Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: recent Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat Year: 2003 Page 6 of about 225 results (0.286 seconds)

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Swami Chemicals

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... and the adjudicating authority or appellate authority had his discretion to impose, disturb or reduce it.5. the contention in the appeal is that penalty prescribed under section 11ac of the act is the minimum penalty and the maximum is contained in rule 173q. the reasoning for this proposition contained in the appeal is summarised by the departmental representative as ..... this is the result of trying to compare two incomparables.8. i do not think it is correct to say that phrase "subject to the provision contained in section 11ac of the act" occurring in sub-rule (1) of rule 173q has to be so interpreted to mean that to be synonymous with in addition to the action to be ..... taken under section 11ac. by applying its normal meaning the term "subject to" appropriately can be construed to mean that where section 11ac invoked, rule 173q could not be invoked. .....

Century Cement Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2004)(165)ELT534TriDel

..... of the apex court judgment in jaypee rewa cement supra shows that modvat credit is available to an assessee in respect of the explosives used for the manufacture of intermediate product which product is then used in the manufacture of the final product. but after the amendment ..... ltd. - 2002 (147) e.l.t. 877 and that for the earlier period, the appellants had been allowed modvat credit on the explosives. he had also submitted that the amended definition of the input which came into force from 1-7-2000 did not stand on a ..... 83.587/- which has been confirmed against them through the impugned order-in-appeal by the commissioner (appeals), by disallowing them modvat credit on explosives used outside the factory premises.2. the learned counsel has contended that the case of the appellants stands squarely covered by jaypee rewa cement ..... terms of the stay order shall result in dismissal of the appeal without prior notice under section 35f of the act. to come up for reporting compliance on 19-11-2003. .....

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Perfect Latex Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2004)(173)ELT314TriDel

..... for manufacturing the products, which are to be exported out cent-per-cent and in these circumstances, such goods are not meant for temporary storage under section 59 of the customs act and therefore, not necessarily bound to be cleared for home consumption on payment of duty. it has also been mentioned by revenue in its grounds ..... closed, the benefit of exemption notifications is no longer applicable; that thus the duty is chargeable from the assessee without allowing any depreciation; that proviso to section 3(1) of the central excise act is applicable as held by the larger bench of the tribunal in the case of himalaya international ltd. v. cce, chandigarh, 2003 (154) e ..... been in use since 1996-97 and thus the assessee has violated the conditions of the exemption notification making the goods liable for confiscation under section 111(o) of the customs act and rule 209 of the central excise rules, that as the capital goods are not being utilized for export production since long and the unit .....

T.E.L.C.O. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... such conflicting decisions and i proceed to decide the appeal, which is pending for over 6 years and relates to a refund claim filed in august, 1995.3. section 27 of the customs act, 1962 inter alia allows filing of a refund claim of duty paid 'in pursuance of an order of assessment'. the appellants have filed such a claim within the ..... of the apex court in the case of karnataka power (supra).6. no doubt, appeals against any decision or order including a b/e can be filed under section 128(1) of the customs act, 1962. but obviously, no modern customs administration worth the name should either refuse to pass an appealable order in a disputed case or insist on filing of ..... . the appellants have paid duty 'in pursuance of an order of an assessment' on the b/e. they have subsequently filed a refund claim within the time limit prescribed under section 27. in a similar case, the apex court has ruled vide karnataka power corporation ltd. v. c.c. (appeals), chennai - 2002 (143) e.l.t. 482 (s.c.) to .....

Lumbini Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in : (2003)(111)LC311Tri(Kol.)kata

..... to an altogether different set of facts and circumstances.12. as regards the personal penalty of rs. 20.00 lakh (rupees twenty lakh) imposed under the provisions of section 11ac, we find that the appellants have taken the credit on the basis of the circular issued by the board, though such basis was on the wrong interpretation of ..... that the said communication dated 24.1.2001 by the deputy commissioner was not appealed against by the revenue and as such, had attained the finality. the same acted as estoppel against the revenue to initiate the fresh proceedings against the appellants on the same grounds. he submits that the commissioner has erred in holding that the said ..... lakh) on the appellants.2. the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of aerated water and fruit pulp based drinks classifiable under chapter 22 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. prior to 1.4.2000, the appellants were not entitled to avail any credit of duty paid on the glass bottles and plastic crates used in the .....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Cerafil

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in : (2003)(158)ELT646Tri(Kol.)kata

..... are specifically designed to be used for storage batteries in question and are nothing but improvised version of the usual and age-old caps and have to act as caps replacement. in terms of section note 2(b), the ceramic plugs have to be treated as parts of storage battery and nothing else. in our view commissioner (appeals) has erred ..... in invoking the provisions of rule 3(b) of rules of interpretation. in terms of section note 2(b) of section xvi and in view of the fact that the ceramic plugs are nothing but replacement of caps, the same are clearly classifiable as part of the storage batteries ..... of ceramic as well as other substances.12. the respondents have also referred to board's order no. 29/5/94-cx, dated 9-3-94 issued under section 37b laying down that the plastic caps meant for battery cells are to be properly classified under heading 39.26. the original adjudicating authority has dealt with the said .....

Pooja Circular Saw and Rajesh P. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(158)ELT466Tri(Mum.)bai

..... new blades be deducted and the balance worked out for the purpose of calculating duty liability at the declared value. confiscation of the goods under section 111(d) of the customs act is set aside. confiscation under section 111(m) is upheld. redemption fine is reduced to rs. 2 lakhs. penalty on m/s. pooja circular saw is reduced to rs. ..... hand goods the import of which should be covered under the valid licence and since they are not, the goods are liable to confiscation under section 111(d) and 111(m) of the customs act as the goods were not declared correctly. the persons concerned are liable to penal action.6. the rival contentions have been examined in depth by ..... circular saw blades was not based on correct appreciation of facts.they refer to the definition of scrap in clause (a) of note 8 of section xv to the schedule to the customs tariff act, which clearly refers to material which cannot be used as it is; the admitted fact according to the appellants is that the imported material is .....

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Gangaram P. Kerkar

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(91)ECC10

..... singh being the co-conspirators in the said drawback fraud. on account of the violations/liabilities of the said car to confiscation under the provisions of section 111 (d) and 111(m) of the customs act, 1962 were invoked by way of show cause notice wherein penal liabilities of shri aditya singh and g.p. kertkar were also invoked under the provisions ..... of section 112 of customs act, 1962.4. shri s.n. kantawala, ld. advocate appeared on behalf of the respondent. he reiterated the order passed by the commissioner. he also drew my attention, to para 3 .....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Godavari Manar S.S.K. Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(158)ELT663Tri(Mum.)bai

..... " since separate sale transaction have been entered into with each individual consumer which cannot be considered as a 'class of buyer' in terms of the provisions of section 4 of central excise act, 1944. in such a situation, assessable value can be worked out on the basis of central excise valuation rules, 1975 as done by vasantdada sugar institute, pune ..... the charges raised in the notice. b) considering the grounds, as raised in the notice i.e. whether different prices could be accepted as 'value' under section 4 of the central excise act, 1944 when such removals are on same day to same class of buyers, at sl.no.4 to 6 in this appeal before us, it is found ..... assessment is being sought to be made at the price of rs. 1000/- pmt being the cost of production + other incidental charges. this is totally incorrect as under section 4, once the normal price at which the goods are sold is available, the department cannot reject the normal price merely because it is less than the cost of production .....

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 .....