Mumbai Court January 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)(144)ELT573Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondent to this appeal manufactured iron and steel products which it cleared on payment of duty. It also manufactured stainless steel wire rods which it cleared without payment of duty, in terms of Notification 47/94 to a 100% export-oriented unit, for conversion by that unit into stainless steel wire which it exported. The respondent took Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of the wire rods. Notice issued to the respondent proposed to apply the provisions of Rule 57CC on the ground that since the clearances to the 100% export-oriented unit were made without payment of duty in pursuance of Notification 47/94, these wire rods were exempted from duty, and, by application of Rule 57C, the credit could not be taken. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the proposal demanding duty, and imposed penalty. On appeal from this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) noted the Tribunal's decision in J.C.T. v. CCE [1999 (114) E.LT. 618 (T) = 1999 (31) RLT 212 ...
Philips (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)(80)ECC421
1. This is an application for implementation of Tribunal's Order No.CI/3732/01-WZB, dt. 23-11-01 by which the appeal of M/s. Philips was allowed partly with consequential relief holding that there was no provision for demanding interest in the Customs Act or under Notification No. 160/92 and setting aside the confiscation of the capital goods and imposition of penalty. By letter dt. 12-2-01, the applicants applied for refund of the amount deposited by them towards interest and for redemption of the bank guarantee duly discharged. On failure to get the refund as well as the written discharge of bank guarantee filed provisionally the applicants filed this miscellaneous application before the Tribunal. The matter was taken up on 19-11-2001 and the Bench directed the Id. DR to obtain written report from the Commissioner as to the action taken for implementation of the Tribunal's order and also directed him to place on record a copy of the Reference Application stated to have been filed by...
Andre Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.,
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)(143)ELT573Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of patent and proprietary medicaments. It had been permitted by the Collector in terms of sub-rule (1) of Rule 173C, to clear its goods on the basis of value declared in its invoice, i.e. without filing price list and getting it approved. The invoices that the appellant issued to its customers showed free supply of goods to the extent of 5%. They charged the customer for 19 units of its products the twentieth being given free. The Department concluded that this 5% was not admissible as discount, and found the 5% to be a commission payable to "super stockists" and notice was issued demanding duty on this quantity.2. The assessee in its reply said that although it had supplied the goods free to the customers, it had paid duty on all the products, including the 5% that was given free. The Collector, in the order impugned before us, recorded this submission, but declined to accept it. He relied upon the statements of the appellant's employee...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›