Delhi Court June 2001 Judgments

M/S. Rajasthan Transformers Vs. Cce, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. M/s. Rajasthan Transformers have filed this ROM stating that the following mistakes have crept in 1.(a) In para 5 of the Tribunal's final order No.A/1799/96-NB dt. 10.7.96 there is no mention about the fact that the modvat credit on the inputs taken on 23.11.92 had been reversed by the applicant on 23.1.93 and subsequently the applicants had filed a claim for modvat credit under Rule 57H (1A) before the Asstt. Commissioner on 4.2.93 on which date there was no subsisting modvat credit. This important aspect has, perhaps, escaped the notice of the Hon'ble Tribunal a) It is submitted that Sub Rule (1A) was inserted under Rule 57H by notification No.28/91-CE (NT) dt.25.7.91 (effective from 1.9.91) which provided that the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise may allow credit of the duty paid on inputs received by a manufacturer immediately before obtaining the dated acknowledgment of the declaration made under the said rule if he is satisfied that a) Such inputs are lying in stock or are ...

M/S. Bhartia Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce, Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(77)ECC441

1. The above applications arise out of two separate Orders-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Delhi. Details are as under:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sl. Appeal No. Duty Demand Penalty Period of DisputeNo. No. Demand (in Rs.) (-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. E/1019/01-A 878983 88,000 7/99 to 1/2000 265860 27,000 2/2000 to 3/2000 ---------- ---2. E/1020/01-A 53747254000 1/99 to 6/99----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. The duty demand arises as a result of rejection of assessees claim for abatement of expenditure incurred towards freight, insurance and additional packing from the wholesale price on an average basis at the rate of 1.93% based on actual expenses incurred during t...

M/S. Tele Data Controls Vs. Cce, Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This is an application, filed by M/s. Tele Data Controls (India) Pvt. Ltd. for waiver of predeposit of central excise duty amounting to Rs.1,14,630/- and penalty Rs.1 lakh confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned Order. Shri Naveen Mullick, learned Advocate, submitted that duty has been demanded by the Revenue by denying benefit of Notification No. 1/93 on the ground that they were affixing the brand name of Star Electronics Ltd. He, further, submitted that they were affixing their own brand name "STAR" with 8 stars whereas trade mark "STAR" is a common brand name used by many persons; that in any case Star Electronics Ltd. used trade mark "STAR" with single star; that accordingly the trade mark used by the applicant is different from the trade mark of Star Electronics. The learned Advocate also mentioned that they have also paid additional duty of central excise treating the clearance of goods affixed with so called brand name of Star Electronics as their own cle...

(1) and (2) M/S. Liberty Shoes Ltd. Vs. Cce, New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. These three appeals have been filed by the appellants against the common impugned order in appeal dated 24.5.2000 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) vide which he had affirmed the order in original dated 30.9.97 of the Assistant Commissioner disallowing modvat credit and imposing penalty also on them.2. The facts giving rise to these appeals may briefly be stated as under: 3. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of footwear.They availed modvat credit on the carry bags during the period April 1996 to November 1996 of the amounts; i.e. Rs.2,78,252/- (appellants no.1), appellant no.(2), Rs.4,45,750/- and appellant no.(2) and Rs.4,94,488/- (appellant n,3). But the modvat credit was not admissible to them on that item under Rule 57-A of Central Excise Rules being not inputs as per the Explanation (b) to Rule 57-A of the Rules.They were accordingly served with show cause notices for the recovery of the amounts and penalty was also proposed to be imposed on them for availing th...

M/S. Shree Cement Limited Vs. C.C.E., Jaipur-ii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The applicant filed this application for waivere of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 4,53,846/- and penalty of Rs. 40,000/-. The applicants are engaged in the manufacture of cement and they availed the MODVAT credit on Oxygen give and which are used for welding in the factory. Learned Counsel submits that these gases are used for welding the machinery and for repair purposes and he relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Supreme Paper Mills Ltd. Vs.Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur, reported in 1999 (112) E.L.T.249 (Tribunal) and submits that the Tribunal in this case allowed the benefit of MODVAT credit in respect of these gases by saying that these are used for cutting and welding purposes in relation to the manufacture of final product.2. Learned JDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that these gases are used for maintenance and reparing of the machinery.Therefore, these are not inputs used in the manufacture of the final product.4. In view of t...

