Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Sep-08-2003
Reported in : (2003)(90)ECC680
..... claim for the rebate of duty paid on materials used in the manufacture of goods cannot be claimed as such under the provisions of section 11b of the central excise act or under section 27 of the customs act as specific provisions have been made in this regard subject to the conditions stipulated in rule 12 of the central excise rules, 1944 and ..... been exported and they could not claim 'duty draw back' on the inputs. the contention of the learned sdr is correct that no refund of duty under section 11b of the act is involved as it is a case of export of finished goods in the manufacture of which duty paid packing material was used. for claiming such duty back ..... that in the present matter the duty is being claimed as refund as goods had been exported and accordingly the refund claim is hit by time-limit specified in section 11b of the act.6. we have considered the submissions of both the sides. the refund claim has been made on the ground that the duty paid empty packing materials were used .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Sep-02-2003
Reported in : (2003)(90)ECC308
..... order relating to this issue, before the issue of show cause notice. the ld. counsel therefore, pleads that there is no case of imposition of any penalty under section 11ac of the act in this case relating to this portion of the duty demand.20. we have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the ld.counsel. it is true that the ..... 8479.90.18. the learned counsel has also pleaded that there is no suppression etc. to warrant issue of demand by invoking larger period of limitation contained in section 11a of the act. keeping in mind the fact that we have over-ruled the classification under heading no. 84.15 it is not necessary to examine the aspect of limitation since ..... differential duty of rs. 1,99,60,142 for the period from 1994-95 to 1997-98. the notice invoked the extended period of limitation under proviso to section 11a of the act by alleging suppression of facts on the part of the applicants.4. the notice also sought to include the cost of free supply items supplied by mul, in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-29-2003
Reported in : (2003)LC939Tri(Delhi)
..... price declared at us $ 3.40 was held to be a misdeclaration. accordingly, the goods were held as liable to confiscation and the appellant liable to penalty under section 114 of the customs act. since bulk of the goods had already been exported, the order confiscated 66 coffee mugs which had been retained as representative samples. the order also imposed a penalty .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-28-2003
Reported in : (2003)(90)ECC686
..... to do the same would not make it a case of suppression of facts. therefore, most of the demand is hit by limitation provided under section 11a of the central excise act.9. in view of what has been stated above, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.[operative part of the order was ..... excise authorities all-through and there was no suppression of facts involved which would justify raising the demand invoking the extended period as provided under proviso to section 11a of the central excise act. in this context, he has relied on declaration filed by the appellant for the year 1997-98, therein the goods were described as "geometry ..... 2003, commissioner of central excise, delhi-1 confirmed the same duty demand.the commissioner also demanded interest in respect of the duty amounts not paid under section 11ab of the central excise act, 1944 and imposed a penalty equivalent to the duty amount on the appellant. the ground for denying the exemption was that the boxes, which are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-25-2003
Reported in : (2003)(90)ECC653
..... 97. we hope that your honour will be pleased to consider all the factors responsible for production and determine the acp accordingly in terms of sub-section (2) of section 3a of central excise act, 1944, taking into account our performance in the past. 4. we are, therefore, awaiting for the orders of your goodself and hope reasonable ..... envisaged in sub-rule (3) of rule 96zo is subject to the condition that we shall not avail of the benefit, if any, under sub-section (4) of section 3a of central excise act, 1944 (1 of 1944). 3. sir, the application of deeming provision of production based on formula of determination of annual capacity of production solely depending ..... 96zo of the central excise rules in terms of compounded levy scheme and that, that rule specifically excludes re-fixation of duty liability under sub-section (4) of section 3a of the central excise act, 1944. it is also pointed out that in view of the decision of the apex court in the case of commissioner, customs & central .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-13-2003
Reported in : (2003)(90)ECC703
..... separately under a common order.3. the assessees are engaged in the manufacture of pty twisted yarn falling under chapter sub-heading 54.02 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. on the basis of intelligence received by the officers of anti evasion directorate that the assessees are indulging in evasion of central excise duty by resorting to undervaluation ..... the depot price clause [section 4(1)(a) proviso (ia) read with section 4(iv)(b)(iii)]. he therefore took the view that the proposal under show cause memo to make assesssment taking recourse to rule 7 of valuation rules is ..... far as bhiwandi sales are concerned there is no factory gate sale and therefore, there is no normal price under section 4. he took the view that since the name of the buyer is fictitious the definition of buyer under section 4(1)(a) cannot be satisfied. it is then pointed out that the show cause notice has not invoked .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-07-2003
Reported in : (2003)(157)ELT290TriDel
..... under section 11a of the act for short levied duties regardless of the approved classification list or price list. reliance was placed on the decision of the tribunal in collector of central excise ..... list in part i under rule 173c of the central excise rules showing the price at the factory gate sale as the price under section 4(1)(a) of the central excise act, the assistant collector refused to approve the price list and directed the appellants to pay the differential amount of duty between the wholesale price ..... going by the decisions of the tribunal, high court and supreme court there is no estoppel against law and the appellants could file a refund claim under section 11b within the stipulated time limit even if the price list or classification list approved earlier was not challenged, just as the department was free to issue notice .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-05-2003
Reported in : (2003)(157)ELT44TriDel
..... as assessable value in view of the fact that the sale price was a purely commercial price which satisfied the requirement of the normal wholesale price under section 4(1)(a) of central excise act, 1944.during the hearing of the case, the learned counsel representing the appellant has submitted that minority shareholding of the buyer in a manufacturing company does ..... demand of rs. 53,000/- on the scrap.2. the main duty demand has been made in view of the definition of related person contained in section 4(4)(c) of the central excise act, 1944 as a person who is so associated with the assessee that they have interest, directly or indirectly in the business of each other. it ..... may also be noted that section 4(1)(a)(iii) stipulates a separate provision as under for the valuation of goods sold to or through a related person : .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Aug-01-2003
Reported in : (2004)(163)ELT478TriDel
..... to or through a person who is related in the manner specified in either of sub-clauses (ii), (iii) or (iv) of clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 4 of the act, the value of the goods shall be the normal transaction value at which these are sold by the related person at the time of removal, to buyers (not ..... of the assessable value of the syrup.3. assessment based on the sale price of the subsidiary is made by relying on the special provision contained in section 4 of the central excise act relating to the valuation of goods sold to or through related persons. the denial of discount is made on the ground that the discounts are not ..... there is no warrant in law for the inclusion of the consideration for deferent activity in the assessable value of excisable goods, definition of 'transaction value' in the new section notwithstanding. it is clear from a perusal of that definition that what is included is any additional amount charged as price, by reason of or in connection with the sale .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Jul-24-2003
Reported in : (2004)(91)ECC625
..... rejection of a transaction value for assessment does not make the declaration of value made in the customs declaration a mis-declaration making the goods liable to confiscation under section 111(m) and importer to penalty.3. we have perused the record and have considered the submission made by both sides. the present import has taken place ..... the goods at the rate of rs. 173.61 per piece. it also proposed confiscation of the goods under section 111(m) of the customs act, 1962 and imposition of penalty under sections 112 and 117 of the customs act, 1962. the appellant filed reply to the show-cause notice explaining that the transaction value represented commercial value of ..... rs. 50,000 on the appellant.2. appellants have contended in the present appeal that the entire proceedings were misconceived and contrary to specific legal provisions in the customs act and customs valuation rules as well as the law laid down by the apex court in the case of eicher tractor ltd., 2000 (72) ecc 673 (sc) : .....
Tag this Judgment!