Delhi Court January 2001 Judgments

M/S. Kichha Sugar Co. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. Meerut - Ii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The appellants in this case had availed modvat credit totally amounting to Rs. 12,476.14 on the H.S.D. Oil during the month of November, 1998. The Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rampur Division vice his order dt. 23.2.2000 denied them this credit and confirmed the demand of this amount on the appellants and further imposed a penalty of an equivalent amount on them.2. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), Ghaziabad vide his order dt.23.6.2000 rejected the appeal of the party upholding the order passed by the lower authority.3. The party is in appeal against the above order of Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate for the appellants and Shri Swatantra Kumar, JDR for the Respondents. The 1d. Counsel for the appellants very fairly concedes that by virtue of clause (1) of Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2000, no credit on H.S.D. Oil is admissible. He, however, relies on the decision of the CEGAT in the case of Chempo Pulp Tissues & Others vs. CCE Mee...

Cce, Chandigarh Vs. B.D. Steel Rolling Mills

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT130TriDel

1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals).2. I have examined the records. The respondents in this appeal had taken modvat credit on certain quantity of inputs lying in stock as on 31.3.94, amounting to Rs.2,82,803.10. They had done so on the strength of invoices issued by the sale Depot of M/s Tata Iron and Steel Co.Ltd. (TISCO). Three out of four invoices were issued prior to 12.5.94 and the remaining one was issued by the Depot after 12.5.94. The department by show-cause notice proposed to disallow the entire credit taken on the strength of the 4 invoices, alleging that the invoices could be accepted as valid document for the purpose of availing modvat credit under Rule 57G only from 12.5.94 in terms of Notification No.21/94-CF(NT) dated 12.5.94 and, therefore, the invoices issued prior to 12.5.94 were not veiled documents for the said purpose. The adjudicating authority disallowed the entire credit. But, in the appeal filed by the ass...

M/S Desh Plastic Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(129)ELT243TriDel

1. In this application, the applicant prays for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounts. The applicant is a manufacturer of polythene bags, sheets and tubes and are availing the facility of modvat credit on inputs under Rule 57A. In 1996, they had utilised modvat credit of Rs.1,19,666.40 towards payment of duty in respect of polythene sheets and tubes. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise disallowed the credit on the ground that the party had not declared polythene sheets and tubes as final products in their modvat declaration under Rule 57G. He also imposed a penalty of Rs.65,000/- on the party under Rule 173Q. The appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Assistant Commissioner was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the appeal before the Tribunal and the present application.3. The proprietor of the applicant-concern Sh. Navdesh Singh submits that, in an identical matter, this Tribunal has held that modvat credit should not be denied on the gr...

M/S. Alcobex Metals Ltd. Vs. Cce, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal appellant prays for waiver of pre-deposit of the amount of duty imposed by the authorities below for entertaining the appeal. A duty demanded against the appellant comes to Rs. 71,489.25.2. Short facts necessary for understanding the dispute raised in the appeal are as follows:- Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Zinc. Zinc is manufactured out of Zinc Ash and other residuaries. Zinc ash when reacts with sulphuric acid forms zinc sulphate solution, said solution is subjected to electrolysis. During this process, the metallic zinc is deposited on the cathodes. When the quantity of zinc in the zinc sulphate solution gets reduced, fresh zinc ash is added to it to generate zinc sulphate solution having more concentration. From such zinc sulphate solution zinc is extracted by electrolysis. Zinc sulphate solution prepared by the appellant was treated as an intermediary product assessable to Central Excise duty, since duty on that product was not paid. Show cause n...

Cce, Chandigarh Vs. M/S. Him Clylinders (P) Ltd., M/S.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This is an application filed by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh for referring the following question of law to the Hon'ble High Court arising out of Tribunal's Final Order No. A/595-597/98-NB dated 15.4.98:- "Whether Gate passes issued prior to 1.4.94 but endorsed on or after that date would fall under the coverage of Entry No. 10 in the table to the Notification No.16/94-CE(NT) dated 30.3.94 and would consequently become eligible document for taking credit under the Modvat Scheme?" 2. M/S. Saras Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd., the Respondent, have requested for adjournment of the case as their advocate was still ill and unable to travel to Delhi. I find from the case records that even on the earlier occasions whenever the reference application was posted for hearing no one has represented the respondents. The learned D.R. Shri Swatantra Kumar, mentioned that the Appellate Tribunal in the past in some matters has allowed the reference applications filed by the Department.I, there...

Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. Cce, Kanpur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal, filed by M/s Kissan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd, the issue involved is whether the Modvat Credit of duty paid on steel tubes was admissible to them under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules.2. Shri Bipin Garg, Ld. Advocate, submitted that the Modvat credit has been disallowed to the Appellants on the ground that they had not filed declaration under Rule 57T of the Central Excise Rules in respect of steel tubes; that steel tubes are components of Boiler/Boiler House; that in their Declaration dt. 22-1-96 they had declared 'Boiler & Boiler Accessories (Sl NO. 1), 'Boiler House & Accessories/Component' and Brass tube & accessories ( Sl. No. 19 & 20); that again in their declaration dt. 13-2-96, they had declared these goods at Sl NO. I, 19 and 20; that in their declaration dt. 15-3-96, they had specifically mentioned at Sl No. 25 'Boiler spare parts'; that 'Steel Tubes' were by name declared in their Declaration dt. 25-3-96 which was sent to the Department...

Cce Chandigarh Vs. Vimal Alloys (P) Ltd. and Others

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(132)ELT77TriDel

1. That are applications filed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, for referring the following question of law to the Hon'ble High Court, arising out of Tribunal Final Order No. A-417-428/97 NB dt.27-6-97; "Whether use of oxygen/acetylene gases in cutting of scrap of Iron & Steel into smaller pieces to be fed into a furnace is a part of integrated process connected with the ultimate production of final products namely steel ingots and other steel castings and is essentially required in process of manufacture of final products and whether oxygen/acetylene gases are eligible inputs for modvat credit"?.2. When the matter was called no one was present on behalf of the Respondents inspite of notice. I, therefore, heard Shri Swatantra Kumar, ld. DR and perused the records.3. The ld. DR, submitted that the Respondents manufacture products of Iron and Steel and avail of Modvat Credit of duty paid on inputs under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rule; that use of Oxygen/Acetylene ...

M/S. H.M. Processors Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

2. The contention of the appellant is that the Annual capacity of production under the Hot Air Stenter Independent textile Processors Annual capacity Determiniation Rules, 1988 were determined without affording an opportunity of personal hearing and the Commissioner while determining the Annual Capacity also taken into account the galleries of their Hot Air Stenter. The appellants are relying upon the Larger Bench decision in the case of M/s.Sangam Processors Bhilwara Ltd. Vs.CCE, Jaipur, Final Order No.16/2001/NB(DB) dated 4.1.2001 whereby the Tribunal held that a gallery which is having no rails, fan or radiator attached to it cannot come within the purview of "any other equipment"as contemplated by Explanation I to the Rule.3. As the impugned order is passed without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant hence it is passed in violation to the principles of natural justice. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner of Centr...

N.K.H. Alloys Vs. Cce Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT65TriDel

1. In this appeal filed by M/s N.K.H. Alloys, the issue involved is whether abatement of duty under Section 3 A of the Central Excise Act is available to them during the period their factory remained closed.2. When the matter was called, no one was present on behalf of the Appellants inspite of notice I, therefore, heard Shri A. K. Jain, Ld.JDR, and perused the records. The Appellants have submitted in their Memorandum of Appeal that they had claimed abatement in duty from 16-1-98 to 31-1-98 and for the period from 20th Feb 98 to 27th February 98; that they had sent intimation for closure of the factory for 15 days on 16-1-98 which was duly acknowledged by the Department; that on 17-1-98 they informed the position of stock of the steel ingots as at 18hrs on 16-1-98 through courier; that as the procedure was new, they forgot to mention the meter reading which was intimated by them on 19-1-98; that the Meter reading on 16-1-98 was 799365 and it was varified by the Central Excise Officer...

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S. J.K. Industries Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the respondents in spite of notice. Therefore, the appeal is being taken up in the absence of the respondents.2. Revenue filed this appeal against the order in appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). In the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals)held that MODVAT credit is available to the inputs used in the manufacture of bladders which are further used in the manufacture of tyres.4. The issue involved in this appeal is already settled by the Tribunal in the case of the respondents vide Final Order No.a/969-970/93-NRB dated 1.12.93. The Tribunal also decided the same issue in the case of Modi Rubber Ltd. Vs. CCE vide Final Order No.30-32/92-C dated 31.1.92 and the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Order dated 2.4.93 in Civil Appeal No.170-172(NM) of 1993. In view of the above settled position, I find no infirmity in the impugned order. The appeal is rejected....