Delhi Court June 2000 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.
Multitech Auto Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT683TriDel
1. In this case, credit of Rs 17,900/- has been disallowed to the appellants who are manufacturers of motor vehicle parts falling under Chapter 87 of the Central Excise Tariff and further differential duty of Rs. 19,430.77 has been confirmed against them.2. We have heard Shri T.K. Srivastava, learned Advocate, and Shri R.K.Sharma, learned SDR.3. The ground for denial of credit of Rs 17,900/- on the capital goods is that the goods were received on 10-8-1996 while the declaration under Rule 57 T was filed on 12-8-1996 i.e. after receipt of the capital goods. We agree with the appellants that the delay of two days in filing the declaration cannot be a ground for denial of credit as the credit was availed only after filing of the declaration and the appellants have also requested for condonation of the very short delay in filing the declaration. Hence, we hold that the appellants are eligible to the above-mentioned amount and set aside the denial of the same.4. The differential duty deman...
Jawahar Metal Industries Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2000
Reported in: (2000)(120)ELT818TriDel
1. These are nine appeals-eight appeals filed by assessees as under and one appeal filed by the revenue-involving the issue of classification of Iron and Steel products, namely, side slittings, end cuttings, roughly shaped pieces and trimmings under the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Acts, Accordingly, all these appeals are being disposed of by one common Order :-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Sl. No. Appeal No.Name of the Appel- Impugned Order lants1. 455/94 B Jaivahar Metal Indus- Order-in-Appeal 643- tries MRT/93 dated 29-10-2. 2194/94 B -do- Order-in-Original 79 Collr/94 dated 21-7-19943. 1507/96-B Bhushan Steel Ltd. Order-in-Appeal 384- 385/CE/MRT/96 dated 10-9-19964. 1246/96 B Jawahar Metal Indus- Order-in-Appeal tries Ltd. 232/CE/APP/MRT/965. 1247/96 B -do- Order-in-Appeal 235/CE/MRT/96 dated 2-6-19966. 676/96 B Bhushan Steel & Strips Order-in-Appeal 46/96 Ltd. dated 6-2-19967. 1281/96B -do- Order-in-Appeal 230- 31/96 date...
Satellite Engineering Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-14-2000
Reported in: (2000)(71)ECC307
1. The appellants filed claims for refund of duty of Rs. 3,20,590.56, Rs. 1,22,709.60 and Rs. 1,74,404/-respectively being the duty paid by them on lead glass tubings supplied by M/s. Metal Lamp Caps (I) Ltd., Mysore on the ground that the supplier/manufacturer had wrongly classified the tubings under CET Subheading 7001.90 instead of under CET sub-heading 7008.10 as electric light bulbs, attracting nil rate of duty. The claims were rejected by the Assistant Collector on the ground that the assessee is not eligible to seek refund of duty on the goods as they had discharged the duty liability in accordance with the approved classification list filed by the manufacturer at Mysore. The lower appellate authority has upheld the order of the Assistant Collector holding that it is not open to a purchaser to reopen the assessment finalised in terms of Section 11B (1). Hence these appeals.2. None appeared for the appellants in spite of notice, hence we heard the learned DR and perused the reco...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Superior Air Products
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-14-2000
Reported in: (2000)(120)ELT352TriDel
1. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Seven Hills Papers (P) Ltd. v.C.C.E. reported in 1997 (95) E.L.T. 522 (T) held "I find that the subject case is fully covered either ratio of the decision of the CEGAT and as mentioned above and I hope that the adjudicating authority was competent to condone the delay". Being aggrieved by this order, Revenue has filed this captioned Appeal.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Oxygen, Nitrogen, Argon Gases and Compressed Air.The Respondents have been receiving capital goods during the period 12-2-1994 to 11-3-1995; that they got registered with the Central Excise office on 15-1-1995 and applied for registration under the Factories Act on 15-3-95. Capital goods were received in March, 1995 and commercial production commenced on 29-3-1995. The Respondents filed a declaration under Rule 57Q on 29-3-1995. Subsequently an applica...
N.K. Meena Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-14-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT744TriDel
1. Shri N.K. Meena is registered as a Custom House Agent with the Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur holding CHA Licence No. 02/CHAL/R/99.His licence has been suspended by the Commissioner by Order dated 25-4-2000. This Order is reproduced below :- "Whereas an enquiry against Shri N.K. Meena, CHA is pending / contemplated. Now therefore, the undersigned, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 21 of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 hereby suspend the Customs House Agent Licence No. 02/CHAL/R/99 issued to Shri N.K. Meena, CHA with immediate effect." 2. The CHA is in appeal against the above suspension order passed by the Commissioner of Customs. Shri L.P. Asthana, Advocate is appearing for the CHA. The Revenue is not represented.3. The ld. Advocate for the appellants submits that the suspension order under Regulation 21(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 (CHALR for short), must indicate that the Commissioner has forme...
