Delhi Court June 2001 Judgments

M.K. Jain, Proprietor, Chelsea Mills Vs. Deputy Director, Enforcement ...

Court: Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

Sharma, Chairperson - This appeal is against the order No. ADJ/1/2001/DD(KNS)/2641 dated 19-3-2001 imposing a penalty of Rs. 4 lakhs on the appellant, Shri M.K. Jain, Proprietor, Chelsea Mills for contravening the provisions of section 18(2) read with section 18(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act). The appeal is accompanied with an application for dispensation of pre-deposit of penalty amount of Rs. 4 lakhs on the ground that the deposit of the penalty amount by the appellant in the circumstances of the case will cause undue hardship to him. The learned counsel of the appellant expressed his willingness to argue the case on merits straightway so that the appeal can be finally disposed of. 2. Having given our careful consideration to the submissions made in the memorandum of appeal and the material brought on record by which number of documents annexed to the appeal indicating the steps taken by the appellant for realisation of the export proceeds in question and p...

M/S. Sonex Plasts (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

The applicants filed this application for waiver of redemption fine.The applicants had already deposited the duty and penalty. In view of the provisions of sec. 35F of the Act, the application for waiver of redemption file is not maintainable and is, therefore, dismissed as such.As the appellants had already deposited the duty and penalty, registry is directed to list the appeal on 13.09.2001. (Dictated in Court)....

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

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)LC28Tri(Delhi)

1. The issue involved is whether the item 'gulkand' is classifiable under Chapter Heading 3003 as Medicament or under Chapter 2001 as Food products.2. We have heard Shri Ashok Mehta, SDR for the revenue and Ms. Reena Khair, Advocate for the respondents and have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records.3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that M/s. Ajmer Food Industries, Indore, are engaged in the production of 'gulkand' which is sold in the brand name 'Super Tower Gulkand'. The practice followed is that the Respondent is receiving gulkand in bulk quantity from their Head Office located at Ajmer (Rajasthan) and the bulk quantity so received is repacked in unit container after adding very negligible quantity of Sodium Benzaite (Preservative) and the same thereafter is labelled with the brand name "Super Tower Gulkand". The respondents filed their initial declaration on 12.4.94 claiming under Chapter Heading 3003.30 of the Central Excise Tariff...

M/S Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. Cce, Indore - Ii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This is an application filed by M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited praying for waiver of pre-deposit of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 26,52,878.00 and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 11AC and another penalty of equal amount imposed under Section 1730 of the Central Excise Rules.2. Shri M. Chandreshekharan, ld. Sr. Advocate submitted that the petroleum products are stored in huge tanks having capacity varying from few Hundred Kilo litres to Thousands of Kilo litres depending upon the requirements that they awarded the contracts for designing construction, procurement, erection, testing and commissioning of Bulk Oil Storage Depot at Sagar (Madhya Pradesh) to M/s Engineering Project (India) Ltd. [EPIL]; that the contract comprised of fabrication, erection and installation of 9 M.S. Storage tanks the capacity of which varied from 510 Kls to 3060 Kls and the width and height varied between 10 Mtrs and 7 Mtrs to 14 Mtrs and 20 Mtrs respectively: that M/s EPIL in turn...

M/S. Timex Watches Ltd. Vs. Cce, Meerut

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The appellants M/s. Timex Watches Ltd. are required to pre-deposit duty amount of Rs. 48,24,339/- and equal amount of penalty.2. Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, Ld. Advocate submits that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of wrist watches and were bringing duty paid parts from outside. While processing these parts for the manufacture of wrist watches, certain parts were found to be defective and not usable as such. They were sent back to the Quality Control Department and when it was found that such parts were not usable, they were destroyed. He refers to the provisions of Rule 57D of the Central Excise Rules and submits that as the parts themselves had become waste, the credit was not required to be reserved. He prays for absolute waiver of the requirement of pre-deposit of the duty and penalty amount.3. Shri Rajeev Tandon, Ld. DR refers to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs CCE, Bhopal reported in 2001 (44) RLT 249 and submits that as the ...

M/S Pack Plast Industries, Kota Vs. Cce, New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2001)LC32Tri(Delhi)

1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s Pack Plast Industries is whether the parts of humidification and ventilation plants are classifiable under Heading 84.79 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act as claimed by the appellant or under Chapter 39 of the Tariff as confirmed by the Collector (Appeals) under the impugned order.2. Shri L.P. Asthana, ld. Advocate submitted that though number of items were involved in the impugned order, the appellants are pressing their appeal only in respect of "Mist Eliminators". The ld. Advocate further submitted that humidification plants are plants which create humidity in areas where specific relative humidity is desired; that initially the parts of humidification plants were manufactured out of G.I. Sheets or mild steel; that with advent of technology, these parts are being now manufactured out of plastics, so that no corrosion takes place and parts have longer life span. he also explained the manner in which the humidification ...

M/S. Pub. Engg. Pre-stressed (P) Vs. C.C.E., Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

2. The applicants filed this application for restoration of the appeal.The appeal filed by the applicants was dismissed vide Final Order No.A/2154/00-NB(S) dated 22.11.2000 for non-compliance to the provisions of Sec. 35 F of the Act.3. Now the applicants have produced an evidence to show that they have deposited an amount of Rs. 50,000/- in compliance to the stay order. As the applicants have complied with the stay order, the Final Order is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number. (Dictated in Court)....

M/S. Atma Tube Products Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Chandigarh

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The applicants filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 62,035.00 and penalty of the same amount.The appellants filed an appeal against the adjudication order and on the direction of the Commissioner (Appeals), the appellants had already deposited an amount of Rs. 50,000.00. Therefore, the deposit of the remaining amount of duty and penalty is waived for hearing of the appeal. To come up for arguments on 14.08.2001. (Dictated in Court)....

M/S. Castrol India Ltd. Vs. Cce, New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Today the matter is posted for hearing the stay application filed by m/s. Castrol India Ltd. in which they have prayed for waiver of pre-deposit of duty amount of Rs. 34.84,672/- and penalty amount of Rs. 25,000/-.2. Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, Ld. Advocate submits that earlier the matter had come up before the Tribunal and the Tribunal under their order dt.22.4.96 had remanded the matter with certain directions. He submits that the matter has now been readjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi and the same amount of duty and same amount of penalty have been confirmed in re-adjudication. It is his submission that the Commissioner of Central Excise has asked the Dy. Commissioner for verification of the credit and referred to page 92 of the paper book. The Dy. Commissioner had verified the claim of Rs. 34,68,463/-.He further submits that a sum of Rs. 400985.63 has already been debited by the assessee. He also submits that although this letter at page 92 of the paper b...

Cce, Chandigarh Vs. M/S. Steel Authority of India

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The Revenue has filed this application for restoration of the appeals.2. Heard the 1d.JDR. The appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed vide Final Order dated 10.4.2000 on the ground that the appellant had not produced necessary clearance from the committee on dispute as respondents are Public Sector Undertaking.Now the Revenue had produced necessary clearance from the Committee on dispute to pursue the appeals. Therefore the Final Order No.622-25/00-NB (SM) dt.10.4.2000 is recalled and the appeals are restored to its original numbers.Adjourned to 12.9.2001 forarguments. Dictated in court....