Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: old Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat tamil nadu Year: 2006 Page 4 of about 35 results (0.101 seconds)

Ennore Foundries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2007)(211)ELT434Tri(Chennai)

..... penalties under section 11ac of the central excise act and rule 173q of the central excise rules, 1944. in the reply to the show cause notice, the assessee had replied that they produced more than 80 ..... excess noticed. a show cause notice was accordingly issued demanding an amount of duty of rs. 58,09,503.64 on the goods found short in terms of section 11a(1) of central excise act, 1944. another amount of rs. 12,82,825/- was demanded on the goods found in excess of the book stock. the notice also contained proposals to impose ..... 503.64 and rs. 12,82,825/- as had been proposed in the show cause notice. another grievance of the revenue is that the commissioner had not imposed penalty under section 11ac for the period prior to 28.9.96 as well.6. in the appeal filed by efl they have reiterated the arguments originally advanced before the adjudicating authority. it .....

Hyundai Motors (i) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

..... of the lower authority. hence these appeals.2. before us, learned counsel argued that, as the relevant show cause notices had proposed to reject the refund claims under section 11b of the central excise act, the time-bar provisions under that section should be applied to the claims, and not anything contained in the notification. according to him the statutory provision ..... (section 11b) which governed all clams for refund of duties of excise had overriding effect.3. on the other hand, id. sdr contended that the provisions of exemption ..... respective dates of finalization of the provisional assessments and must be dealt with on merits, in which scenario there is no question of time-bar, whether under section 11b or under the notification. the party should be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Celetronix India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2007)(211)ELT553Tri(Chennai)

..... 313 (tri.-lb), wherein resort to rule 3 was disapproved as the classification of the item involved in that case was possible in terms of relevant headings and section/ chapter notes. it was prayed that the item may be classified as declared modifying the decision of the lower appellate authority.7. during hearing, ld. counsel for ..... value of rs. 6,70,734/- @ rs. 74,5267- per unit classifying the goods under chapter sub heading (csh) 84714191 of both customs and excise tariff acts. before the lower appellate authority, the appellants had submitted a technical write-up along with a statement from a professor of iit, mumbai and a letter conveying the ..... (appeals), upholding the classification of "compact media centre" (cmc) or "k-yan computer systems" under the chapter heading 85283020 of the schedule co customs tariff act/central excise tariff act as 'video projector'. m/s.celetronix india pvt. ltd, chennai, an eou had filed a bill of entry for effecting clearances to dta of what is declared .....

Mohammed Ghouse, Metal Weld Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

..... the above period, confiscated the seized goods with option for redemption on payment of fine, imposed composite penalty of rs.10 lakhs on m/s. mwe under section 11ac of the central excise act and rules 173q and 209 of the central excise rules, 1944 and imposed penalties under rule 209a on s/shri n.b. mohammed (rs.3 lakhs), ..... the adjudicating authority to impose any penalty under rule 209, a residual provision. secondly, there is no quantification of section 11ac penalty. it is settled law that any composite penalty cannot be imposed on a person under different penal provisions. hence the penalty of rs. 10 lakhs (rupees ten ..... formula was not considered at all by the adjudicating authority.6. as regards penalty on m/s. mwe, we find that a composite penalty was imposed on that under section 11ac and rules 173q and 209. we find infirmities in this decision of the commissioner. firstly, where a penalty was imposed under rule 173q, it was not open to .....

T.N. State Trans. Corpn. Vs. C.C.E.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2007)6STR322

..... the appellants to suit the requirement of staff of bhel. the tour operator service has been re-defined effective from 10- 9-2004 in terms of section 65(115) of the finance act. as per the revised definition "tour operator means any person engaged in the business of planning, scheduling, organizing or arranging tours (which may include ..... similar services) by any mode of transport and includes any person engaged in the business of operating tourist vehicle covered by a permit granted under the motor vehicles act 1988 (59 of 1988) or the rules made thereunder". the commissioner found that from 10-9-2004 onwards any person engaged in the business of planning, scheduling ..... and penalty @ rs. 100 per day for the delay in payment of the tax due under section 76. the order also had demanded interest at the appropriate rate under section 75 of the finance act 1994. in the impugned order the commissioner (appeals), trichy has affirmed the demand of tax and the penalties imposed in the original order .....