Delhi Court May 2001 Judgments

M/S. Cold Breeze Engg. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Vadodara

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(76)ECC402

1. The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s.Cold Breeze Engineering Pvt. Ltd., is whether they removed Air Conditioners from their factory premises in the guise of kits/components and suppressed the value for claiming the benefit or exemption under Notification No.64/83-CE dated 1.3.1983.2. Shri Himanshu Desai, learned Advocate, mentioned that the Appellants manufacture and supply air conditioners, water coolers and parts thereof; that they also provide service for installing, maintaining or renting air-conditioners, water coolers; that they surrendered their L-4 licence ad the activity of manufacturing water coolers was discontinued during 1983-84, that after having crossed the prescribed limit,they obtained L-4 licence again on 5.9.1986 for manufacture of air-conditioner and split unit, water cooler and cooler-cum-filter;that Central Excise Officers visited their premises on 26.8-1986 and subsequently visited the premises of various customers and issued show cause notice date...

M/S. Majestic Auto Ltd. Vs. Cce, Meerut-1

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This is an application, filed by M/s. Majestic Auto Ltd., for rectification of mistake said to have crept in the Appellate Tribunal's Final Order No. 1498/2000-B dated 26.9.2000.2. Shri S.V.Arya, learned Advocate, submitted that the Applicants have taken the plea, amongst others, that the Additional Commissioner was not competent to adjudicate the matter in terms of the powers invested by the C.B.E.C. under Section 33 of the Central Excise Act; that they had relied upon fooling three circulars of the Board whereby the criteria for adjudication by officers of different ranks was notifies: 2.2 The learned Advocate, further, submitted that as per Circular dated 9.12.97, different cases of the same notice involving the same issue in a Commissionerate will be adjudicated by an officer competent to decide the case where duty involved is of the highest amount; that they had pleaded in their memorandum of Appeal that because same issue involving duty Rs.29.47 lakhs was pending adjudication...

M/S Vishnu Sahai Subhash Chander Vs. Cce, Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT641TriDel

1. In this appeal filed by M/s Vishnu Sahai Subhash Chander, the issue involved is whether the penalty under Rule 209 A of the Central Excise Rules is imposable on them.2. Shri K.K.Anand, Ld. Advocate, submitted that the Central Excise Officers Chandigarh searched the factory premises of M/s New India Dyg.& Finishing Mills, M/s New India Printing Works, M/s J.D. Woollen and Silks Mills & M/s Pahwa Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd on 29-10-88; that during the investigation the officers obtained photo copies of the outside bill collection register of the Punjab & Sind Bank; that as per the said register 38 sale bills for the period 18-1-88 to 29-3-88 of processed man made fabrics valued at Rs. 16.98 lakhs issued by New India Printing Works were pending collection; that similarly 77 sale bills for the period 1-3-88 to 10-11-88 of processed man made fabrics valued at Rs. 34.06 lakhs were also pending. The ld. Advocate, further, mentioned that on being asked about outstanding bills which we...

M/S. Nahar Fibres Ltd. Vs. Cce, Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The issue in these two appeals is the same, therefore, they are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.2.The issue involved in the case is whether duty is to be collected at the stage of removal of the yarn from the factory.3. The facts of the cases are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of single yarn, multi-folded yarn and doubled yarn. On scrutiny of the records of the assessees, the Departmental Authorities found that the appellants were manufacturing single yarn and were further processing the single yarn into doubled/multi-folded yarn. The Department, therefore alleged that since only doubled/multi-folded yarn was leared from factory, therefore, duty should have been paid on the price at which the Yarn left the factory since duty on the Yarn was advalorem. The assessees were not selling the yarn at the factorygate but were sending it to their depots on consignment basis without paying duty as their contention was that duty, was alread...

M/S. Hind Syntex Ltd. Vs. Cce, Bhopal

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal, filed by M/s. Hind Syntex Ltd., the issue involved is the refund of Service Tax paid in respect of service of transporting goods.2. The Appellants have requested under their letter dated 19.5.2000 to decide their appeal on merits on the basis of record. We, therefore, heard Shri R.C. Sankhla, learned D.R. and perused the records.3. The Appellants had filed a refund claim of Service Tax on 29.9.1999 consequent to the declaration of Service Tax on Goods Transport Operators as ultra vires by the Supreme Court. The Dy. Commissioner, under Adjudication Order dated 23.2.2000, rejected the refund claim being time barred and also on the ground that the Appellants were not the petitioners in the case before the Supreme court in which the Tax was held to be ultra vires and accordingly the refund could not be granted to them automatically. The Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned Order, rejected the appeal agreeing with the findings of the Adjudicating Authority. The App...

