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 8 of about 92 results (0.822 seconds)

Hayagriv Industries Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(162)ELT541Tri(Mum.)bai

..... of these circumstances, which would require filing of declaration of price, was present. nor does the department contend that the appellant did not declare the value under section 4 of the act of the goods on such documents as sales invoices that it issued for sale of the goods. even assuming such a failure on the part of the appellant, ..... at any price. there being no allegation that the value which it paid and adopted for payment of duty was not in consonance with the provisions of section 4 of the act, the mere fact that the value was lower than the tariff value that was earlier fixed is entirely insufficient on which the demand for duty was based. ..... the manufacture of polyester filament yarn. between 16th march, 1995 and 16th june, 1995, the duty on this product was leviable on a tariff value determined under section 3(2) of the act, rs. 98/- per kg. the notification fixing a tariff value was withdrawn with effect from 16th june, 1995. the appellant thereafter cleared the goods at the .....

Clariant (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... duty paid on the inputs.he further states that no taxes can be collected except under authority of law and therefore, once an exemption notification is issued under section 5a of the central excise act, 1944, the amount paid by the appellants cannot be treated as duty in view of the definition of duty under rule 2(v) of the central excise ..... and the board's revised circular and decided that it is the option of an assessee to claim or not to claim a benefit of notification issued under section 5a of the cental excise act. it also held that consequently the assessee can not be denied the benefit of modvat credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of final .....

Laxmi Board and Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... and the other by the department. in the impugned order, the commissioner has held that the show cause notice dated 26 june 97 invoking the proviso to section 11a of the central excise act, 1944 alleging suppression and misstatement was not an order and is not maintainable and therefore the demand is hit by time bar for non maintenance of proper records ..... the rival submissions. paragraph 4 of the show cause notice reads as under: "shri v.p. kaushal production manager, in his statement dt. 12.12.96 recorded under section 14 of the central excise act 1944 stated, interalia, that during the years 92-93 & 93-94, they were engaged in the manufacture of kraft paper using bagasse; that kraft paper consisted of .....

Barron International Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(161)ELT540Tri(Mum.)bai

..... ) or where such goods are not sold to such dealers, to dealers (being related persons), who sell such goods in retail --".54. the definition of a manufacturer under section 2(f) of the act at the material time included any person who engaged in the production or manufacture of excisable goods and also one who hired labour in the production or manufacture ..... of such goods.55. the charge in the show cause notice does not claim relationship in terms of section 4 of the act, between jre and bil but makes out bil as the manufacturer denying the independent existence of jre by calling them a dummy.56. as against the charge in ..... .o.i [1988 (38) e.l.t. 535 and 1989 (39) e.l.t. 493] where the job worker was held to be the manufacturer in terms of section 2(f) of the act and the basis of assessment of the goods cleared by him to the principal manufacturer was determined as the sum total of cost of raw materials, cost of .....

Essar Steels Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(156)ELT42Tri(Mum.)bai

..... sub-rule (2) of rule 9 and in particular/ clause (a) thereof reads as under : "(2) for the purposes of sub-section (1) and sub-section (1a) of section 14 of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and these rules, the value of the imported goods shall be the value of such goods, for delivery at ..... said decision. their lordships have categorically held that the price at which the imported goods are ordinarily sold should be the basis for valuation under section 14(1) of the act. ordinarily demurrage is not payable. only in extraordinary circumstances where delay in discharging the goods from the ship occurs, demurrage becomes payable. such extraordinary ..... circumstances are not falling within the purview of section 14(1) of the act.panchmahal steel ltd. v. collector of customs - 1998 (101) e.l.t. 399 (tribunal) look the view that demurrage charges, which are paid .....

Essar Steels Limited, Shashi N. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... sub-rule (2) of rule 9 and in particular, clause (a) thereof reads as under: "(2) for the purposes of sub-section (1) and sub-section (1a) of section 14 of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and these rules, the value of the imported goods shall be the value of such goods, for delivery at ..... said decision. their lordships have categorically held that the price at which the imported goods are ordinarily sold should be the basis for valuation under section 14(1) of the act. ordinarily demurrage is not payable. only in extraordinary circumstances where delay in discharging the goods from the ship occurs, demurrage becomes payable. such ..... extraordinary circumstances are not falling within the purview of section 14(1) of the act.panchmahal steel ltd. v. collector of customs - 1998 (101) elt 399 (tribunal) took the view that demurrage charges, which are paid on account .....

Premier Glass Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(155)ELT90Tri(Mum.)bai

..... serve the purpose of a mirror, as it would be only a glass. therefore, the process, which is carried out, is certainly amounts to manufacture in view of section 2f of central excise act, 1944." 3. despite the valiant efforts of the departmental representative, we are unable to see as correct anything in the conclusion of the commissioner (appeals). it is common .....

Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)LC6Tri(Mum.)bai

..... 's premises, consisting of freight and insurance, are to form part of the assessable value. the commissioner has reasoned, applying the definition of the "place of removal" in section 4 of the act, after its amendment in 1996 which includes a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold .....

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Aroma International

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(154)ELT593Tri(Mum.)bai

..... , after elaborate discussion of the material on record had held, vide that order, as follows : (a) the commissioner's order regarding extension of time under section 110(2) of the customs act, 1962 for issue of notice was not to be interfered with; (b) the petitioner was required to file necessary modification to the bill of entry for provisional ..... rs. 20 lakhs'. recorded seizure is not essential, and hold whatever is 'detained' or 'taken/seized' has either to be adjudicated or released within the time frame a section 110(2). therefore cloves and amount of rs. 20 lakhs stands released from seizure/detention." "11. the department says and submits that the order of hon'ble cegat, manifests ..... was a seizure and also held that recorded seizure was not essential. it further concluded, it was required to be adjudicated or released within the time frame of section 110(2) which was not done.5. in this view of the matter and the findings arrived at by the bench, no grounds are found to sustain the .....

Mitexco Vs. Commissioner of Customs (E.P.)

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)LC8Tri(Mum.)bai

..... drawback due thereon. having called back the goods, there is no export in respect of these goods taking place and therefore in terms of proviso to section 75 of the customs act 1962, no drawback is admissible where in respect of goods of which sale proceeds are not received by and on behalf of the exporter in india." 36 ..... only under suspicion. they did not have reasons to believe at that time that the goods which were transferred into their jeep were liable to confiscation under section 111 of the customs act, and when they handed over the seizure list to the petitioners, seizing the silver goods and the car, has been interpolated. i have already referred to ..... liable to confiscation. it all depended upon the facts and circumstances of the case. the court in para 11 of the judgment after quoting the provision of section 110 of the customs act observed as under :- "the seizure of the goods must follow only if the proper officer has reason to believe that the goods were liable to confiscation, .....