Western India Stationery Mfg. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-13-2000
Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT679TriDel
1. A show cause-cum-demand notice dated 10-5-1988 was issued to the appellants herein for recovery of Central Excise Duty of Rs. 34,547.40 on envelopes falling under CET Sub-heading 4817.00 cleared without payment of duty for the period 1-3-1988 to 31-3-1988. The notice was withdrawn by the Assistant Collector vide Order No. A-117/88, dated 1-11-1988, extending the benefit of exemption under Notification 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 by excluding the value of clearances of envelopes from 1-3-1987 to 29-2-1988 during which period the said envelopes were exempted from duty in terms of Notification 43/86, dated 10-2-1986. The Revenue preferred an appeal to the Collector (Appeals), Bombay on the ground that the envelopes were articles of correspondence and not articles of stationery covered by Notification 43/86 and, therefore, the value of their clearances was required to be included for the purpose of computation of clearance value under Notification 175/86. The Collector (Appeals) set aside t...
Sagun Foundary (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-13-2000
Reported in: (2000)(71)ECC871
1. These are 4 applications for waiver of pre-deposit of the following amounts of duty confirmed and penalty imposed by the Commissioner, Central Excise under the impugned order. 1. M/s. Sagun Boundary P. Ltd. Duty Rs. 46,28,4377-Penalty Rs. 46,28,437/-under Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, and Rs. 1 lakh under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules.2. Shri Vinay Garg, learned Advocate, submitted that M/s. Sagun Foundary manufacture C.I. Castings and parts and components of I.C.Engine and P.D. Pump sets on job work basis for M/s. Bharat Electricals, applicants No. 2; that the Commissioner had confirmed the demand of duty and has imposed penalty on applicant No. 1, holding that the impugned goods were used for manufacturing P.D. Pumps which attracted nil rate of duty and as such exemption under Notification No.214/86-CE dated 25-3-1986 was not applicable to Castings manufactured by applicant No. 1; that the Commissioner had also held that exemption under notification No. 84/94 dated...
Daewoo Motors India Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-13-2000
Reported in: (2000)(71)ECC279
1. Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Motor Vehicles falling under Chapter Heading 8702 to 8706 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The issue raised in these appeals is whether the value of tool kits has to be included in the assessable value of passenger cars manufactured by them under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act.2. Excise Department issued show cause notices to the appellant company calling upon them to show cause why value of tool kits cleared with passenger cars should not be added to the assessable value of the cars and duty assessed accordingly. Appellants raised many contentions against the inclusion of the value of tool kits to the assessable value of the passenger cars manufactured by them. It was contended that tool kits is not a statutory requirement for the purpose of registration of a passenger car or for running the same, tool kits does not enhance the marketability of the car; nor does it go to ensure completion of the manufacturing process of the ca...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. S.T.P. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-12-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT743TriDel
1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) who has held that 'Bituminous Mixture' manufactured by the respondents herein for captive use in the manufacture of tarfelt, is not excisable on account of its non-marketability. According to the Revenue, the item in dispute is a excisable commodity meriting classification under CET sub-heading 2715.90 as Bitumen Mastic.2. We have heard Dr. Ravinder Babu, learned DR and Shri Gopal Prasad, learned Advocate. Bituminous mixture is manufactured by mixing blown bitumen at a temperature of 200 C to 250 C with limestone or french chalk. The Bituminous mixture is a coating substance which renders special properties like water proofing to materials such as Hessian/fabrics coated with it. It can be used only in molten state and cannot be re-used after re-melting once it gets solidified. The Chemical Examiner has opined that Bituminous mixture has to be used immediately in a continuous process while it is still...
Sony India Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-12-2000
Reported in: (2000)(71)ECC268
1. Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 stipulates valuation of excisable goods with reference to retail sale price where the Central Govt. by way of issue of notification may specify any goods, in relation to which it is required to be declared on the package thereof the retail sale price of such goods, under the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 on the rules, made thereunder or under any other law for the time being in force. The Central Government by issue of notification No. 18/98-CE., (N.T.), dated 2-6-1998 has extended the provisions of Section 4A to Colour Television Sets (CTVs).2. Under Rule 6 of Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 issued under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976, the manufacturers of CTVs have to print Maximum Retail Price (MRP) on the packages of the CTVs.3. By Notification No. 50/1997-CE, dated 10-9-1997, the Central Government specified the colour Television Receivers falling un...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »