Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1990)(27)ECC39
1. M/s. Jain Sudh Vanaspati Ltd. had filed the above captioned appeals at serial number 1 and 3, and the Collector of Customs, Bombay, had filed the above captioned appeal at serial number 4 and a cross objection at serial number 2. The Bench vide miscellaneous order No.l35/88-C dated 9th December, 1988, in response to the importer M/s.Jain Sudh Vanaspati Ltd. 's request for the change of the name to M/s.Elephanta Oil & Vanaspati Industries Ltd. had ordered for the change of the name from M/s. Jain Sudh Vanaspati Ltd. to M/s. Elephanta Oil & Vanaspati Industries Ltd. The learned Departmental Representative had no objection to the request of the importer.2. Against Order No. S/10-175/83-A dated 20.12.83 passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, M/s. Jain Sudh Vanaspati Ltd. & Another (now Elephanta Oil & Vanaspati Industries Ltd.) had filed a writ petition in the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and the same was registered as Matter No.1838 of 1983. After the filing of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1995)LC736Tri(Delhi)
1. These two appeals are directed against the impugned Order-in-Original passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur.2. Factual Backdrop : It was the case of the Department that the officers of the DRI, New Delhi, assisted by the Customs and Central Excise Officers of Kanpur, searched the residential premises of the appellant on 3-9-1973 at 7 A.M. and recovered 41 pieces of primary gold bars of foreign origin and 8 pieces of gold (Bithur) in the presence of Shri Ram Niwas Sharma and Shri Shree Ram Agarwal, and also in the presence of two panch witnesses, namely, Shri Prem Chand Sharma and Shri Bankey Lal, as detailed out in the panchnama/recovery memo, said to have been prepared on the spot. It was alleged that the appellant, Shri Shiv Charan Bajpai, was also present on the spot, but he slipped away from the house when some photographs of the contraband gold, as recovered above, were being taken and accordingly FIR to that effect was lodged at 11.20 A.M. with the Police Station,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1996)(81)ELT407TriDel
1. Transhipment cargo consignment covered by Airway Bill No.098-57616812 and House Airway Bill No. 21732 which had arrived from Hongkong by Air India Flight on 6-5-1992 was intercepted on 8-5-1992 on the basis of intelligence information. The consignment consisted of 48 cartons of "Polyester Film Capacitors". Consignee was shown as Shree Electronics, G-41, Noida, Ghaziabad (appellant in Appeal No.C/533/94/A). Consignor was shown as NRCOLA Ltd., Hongkong. Consignor's cargo agent was M/s. Air Freight Ltd., Hongkong. Consignee's . cargo agent was M/s. Air Freight, Calcutta. Instruction was issued to Air India not to load the consignment for transhipment to Calcutta, till the consignee's address was verified. Enquiries conducted through customs and excise officers at Delhi, Noida and Calcutta revealed that there was no such unit by the name. "M/s. Shree Electronics" at the given address. Hence, consignment was opened and examined in the presence of Panch witnesses. The cartons were found ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1986)(8)LC207Tri(Delhi)
1. Collector of Central Excise, Madras has filed an appeal being aggrieved from order in appeal No. 136/82 (M) dated 12-4-1982 passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Madras. In column No. 3 of the memorandum of appeal the date of service has been mentioned as 12;4-1982. The appellant had moved an application for amendment of the appeal and has requested for making the amendment to the effect that the date had been wrongly written as 12-4-1982 against the correct date of 27-4-1982. By a separate order dated 20-2-1986, the amendment of the appeal was allowed to the effect that para No. 3 of form E. A.3 should be read as 27-4-1982. In terms of the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 the appeal was to be filed within three months. By virtue of the provisions of Removal of Difficulties Order No. GSR 597(E), dated 11-10-1982 the appeal could have been filed within six months. The appellant has filed an application for condonat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (2002)(145)ELT669TriDel
1. On the basis of intelligence, a packet which arrived from Singapore by Malaysian Airlines at IGI Airport, New Delhi in the name of M/s.Umesh Book Service (consignee) on 26-10-97 under AWB Bill No.232-8075-8705 and House AWB No. ACT-9015 was examined by officers of Customs in the presence of independent witnesses and representatives of the Airport Authority of India. The goods were described as "books/printed matter" in the Airway Bill. The packet was opened in the presence of the witnesses and was found to contain three cardboard cartons which, in turn, contained electronic goods such as 'Sanyo' cordless telephone, 'Casio' printing calculator, 'Sony' video CD/LD/player with remote control, 'Panasonic' video cassette recorder with remote control etc., totally valued at Rs. 14,28,800/-. The address of M/s. Umesh Book Service was found, on verification, to be fictitious. The consignment was not accompanied by any documents establishing lawful importation of the goods. Officers, theref...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1989)(24)ECC150
G.P. Agarwal, Member (J) for himself and for Harish Chander, Member (J), I.J. Rao, Member (T) and D.C. Mandal, Member (T) 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order-in-appeal No.86/WB/82 dated 18-3-1982 passed by the Appellate Collector, Customs & Central Excise, Calcutta. (i) That the impugned order-in-appeal was passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta on 18-3-1982. (ii) That the present appeal filed by the department against the impugned order-in-appeal was received in the Registry on 23-12-1982 without any application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. (iii) That at the time when the impugned order-in-appeal was passed by the Appellate Collector on 18-3-1982 there was no provision for appeal in the Central Excises & Salt Act. However, the Central Government was conferred with the revisional power under erstwhile section 36(2) of the Central Excises & Salt Act either suo motu or otherwise to call for and examine the record of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1994)LC130Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Air Control & Chemical Engineering Company Limited, have filed the present appeal against the Order-in-Original No. 16/Collector/1989, dated the 17th Oct., 1989, passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad.2. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of compressors, falling under Item No. 29A(3) of the erstwhile First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the old Tariff), and under Heading No. 8414.10 of the new Tariff, with effect from 1-3-1986. On investigation, scrutiny of documents recovered from their premises, and the information gathered from the officials of the appellant's company, it was revealed that they were undervaluing the dutiable compressors, with an intent to evade payment of Central Excise duty, and at the same time were overvaluing the non-dutiable parts which were essential for the working of the compressors, and which were compulsorily supplied to the customers. In this process, while they were recovering their differential...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1996)(66)LC752Tri(Delhi)
1. (i) These appeals arises from an order in-original dt. 13.12.1991 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi, by which he has directed confiscation of the seized goods and granted option to redeem on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 25,000/- and to pay appropriate amount of duty on its further clearances. He has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the contravention of the various rules cited in the show-cause notice alleging manufacture and clandestine removal of goods from the appellant's factory. The Revenue is aggreived to the extent of that portion of order in which the Addl.Collector has failed to take legal notice of the fact that once clandestine removal are held to have been established, the duty amounting to Rs. 3,71,750.40 payable on the goods so removed, should have been demanded from the party which he has failed to do. The Revenue is also aggreived on Additional Collector having not imposed any personal penalty on the owner of the truck h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1983)LC880DTri(Delhi)
1. This matter, by way of a revision petition, filed by Pyrites Phosphates & Chemicals Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking, before the Central Government under section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, has been transferred to the Tribunal, to be disposed of as an appeal because of provisions of section 35P of the said Act. It is accordingly being taken as such for disposal.2. The appellant is stated to be engaged in mining and marketing of phosphorite, and one of the area of its activities is Mussoorie Phosphorite Deposits, commonly known as Mussoorie-Phos. They state to have commenced their operations some time in September, 1969 but in the beginning, they were marketing the run of mine in its virgin form without any treatment but in the year 1973, they started crushing of the rock phosphate mine, and marketed the same as mineral fertilisers.3. Some time in May 1975, they addressed a letter to the Superintendent, Central Excises, Dehra Dun for clarification as to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1990)(48)ELT64TriDel
1. Since all the 4 appeals arise out of a common impugned order, a common order is being passed.1.2 Acting on a secret information, two persons namely Umesh Kumar Agarwal (U.K. Agarwal) and Mukesh Kumar Agarwal (M.K. Agarwal) were apprehended by the Station House Officer (Police) Vasant Vihar between 4.30 and 6.00 hrs. on 17-12-1981 in a taxi No. DLT-4940 which came from the side of Hilton Lodge Guest House. As the taxi came to a halt, a boy who later disclosed his identity as U.K. Agarwal tried to get out of the taxi with a cream-coloured suitcase in his hand. He was overpowered by the Police officer then and there. In the meantime, a person namely D.S. Sodhi, r/o B-4/6, Vasant Vihar happened to pass that way. He was also made to join the Police party. On questioning about the contents of the suitcase, U.K. Agarwal first gave some evasive replies but ultimately admitted that he was carrying some contraband gold and its sale proceeds. He further stated that another boy namely M.K. Aga...
Tag this Judgment!