Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: recent Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat mumbai Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 92 results (1.050 seconds)

Anil Chemical and Industries Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(158)ELT759Tri(Mum.)bai

..... to rs. 4,10,27,681/- by alleging that plot no. 48 and 49 are in fact one unit and explosives emerges at plot no. 48 and 49, as a result of application of section vi of the central excise tariff act. it was further stated that bmd vehicle cannot be treated as workshop, consequently exemption granted to goods manufactured in a workshop ..... .9.1994 to dec. 1996, by invoking the extended period of limitation in terms of section 11-a of the central excise act, besides the allegation of manufacture of explosives at plot no. 48 and 49, in view of note 2 to section vi of the central excise tariff act, revenue alleged that appellant had recovered the amount of central excise duty from the customer .....

Anil Chemicals and Indus. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(155)ELT91Tri(Mum.)bai

..... made for the extended period is hit by limitation. the following judgments witness this ruling - (1) the storage in three compartments of the ingredients necessary to manufacture prepared explosives in the same van did not amount to manufacture and that the provisions of rule 2(a) of the rules for interpretation of central excise tariff did not apply. ..... and could not fall under the ambit of the aforesaid rule. the belief of the commissioner that these three ingredients carried separately in the same van were prepared explosives incomplete or unprepared form has no substance and must be rejected.5. as the second argument before him the assessees claimed that the goods on final mixing at ..... to evade payment of duty. in the absence of any specific averment to this effect, the proviso to section 11a does not come into operation. no such allegation is made in the show cause notice at all. the act of not taking a licence is described as wilful but there is nothing to sustain the invocation of the .....

Ghodavat Pan Masala Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... why - (i) central excise duty as detailed in annexure b-vii should not be demanded and recovered from them under the proviso to sub section (1) of section 11a of the act read with rule 9 (2) of the central excise rules 1944. (ii) why the goods seized as detailed in annexure "d" to the ..... & 10 should not be adjusted and appropriated towards the demand. (iv) penalty equivalent to the duty determined under section. 11a(2) of the said act should not be recovered under the provisions of section 11ab of the said act. (v) land, building, plant, machinery etc. used in connection with manufacture/production/storage/removal/disposal of the ..... materials used.clandestine removal burden on dept - sources of raw materials not contacted buyers not contacted receipt of sale proceeds not established.clandestine removal a positive act /provable on mere assumptions and ^1 presumptions.clandestine removal cannot be proved by office memo - not a direct evidence nits evidentiary value extremely limited.inflated .....

Commissioner of Customs and Vs. Swastik Dyeing and Bleaching

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(170)ELT491Tri(Mum.)bai

..... and thereafter, under notification no. 130/82-ce. the process of "calendaring", "stentering" & "squeezing of excess water" do not amount to "manufacture" as contemplated under section 2(f) of the act. consequently, there would be no liability to duty. in natwar textile processors pvt. ltd. v. cce, surat 2000 (120) elt 654 (tribunal), the cegat dealing ..... to the process of "stentering" carried on by the respondents on cotton fabrics and the same would also not amount to "manufacture" as envisaged under section 2(f) of the act. d) squeezing of excess water from the fabrics also does not amount to 'manufacture' in view of the principle laid down by the larger bench ..... with aid of power, admittedly with plain rollers. such process of "calendaring" has been held to be not amounting to "manufacture" within the meaning of section 2(f) of the act by the hon'ble supreme court vide judgments rendered in the case of siddeshwari cotton mills (p) ltd. v. uoi and anr.mafatlal spinning & manufacturing .....

Nitco Tiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(92)ECC414

..... 22/03/1999 was issued to the appellants proposing recovery of duty of rs. 31,03,303/- on marble slabs, tiles and novelty items under the proviso to section 11a(1) of the act, proposing confiscation of seized marble slabs and tiles, marble articles, and proposing recovery of interest and imposition of penalty.the notice was adjudicated by the commissioner who confirmed ..... the erstwhile central excise tariff, are applicable to the present tariff for the period in dispute which is subsequent to the introduction of the ceta, 1985 and section 2(f) of the central excise act, which has been relied upon by the commissioner in holding that the earlier judgments are not relevant for the period in dispute, makes it clear that manufacture .....

Sophisticated Marble and Granite Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(165)ELT353Tri(Mum.)bai

..... level of fine and penalty determined by the tribunal in the earlier orders. it has dismissed customs application no. 27/2002 and other applications of the commissioner under section 130a of the act on the ground that determination of fine was a finding of fact. similarly, while allowing the writ petition no. 4124 of 2002 of marmo classic, it has ..... . he also points to instructions in the manual that the fine has to be equal to these norms or the margin of profit whichever is higher.6. section 125(2) of the act provides that the fine for redemption of goods ordered to be confiscated cannot exceed the market price of the goods and excise duty payable thereupon. therefore, any ..... this limit cannot be said to be contrary to law.similarly, the penalty on the importer will not be illegal if it is within the limits specified by section 112 of the act. the margin of profit, which is a contentions issue in this appeal, is only a working rule that the department accepts. the reason for basing fine upon .....

Mardia Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... appeals were dismissed. hence these appeals before the tribunal.4. the grievance of the appellants is that the orders passed on their applications for waiver in terms of section 35f of the central excise act, 1944 were ex-parte orders without affording them any opportunity of personal hearing; that their modification applications on the ground inter alia that they had appealed to .....

Mukta Arts Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(167)ELT85Tri(Mum.)bai

..... to pay service tax on the total amount of receipt from the various manufacturers of the goods whose product has been advertised, in terms of provisions of section 65(3) of chapter v of finance act, 1994. it has been held by the lower authorities that the definition of "advertising agency" is very wide and includes any commercial concern engaged in providing .....

RollwIn Engineering Company Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(175)ELT678Tri(Mum.)bai

..... removal of their final products during the periods - from 1992-93 to 1996-97. in addition, he has imposed personal penalty of identical amount under the provisions of section 11ac of the central excise act, 1944 and penalty of rs. 8.0 lakh (rupees eight lakh) under the provisions of rule 173q of the central excise rules, 1944. he has also confiscated ..... fifty thousand).2. as per facts on record, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of ball bearings and roller bearings falling under chapter 84 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. the appellant company's factory was visited by the central excise officers on 17.10.96, who conducted various checks and verifications and found unaccounted for raw materials & semi .....

Tullow India Operations Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(165)ELT218Tri(Mum.)bai

..... of exploration for oil. tullow india operations ltd. also conducted such surveys in the gulf of kutch. the processes, as explained, consisted of creating shock wave by means of controlled explosions which travel through the waters of the sea and the land mass beneath. the response to these waves indicates, by means of past experience and by applying the knowledge of ..... justify the imposition of penalty. there is no finding that this appellant, which is a wholly owned corporation of the government of india sought to evade duty by any clandestine act. it could well have believed that the goods that it imported were software within the meaning of the relevant notification.we therefore set aside the penalty imposed on it.23 .....