Delhi Court May 2001 Judgments

M/S. Savitri Concast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(138)ELT296TriDel

1. The appellants manufacture "Ingots" falling under Chapter No. 72 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were availing modvat facility under Rule 57-A/57-Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and with effect from 1.8.97, they started paying duty on the compounded rates as provided under Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944. They were issued a show cause notice dt. 29.1.98 by the Asst. Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur calling upon them to show cause why the duty amounting to Rs. 1,47,319/- in respect of the inputs lying in stock on this date and the inputs used in the manufacture of final products should not be recovered from them under Rule 57-I of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and further why a penalty should not by imposed on them. On considering the reply of the party, the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur vide his Order dt. 5.5.99 dropped the proceeding and vacated the aforesaid show cause notice.2. The above order of the Dy. Commissioner was revi...

M/S Crompton Greaves Ltd. Vs. Cce, Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(76)ECC69

1. Appellant prays for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of operation of the order in view of pending appeal. According to the appellant, products worth Rs. 17,99,600/- were capitalised and were being utilised in Research and Development Section. On such capitalised goods manufactured by them, duty under the excise was not paid. Department objected to this action of the appellant. The value of the goods capitalised by the appellant was arrived at by adding 108% to the value given by the appellant as overhead charges. On such valuation duty amounting to Rs. 7,69,116.25 was directed to be paid. A penalty of Rs. 8 lakhs was also imposed invoking the provision contained in Rule 173Q of the Rules. In appeal, the imposition of duty and penalty as stated above by order in Original No. 15/CE/DC/99 dated 31.5.99 was challenged before the lower Appellate Authority. Commissioner (Appeals) by his order in appeal No. 1724/CE/CHD/2000 dated 29.12.2000 rejected the appeal upholding the order in origina...

M/S. Samtel India Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The brief facts in this case are that the appellants manufacture "display monitors" classifiable under Chapter heading 8471.00. On 16.10.96 their factory premises were visited by the anti-evasion branch of Central Excise Commissionerate, New Delhi and they conducted physical verification of the fully finished excisable goods and also the input items. On conducting stock taking, 53 monitors were found in fully finished condition which are not entered into their RG.1 Register. Further, the inputs valued at Rs. 9,35,785/- involving Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,71,514/- were found short as against the entries in their RG. 23A Pt.I account. Accordingly, the proceeding were initiated which culminated in the Addl. commissioner of Central Excise, Faridabad passing an Order dt. 27.2.98, in which she ordered for the confiscation of the 53 monitors, but gave the party an option to redeem them on payment of a fine of Rs. 3,500/-. The Adjudicating Authority further confirmed a demand of Rs. 1,7...

M/S. Modern Food Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This appeal was last called on 22.7.2000 and the same stood adjourned to this date in the presence of Shri A.C. Upadhyay, Advocate for the appellants.2. Today when the matter is called, the appellants are not represented.There is no communication from them either requesting for adjournment or giving reasons for their absence. It therefore appears that the appellants are not interested in pursuing their appeal....

C.C., Icd, New Delhi Vs. M/S. Asian Overseas

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The revenue filed this application for staying the operation of the impugned order.3. In this case, the respondents made import of dry cell batteries from China and the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order up-held the order of confiscation and ordered release of the goods in question on payment of redemption fine. The respondents also filed an appeal against the same impugned order, which is numbered as C/129/2001-NB(S).Taking into consideration that the order of confiscation is up-held by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) only gave an option to the importer to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine, I find no merit in the application and the same is rejected.Registry is directed to list C/Appeal No. 129/2000-NB(S) alongwith this appeal on 17.05.2001. (Dictated in Court)....

M/S. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd Vs. Cce, Raipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. When the matters were called no one was present on behalf of the Appellants inspite of notice. We also observe that no one had represented the Appellants whenever the case was posted earlier for hearing on 12.9.2000, 13.12.2000 and 20.2.2001. As the Appellants are public sector undertaking, they need clearance from the Committee of Secretaries for pursuing the appeals with the Tribunal as per the Supreme Court's decision in the case of O.N.G.C. As more than one year's period has passed since filing of the appeal and no clearance has been produced by the Appellants, both the appeals are therefore, dismissed. We, however, given liberty to them to apply for the restoration of appels as and when the clearance is obtained by them from the Committee of Secretaries....

M/S. A.P.S. Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This Stay Petition is against the imposition of penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the appellants by the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, MOD-IV, Delhi vide his Order dt. 7.9.98 and upheld by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi vide Order dt. 10.11.2000.2. I have heard Shri V.K. Gupta, Advocate for the appellants and Shri A.K. Jain, SDR for the respondents. Keeping in view that the matter relates to the seizure of the goods allegedly removed without payment of duty by the appellants and as the penalty is small amount, I direct the appellants to make the deposit of the entire amount of Rs. 5,000/- on or before 12.6.2001. The matter will be called for reporting compliance on 14.6.2001....

Rajasthan Pigment and Chemicals Vs. C.C.E, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The applicants filed this application for waiver of duty amounting to Rs. 61,107.28 and penalty of Rs. 5,000.00.2. Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the applicants, submits that allegation in the show cause notice was that the applicants availed the benefit of MODVAT Credit on the strength of improper invoices issued by the dealer. He submits that the Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, rejected the appeal filed by the applicants on the ground that the dealer cannot issue the invoice showing the higher rate of duty than the duty shown in the invoices issued by M.M.T.C. Ltd. he submits that before the Commissioner (Appeals), they took the specific plea that in respect of invoice number 16 dated 26.4.95, the excise duty paid in dealers' invoice was wrongly shown as Rs. 63,035.00 whereas the invoice issued by MMTC Ltd. shows Rs. 29,413.97. He submits that the applicants availed the benefit only in respect of duty shown in the invoice issued by MMTC Ltd. In respect of invo...

Shri Ram Nath Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Shri V.K. Gupta, Advocate for the appellant at the outset submits that since there is no penalty imposed ont he appellants, the Stay Petition filed by him is infructuous. The Stay Petition filed by the appellant, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous....

M/S. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this case, the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pathankot Devision vide his Order dt. 29.10.97 disallowed the modvat credit totally amounting to Rs.1,95,307/- to the appellants apart from imposing a penalty of Rs.20,000/- on them. The party filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh, who vide his Order dt.16.10.2000, dismissed the appeal of the party unholding the order passed by the Original Authority.2. The matter is listed today for hearing the Stay Petition filed by the appellants against the above order of the Commissioner (Appeals).Shri P.K.Mittal, Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that in this case, the order passed by the Original Authority is in violation of the principles of natural justice in as much as the same has been passed ex-parte without affording them an opportunity of hearing. He states that this point was also raised before the lower appellate authority, but the same has been dismissed by observing that sufficient time was...