M/S. Plaza Cable Indus. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Application filed this application for waiver of penalty of Rs. 50,000/-.2. In this case at the time of visit of the Excise Officer, certain finished goods were found excess to their record. The goods were taken into possession and the adjudicating authority confiscated the goods and gave option to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine and imposed penalty.5. The contention of the appellant is that the Tribunal in the case of Billai Conductors (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Raipur, reported in 2000 (91) ECR 569 (Tribunal) held that in absence of mens rea, the provisions of Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules are not applicable and assessee is only liable for contravention of provisions of Rules 226. The contention of the appellant is that in this case there is no finding that applicants are removing the goods or made any (sic) to remove the goods without payment of duty. Therefore, they are only liable to fine of Rs. 2000/- as provided under Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules.In view...

Cce, Chandigarh Vs. M/S. Garg Forging and Casting Pvt.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Shri Ashok Kumar, JDR submits that in these group of appeals, in which the respondents are M/s. Garg Forging and Casting Pvt., the main appeal against the common impugned order dated 30.09.99 was filed in time and the Commissioner was under the bonafide belief that as a single No.50/CE/99 has been given by the adjudicating authority, it was sufficient if one appeal was filed against the said common impugned order. When it was pointed out that more appeals were required to be filed, the same have been filed with the application for condonation of delay. He prays that as the main appeal was filed in time, the delay in filling the supplementary appeals be condoned and all the Revenue's appeals be heard together.2. Ms. Anuranjana Singh, Advocate is present for the respondents. She is representing all the appellants. She has no objection.3. As per practice of the Tribunal, the delay in filing the supplementary appeals is condoned....

M/S. Contract Advertising Agency Vs. Cce, Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(132)ELT245TriDel

1. In this appeal, filed by M/s Contact Advertising Agency, the issue involved is whether the activity of printing and publishing of yellow pages will attract levy of Service Tax.2. The Appellants, under their letter dt. 24-5-2001. have requested that their appeal may be decided on merit. We therefore, heard Shri R.C. Sankhla, ld. DR, and perused the records. The Appellants have submitted, in their Memorandum of Appeal that they are (i) printing and publishing yellow pages and (ii) booking advertisements for news papers and Magazines; that the Assistant Commissioner under Adjudication Order No. 73/AC/99 dt. 14-9-99 held that advertisements through yellow pages do form source of advertisement and the amount is charged from the clients whose name, particulars, etc are included in the yellow pages and as such it would attract Service Tax, that Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned Order rejected their appeal holding that they were providing services for advertisements in yellow pages...

M/S. Agra Beverages Corpn. (P) Vs. Cce, New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(76)ECC600

1. Appellant, M/s.Agra Beverages Corporation Private Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of aerated waters and beverages syrup under franchise from pepsi Foods Ltd. They are aggrieved by Order-in-Original No.CCE(Adj.)VSL?01/2001 dated 31.1.2001. As per that order Commissioner confirmed duty of Rs.59,68,534.40 under section 11A(1) of the Act. Same amount of penalty has also been imposed invoking the provisions contained in Section IIAC of the Act read with Rule 173Q of the Rules.Interest under Section 11AB had also been levied. Over and above this a penalty of Rs.2000/- under Rule 52A of the Rules was also imposed.2. According to the Learned Counsel representing the appellant, the manufacturer claimed a deduction of Rs.11 Lakhs and odd towards advertisement and publicity. A sum of Rs.92 Lakhs were claimed by way of Discounts to customers known as 'quantity discount'. A further sum of Rs.13,11,309 was also deductible by way of shipping service etc.These deductions claimed by the manufac...

Commissioner, Central Excise, Vs. Steel Authority of India

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The respondent is a Public Sector Undertaking and the Revenue had not produced any clearance from the Committee on Dispute to pursue this matter before the Tribunal. In this case the dispute is in respect of Rs. 2,662/- only. As the appellant had not produced necessary clearances, the appeal is dismissed. However, appellant shall have liberty to apply for restoration of the appeal on production of clearances from the Committee on Dispute....