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 6 of about 92 results (0.080 seconds)

Bayer Abs Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... of customs & central excise., aurangabad (by the supreme court) vide order reported in 2003 (155) elt 8 (s.c.) wherein it was held that amendments of section 4 of central excise act, 1944 have made no difference to the earlier position as settled by the court vide its orders in the case of union of india v. bombay tyre international ..... s.c.) which had held the eligibility of deductions and thus no levy on equalised freight. in vip industries ltd. case, after considering the amendments made to section 4 of the central excise act, 1944 as regards the "place of removal" the court held as follows- "5. after the amendment, the department sought to include in the value the ..... of removal is appellant's factory or the customers premises is the pure question of interpretation involving meaning and scope of section 4 as amended w.e.f 29.6.96 and section 2(h) of the central excise act, 1944. the legal position about correct place of removal to be considered in case of insurance coverage taken by the .....

Aban Loyd Chiles Offshore Ltd., P. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... the penalty imposed on its owners and others. the commissioner has found contravention of the provisions of clauses (f), (g), (h) and (j) of section 111 of the act. these clauses relate respectively to any dutiable or prohibited goods required to be mentioned under the regulations in an import manifest or import manifests which are not so ..... and locations of the oil rigs. it was a contention the writ petition that the oil rigs were foreign going vessels and, therefore, by application of section 86(2) of the act, these parts, which were ship's stores, were liable to duty. the court noted that a vessel, as commercially understood, would also include a sailing ..... and, by applying rule 3 of the customs valuation rules, this transaction value should be accepted. it is further contended that the benefit of drawback under section 76 of the act, which would be available as the rig was exported after import on each occasion, has not been considered. confiscation of the vessels is questioned on the .....

Glaxo Smith Kline Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(162)ELT612Tri(Mum.)bai

..... the inputs utilised for the quality control purposes needs to be recovered from them under rule 57i read with proviso to section 11a(1) of the c.ex.act, 1944." the findings of the adjudicating authority at paras 8 & 9 are as follows: "8. i find that the input used for testing the quality of the ..... final products cleared by them during the period from april 95 to dec 99 is required to be recovered from them under the provisions of proviso to section 11a(1) of c.ex. salt act, 1944 read with rule 9(2) of c.ex.rules, 1944. similarly, the proportionate modvat credit of rs. 10,37,930/- not reversed by the assessee on ..... demanding duty of rs. 19,33,473/- and demand of reversal of modvat credit of rs. 10,37,930/-; imposing penalty of rs. 25,51,294/- under section 11ac of the central excise act, and rs. 50,000/- under rule 173q of the central excise rules. the other appeal is filed by the manager of the office of the assessee against imposition .....

Rex Arts Castors Pvt. Ltd., Rex Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(177)ELT179Tri(Mum.)bai

..... these appeals by the assesses.4. the brief facts of the case are these. rexello castors pvt. ltd. (rcpl) is a company registered in the year 1976 under indian companies act, 1956, which was originally a partnership concern as rexello industries and it is situated at 23/d, mahal industrial estate, mahakali caves road, andheri (e), mumbai 400 093 and was ..... .2, 9.7, 9.8, 10.1, 10.5, 10.7, 10.7.3 and 10.10. the sum and substance of this citation is that m/s. rcpl was acting as a focal point in receiving orders from the customers and stockists. the requirements of the clients were being distributed to the various manufacturing units as the per the convenience .....

Viacom Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(156)ELT501Tri(Mum.)bai

..... has to answer that the provisions of sub-rule (1) are shown to have been complied with on importation.this sub-rule does no way prohibits the importer in acting in such a manner as to ensure that the declarations are put on the packages before they arrive in india. we do not find anything in these rules that ..... (appeals). it is necessary to mention here that the word clearance contained in the entry is not of legal significance. the word "clearance" is not defined in the central excise act or the rules or in the tariff.5. the circular dated 5-1-2000 of the board reproduced in 2000 (115) e.l.t. (t41) = 2000 (88) ecr ..... on subject goods. further, sr. no. 225(i) has necessarily to be read with section 4a of central excise act, 1944 and any notification issued under the said section specifying the percentage of abatement for arriving at the assessable value. it is quite clear that section 4a was introduced to check the under valuation of domestically produced goods and references therein to .....

