

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Mohan Bottling Co. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(128)ELT130TriDel

1. The issue involved in these five appeals filed by the Revenue is whether the Modvat credit is available to the Respondents, M/s. Mohan Bottling Co. Ltd., in respect of duty paid on the bottles used for aerated water.2. When the matter was called no one was present on behalf of the Respondents. Infact notice issued to them regarding date of hearing has been received back undelivered from postal authority with remark "not claimed returned to sender". I, therefore, heard Shri R.C. Sankhla, ld.DR and perused the record. The ld. DR, submitted, that the Respondents manufacture aerated water and avail of Modvat credit of the duty paid on glass bottles and plastic crates; that show cause notices were issued to them for disallowing the Modvat credit of the duty paid on the empty bottles, as the cost of these bottles was not included in the assessable value. The Assistant Commissioner, however, dropped the proceeding against them as he found, from the certificates submitted by the Cost Accou...

Kanahiya Aqua Control (P) Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(133)ELT232TriDel

1. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that 'In the instant case the appellants were manufacturing sanitary fittings with stylised brand name "COX" which was also being used by another manufacturer M/s. K.S. Valves Forgings, Jalandhar in simple word "COX".It is apparent from the evidences material and documentary relied upon by the lower adjudicating authority that there was a trade nexus between the impugned goods manufactured by the appellants and M/s. K.S.Valves Forgings, Jalandhar. Therefore, the lower authority is correct by not extending the benefits of exemption, which was hit by limitation of para (4) read with explanation IX to Notification No. 1/93-C.E., dated 28-2-1993 as amended. I do not find any merits in the appeal to disturb the impugned orders of the lower authority. Accordingly, I uphold the same.' Being aggrived by this order, the appellants have filed the captioned appeal.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in th...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Guljag Chemicals (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT78TriDel

1. Present appeal by Revenue, is against the order holding that Input Modvat credit, could be availed of duty paid on HDPE bags, used to pack 1 Kg packets of detergents made by the Respondent manufacturer as job-worker of M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd., the supplier of the raw material and packaging material and to whom the goods are transferred after manufacture and packing. The duty is being discharged by the manufacturers, with the relation to the maximum retail price, printed on the 1 Kg packs, as per the provision of notification issued under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. "...There is no provision in the Modvat Rules which debars taking Modvat credit in such situation. Interpretation sought to be given in the impugned order to Rule 57B(2)(v) is ill founded and without any basis as borne out by very wordings which are reproduced in the previous paras. It also cannot be said that Section 4 includes the cost of only retail packing. Assessment under Section 4A has to be made...

Shiva International Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(129)ELT91TriDel

"The CHAs are granted licence under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 and the licence is not transferable under any circumstances. The H-Card issued to Shri Ajaya Kumar Mathur did not make him competent to file Bill of entry/Shipping Bill or other documents. He was also not authorised as a H-Card holder sign any such documents. It is not known as to whether Shri Deepak Arora was permitting his H-Card holder employee to function in a manner not contemplated under CHALR'84, but even if it was done without the CHA's knowledge, it shows that there was a lack of supervision and proper control on the part of the CHA. I do not agree that although the licence was suspended in 1993, the two Inquiry Officers did not submit any Inquiry Report and the matter has dragged on for about seven years, causing hardship to the CHA. While I do not hold any brief for the Department for the delay in finalising the case and the consequent loss of business and tension for the CHA, at the sa...

M/S Navjeevan Textiles Vs. C.C.E. Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal, filed by M/s Navjeevan Textiles, the issue involved is whether the grey fabrics which was not accounted fro in the statutory register was liable for confiscation and penalty was imposable on them.2. Shri Pradeep Jain, Ld.Charted Accountant, submitted that the Central Excise Officers visited the appellant's factory premises on 18.6.98 and found grey cotton fabrics measuring 48944 mtrs received by them for processing in excess of quantity mentioned in the register; that the Assistant Commissioner, under the Adjudication Order No. 26/99 dated 18.2.99, confiscated the same and ordered to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 30,000/- and imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,000/- on the Appellate; that the entry could not be made due to non receipt of challan from the trader; that mere difference between physical stock and book stock would not lead to confiscation of goods. He relied upon the decisions in the cases of Garden Silk Mills Vs C.C.E., 1991 (51) ELT 373; Balls and Cyc...

