Delhi Court May 2001 Judgments

M/S. Rajat Wires (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. When the matter is called, there is no one for the appellants.Matter was last called on 13.3.2001 and it was adjourned to this date in the presence of Shri N.L. Jagir, Advocate who represented the appellants. There is no communication from them either requesting for adjournment or giving the reasons for their absence. It therefore appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting their appeal. The appeal is thus dismissed for non-prosecution....

M/S. Jct Electronics Ltd. Vs. Cce, Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This order will dispose of four appeals, one filed by the appellants bearing No. E/1767/99-NB and the other three by the Revenue bearing Nos. E/2010-2012/99-NB against the common order dated 13.5.99 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The issue involved in all these appeals relates to the 'capital goods' and availability of modvat credit thereon. The appellants have filed the appeal challenging the validity of the impugned order in respect of the goods on which modvat credit had been disallowed to them being not 'capital goods', while the Revenue has questioned the validity of the impugned order in respect of the goods on which the modvat credit had been allowed.2. It has been submitted by both the sides that the question whether the disputed goods in question satisfy the definition of 'capital goods' or not for the purposes of modvat credit, requires re-examination in the light of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in CCE Indore Vs. Surya Roshini, 2001(42) RLT 817(LB).3. ...

C.C.E., Delhi Vs. M/S. Hindustan National Glass and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The respondents manufacture 'Class Bottles, Glass Tumblers, C.I Moulds and C.I. Castings' falling under Ch. 70 & 84 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak vide his Order dt. 15.5.97 disallowed the modvat credit totally amounting to Rs. 25,746/- to the respondents, availed by them on the following items as capital goods under Rule 57-Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. The party filed an appeal and Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi vide Order dt. 28.6.99 allowed the appeal of the party by setting aside the order passed by the Original Authority.3. The present appeal is against the above order of the Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard Shri J. Singh, JDR for the appellants. The respondents are not represented despite the notice. It is contended in the Revenue appeal that the item 'Reinforced Cut of wheels' is used for shaping & cutting up ceramic bricks used for Glass Furnace; Zircon Bricks are used fro lining ...

M/S. Bhartia Industries Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The appellants have been denied the MODVAT credit amounting to Rs. 16,500/- availed by them on their rejected final products. The matter is listed today for admission and stay. Shri R.C. Gupta, Advocate for the appellants relies on the decision of the Larger Bench of CEGAT in the case of CCE vs. Tin Manufacturing Co. Ltd. - 2000 (119) ELT 290 (T-LB), in which, it is held that the modvat credit is admissible on the defective/rejected goods received back by the manufacturers as inputs. Shri A.K. Jain, SDR for the respondents does not dispute that the facts of the present case are squarely covered by the cited decision of the CEGAT. In view of these facts, I allow the admission of the appeal. Further, I grant the party waiver of pre-deposit of the impugned amount and stay its recovery till the disposal of the appeal....

M/S. Birla Vxl Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The Commissioner of Customs, Sahati, Bombay vide his order dt.4.12.2000 has confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 5,50,697/- on the appellants along with the interest for violating the provisions of Notfn. No.203/92-Cus. dt.19.5.92 inasmuch as they wrongly availed the modvat credit at the input stage on the imported goods used for manufacture of the goods exported.2. The Commissioner of Customs has further imposed a penalty of Rs.50,000/- on the appellants.3. The party is in appeal against the above order of the Commissioner, The matter is listed today for hearing the Stay Petition of the party.At the outset, Shri R. Sudhinder, Advocate for the appellants submits that the impugned order is passed ex-parte in violation of the principles of natural justice. it is submitted that the party had filed their reply dt. 10.10.2000 to the show cause notice, a copy of which is also placed in their appeal papers. It is further stated that they had also appeared for personal hearing before the Addl....

M/S. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The appellants are disallowed the modvat credit totally amounting to Rs.48,185/- on the capital goods viz., "Electric Wires & Cables, Electric Control Panel and Refractory Bricks under Rule 57-Q of the C.E.Rules, 1944.2. Shri Joy Kumar, Advocate for the appellants submits that with regard to Electric items viz., Electric Wires & Cables and Electric Control Panel relies on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of SIV Industries Ltd. vs. C.C.E. Coimbatore reported in 2001 ( 129) ELT 48 (Mad.), in which the Hon'ble Madras High Court have allowed modvat credit on the Electric wires & cables as capital goods.Following the ratio of this judgment, I allow the appeal of the party with regard to items viz.,Electric Wires & Cables and Electric Control Panel. For the item--Refractory Bricks, the ld. Counsel for the appellants relies on the decision in the case of C.C.E., Jameshedpur vs. M/s. JEMCO reported in 1999 (108) ELT 689 (T), in which it is held that...

M/S. Adarsh Steel Rolling Mills Vs. M/S. R.J. Steel Rolling Mills

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(136)ELT690TriDel

1. Shri R. Santhanam, Advocate submits that the appellants have prayed for staying the operation of the order. In the impugned order no demand has been made as such although there are some observations by the Commissioner of Central Excise in this regard. After hearing Shri R.Tandon, SDR and going through the facts on record we are not inclined to stay the operation of the order. As there is no demand no orders are required to be passed under Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act, 1994. However, in the interest of justice and as requested by the advocate is made against the appellants some time be given by the adjudicating authority to seek them legal remedies with these observations the stay application is dismissed. The matter to be heard on 16.5.20001 for regular hearing....

M/S. Shri Laxmi Iron and Steel Vs. Cce Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(135)ELT1027TriDel

1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Shree Laxmi Iron & Steel Re-rolling Mills two issues are for reconsideration. The first issue relates to the nature of furnace whether it was a batch type or was a pusher type.The second issue relates to the adjudication of four show cause notices dated 29.10.98, 29.10.98, 16.4.99 and 7.10.99 which the Commissioner as a adjudicating authority had also disposed of in terms of his order dated 29.10.99. The matter had come up earlier before the Tribunal and the Tribunal under their order dated 11.8.99 has remanded the matter with directions that the factory premises of the appellants should be personally visited by the adjudicating authority alongwith the technical experts and then a considered view should be taken and speaking appealable order be passed. It is in pursuance of these directions of the Tribunal dated 11.8.99 that the adjudicating authority alongwith two technical experts from the National Institute of Secondary Steel Technology, Mandi Go...

M/S. O.N.G.C. Vs. Cce, Mumbai

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. At the outset it is noted that there is no quantification of the duty demand. The Commissioner (Appeals) has directed duty to be worked out after verification of the assessee's stand that they had already paid Rs.49 crores on 'lean gas'. Since there i s no quantification of duty demand, the stay application is dismissed as premature with liberty to the applicants to move fresh applications as and when the duty amount gets quantified....

Cce Meerut-ii Vs. M/S. Simbholi Sugar Mills Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 31.7.97 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he had allowed the modvat credit on the goods in dispute by holding the same to be 'capital goods', to the respondents.2. It has been submitted by both the sides that the question as to whether the disputed goods fall within the ambit of 'capital goods' or not deserve to be re-examined by the adjudicating authority in the light of the latest Larger Bench decision in CCE Indore Vs. Surya Roshini, 20001(42) RLT 817(LB). We have also gone through the impugned order and the record and in our view the submission of both the sides deserves to be accepted. The decision of the larger Bench in the above cited case was not available to the Commissioner (Appeals) when he passed the impugned order. The question, whether the disputed to be re-examined by the adjudicating authority in the light of above said decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal.3. Therefore, ...