Johnson and Johnson Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(156)ELT134Tri(Mum.)bai

..... be printed on a package itself or made on a card or tape fixed firmly to the package or container bearing the required information. section 32 of the prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 provides that every package of food shall carry a label and, unless otherwise provided, the label shall contain the trade name or ..... would be in contravention of the provisions of the standards of weights & measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 and of the rules under the prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 in the case of chocolates, or of the drugs and cosmetics rules in the case of the medicaments. the judgment of the delhi high court in ..... label contains information necessary to meet the requirements of the standards of weights & measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977, and in addition, the prevention of food and adulteration act, 1954 in the case of nestle india ltd., and the drugs & cosmetics rules in the case of johnson & johnson ltd. providing that the goods cannot be marketed .....

Rajpurohit Gmp India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(162)ELT431Tri(Mum.)bai

..... place, which makes the product have a different character and use of its own which did not bear earlier then the process would amount to manufacture under section 2(f) of the act. in fact the learned dr adopted the words contained in the head note of the case. it was also specifically emphasised by the learned dr that ..... products, namely, bleaching, mercerising, dyeing, etc., and whether it will amount to manufacture or not. one important question in that case which arose was whether section 4 of the central excise act after the amendment made therein would be consistently followed or not. the same has been reflected in paragraph 20 of the said judgment. it is true that ..... dated 6-6-2001 confirmed the duty of rs. 42,89,48,256/- and imposed a penalty of equal amount under section 11ac of the central excise act and ordered payment of interest in terms of section 11ab of the act and confiscated the land, building, etc., with an option of redemption fine of rs. 2 crores. on the other appellant .....

Johnson and Johnson Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... printed on a package itself or made on a card or tape fixed firmly to the package or container bearing the required information. section 32 of the prevention of the food adulteration act, 1954 provides that every package of food shall carry a label and, unless otherwise provided, the label shall contain he trade name ..... would be in contravention of the provisions of the standards of weight & measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 and of the rules under the prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 in the case of chocolates, or of the drugs & cosmetics rules in the case of the medicaments. the judgment of the delhi high court in ..... label contains information necessary to meet the requirements of the standards of weights & measurers (packaged commodities) rules, 1977, and in addition, the prevention of food & adulteration act 1954 in the case of nestle india ltd., and the drugs & cosmetics rules in the case of johnson & johnson ltd. providing that the goods cannot be marketed without .....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Quality Steels and Forgings Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... would pay the duty without protest even when he contests the levy of duty, its rate, classification or any other aspect. if one reads the second proviso to sub-section (1) of section 11b alongwith the definition of 'relevant date', there is no room for any apprehension of the kind expressed by the learned counsel." therefore, in view of the above ..... been filed within six months from the date of payment of duty. we think that the entire edifice of this argument is erected upon on incomplete reading of section 11b. the second proviso to section 11b (as amended in 1991) expressly provides that 'the limitation of six months shall not apply where any duty has been paid under protest'. now, ..... , order or direction of the appellate tribunal or any court or in any other provision of this act or the rules made thereunder or any other law for the time being in force, no refund shall be made except as provided in sub-section (2)." in this case the claim for refund filed on 30.8.92, is clearly time- .....

Usha Electronics Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... 9405.40 of the customs tariff and restricted in terms of exim policy 92-97 and were therefore liable for confiscation under section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962 and the importers liable to penalty under section 112(a) of the act. (b) the deputy commissioner who adjudicated the case after considering the submissions of the appellants and after examining the representative samples .....