Cosmo Ferrites Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT605TriDel

1. The issue involved in this appeal is whether M/s. Cosmo Ferrites Ltd., are eligible to take Modvat Credit of the Additional Customs Duty paid subsequently on demand by the Department.2. Shri J.P. Kaushik, Advocate, submitted that the appellants imported certain goods on payment of concessional rate of duty; that as they could not produce the end use certificate, Assistant Commissioner of Customs Bombay, directed them to deposit the differential duty which was deposited by them; that subsequently on the basis of the certificate issued by the Bombay Custom House, they had taken the Modvat credit of the countervailing duty paid by them. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise disallowed the credit holding that said certificate was not issued under Rule 57A or 57E of the Central Excise Rules; that the certificate had been issued for non-compliance of procedure and is in the form of a penalty; that Commissioner (Appeals) also under the impugned Order rejected their appeal holding tha...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Dhan Laxmi Mills

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(74)ECC351

1. Laxmi Mills, Pali. They were engaged in the processing of man-made textile materials and other textile fabrics without the aid of power.During the course of manufacture of carbonised processed fabric the base fabric in which the polyster content was less than 70% came into existence and the department wanted to assess the fabrics at that stage when the polyster contents was less than 70%. The processed fabrics with 100% polyster content at that time enjoyed exemption from the payment of Central Excise duty. As a result of carbonisation process the cotton content gets burnt out and what was left was 100% polyster fabric. The contention of the Revenue is that as the final fabrics were exempted and as at the earlier stage duty was chargeable on bleached/dyed fabric with less than 70% polyster contents, the respondents should have paid duty at that earlier stage before subjecting such fabrics to the process of carbonisation. The Commissioner, Central Excise (Appeals) in his Order-in-Ap...

Pushpa Industrial Corporation Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT429TriDel

1. Shri Amit Awasthi, learned Counsel arguing the application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty, submits that the applicants had applied for re-determination of the capacity of their re-rolling mill after opting for payment of duty under Rule 96ZP(3). He submits that the Department provisionally fixed the ACP and subsequently after re-verification of the parameters, the ACP was re-determined. He submits that during these verifications, the assessee was not associated and the appellants rejected the verification stating that the parameters have been wrongly taken. It was also argued by the appellants that because of the closure of the unit, there was dismantling of the machinery and when the machinery was dismantled, it was not possible to determine the parameters essential for re-determination of ACP correctly.2. The learned Counsel submits that the Department has raised the demand for the entire period; that during the major part of the material period, the factory was closed, licenc...

Smt. Linda Constance Edwards Vs. Shri William Edwards and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001IIIAD(Delhi)482; 91(2001)DLT355; I(2001)DMC746; 2001(58)DRJ731

ORDERJ.D. Kapoor, J.1. Marriage between the parties who are Christians took place more than 25 years ago. Its dissolution has been sought on the ground of cruelty coupled with adultery.2. It is alleged that right from day one respondent No.1, i.e. the husband started exhibiting symptoms of cruelty, apathy and lack of interest towards the petitioner and somehow or other the petitioner pulled on with the marriage till the year 1978 in the hope that the respondent No.1 may change. The impression of the petitioner was that the problems of his character may be due to temperament and not a basic trait of his character that may be incorrigible or unchangeable. That off and on the respondent No.1 used to come home fully drunk and indulged in physical beatings. However, when all efforts failed, the petitioner found that respondent No.1 was psychologically ill and has maniac traits right from his childhood and his character is unsuitable for a marital life and so much so the doctors, psychologis...

Sir Shadi Lal Enterprises Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2001(59)DRJ197

ORDERVijender Jain, J. 1. Rule.2. This writ petition can be disposed of at this stage. This is an off-shoot of the writ petition originally filed by the petitioners before the Allahabad High Court for the crushing season for grant of interim prices claimed by the writ petitioners. It seems that Allahabad High Court granted interim price, which was higher than the notified price subject to the petitioners-sugar factories furnishing bank guarantee along with the interest amount @12% p.a. Pursuant to interim order the petitioners furnished bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the Registration of the Allahabad High Court. The writ petitions of the petitioners i.e. DCM Shriram Industries Ltd. and Siel Ltd. Writ Petition no.1989/1983 (Transferred Case no. 54/1989), Sir Shadilal Enterprises Ltd. Writ Petition no.1840/1993 (Transferred case no.55/1/1989) and Simbaoli Sugar Mills Ltd. Writ Petition no.5963/1993 (Transferred Case no.84/1988) after furnishing of the bank guarantee were transferr...