M/S. Rishab Handicrafts, S/Shri Vs. Cc, New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(77)ECC439

1. Four appeals have been filed in this case challenging the impugned order No.SKS/CC/ICD/TKD/63/2001 dt. 19.4.2001 confiscating the seized goods, reassessing the CIF value and imposing penalty.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellants imported a consignment of copper scrap contained in 5 containers and presented Bill of Entry No.003 dt.5.8.2000 for customs clearance. In that Bill of Entry the description of the goods, weight and CIF value were declared as copper scrap 'dream' grade as per ISRI, 100.24 MT and Us$ 1065.00 per MT. The invoice Produced alongwith Bill of Entry showed that the goods in question were supplied by M/s. Ransat Marketing Limited, U.K.3. In accordance with Standing Order No. 1/2000 dt. 6.1.2000, the CIF value of copper scrap of 'Dream' grade was fixed as US$ 1250.00 per MT and a discount at the rate of 10% was allowable if the quantity imported was 100 MT Or more. Therefore the value was computed. The duty was computed as Rs. 34,42,059/- wh...

Shri Mohd. Ali and M/S. Marudhar Vs. Cce, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Vide the impugned order the Commissioner(Appeals) has dismissed both the appeals for non-compliance with the Stay Order passed by him on 5.9.2000 directing the appellant No.1 M/s. Marudhar Marbles Pvt. Ltd. to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards duty within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the stay order. Subject to deposit of the aforesaid amount of duty by the Appellant No.1, the balance amount of duty and penalty imposed upon both the appellants was waived.2. Shri Bipin Garg, learned Advocate, appearing for the appellants submits that the stay order passed on 5.9.2000 was received by the appellants on 14.9.2000 and the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was deposited on 4.10.2000. Intimation to that effect was given to their Range Superintendent who in turn vide his letter dated 4.10.2000 informed the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner. However, he fairly agreed that no intimation was placed before the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that in as much as there was a ...

M/S. Parshuram Cement Ltd., Shri Vs. Cce, Lucknow

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. These three appeals have been preferred by the appellants against the common order in original dated 28.2.2000 passed by the Commissioner vide which he had confirmed duty demand of Rs.33,27,909.20 alongwith penalty of equal amount under Section 11-AC and of Rs.2 lakhs under Rule 173-Q of the Central Excise Rules, on appellant no.1 and imposed penalty of Rs.1 lakh each on other two appellants.2. The facts giving rise to these appeals may briefly be stated as under: 3. Appellant no.1 company was engaged in the manufacture of ordinary portland cement while appellants nos.2 and 3 were working at the relevant time as its managing Director and General Manager respectively. On 8.12.95 the factory premises of the company were visited by the Preventive Staff of the Central Excise Division, Aligarh and one Shri D. Gupta who introduced himself as production incharge was present. On conducting search of the store-room empty bag register containing entries for the period 1.4.95 to 22.7.95 and n...

M/S. JaIn Industrial Corporation Vs. Cce, Jaipur

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This stay application arises out of the appeal filed by the appellants against the impugned order in appeal dated 7.2.2001 vide which the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had upheld the order in original of the Assistant Commissioner disallowing modvat credit of Rs. 25,407/- to them and imposing penalty of equal amount on them under Rule 57-I(4) of the Central Excise Rules.2. The appellants have sought complete waiver of the pre-deposit of the duty as well as penalty amounts for the purpose of hearing of the appeal. The learned counsel has contended that the demand was time barred as credit was taken in December 1994 whereas the show cause notice has been issued only on 1.12.99 and no extended period of limitation could be invoked as the appellants had been submitting returns alongwith the invoices to the Excise Department regularly and as such all the facts relevant to the taking of modvat credit were in the knowledge of the department. He has also contended that the impugned order ...

M/S. Shah Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Ahmedabad

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT619TriDel

1. These applications seeking rectification of mistake and recall of the Final Order No.392-393/2000-D dated 22.11.2000 have been moved by the appellants.2. The appellants filed two appeals Nos.E/682.89-D against two orders dated 31.3.92 and 27.12.92 of the Collector (Appeals). The issue involved in those appeals was regarding the classification of the book binding cloth manufactured by the appellants. Both those appeals were disposed of by common final order dated 22.11.2000 referred to above and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision.3. Through present applications the appellants have in fact sought rectification/recall of some of the observations made by the Tribunal in paras 8 and 13 of the Final Order.4. The relevant observations in para 8 of the Final Order in respect of which rectification/recall had ben prayed by the appellants, read as: There is no conclusive and definite evidence/material on the record to establish that the cotton fabric man...