Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: labour exchange Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat tamil nadu Page 1 of about 39 results (0.141 seconds)

ion Exchange (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2003)(159)ELT499Tri(Chennai)

..... they also invited our attention to page 356 of the paper book which contains the view of the ion exchange manager at hosur under which it was stated as under : "(a) abandon the idea of a go-down - continue to operate from the factory ..... the respondent submits that it is true that a mere change in the substance may not be process but in the case of appellants the change is the result of treatment labour and manipulation and transformation of a new and different article emerges having distinct name, character or use. ..... the statement of the various job workers whom the department described as hired labourers and the statement of the general manager of the appellant firm also relied.17 ..... therefore the show cause notice alleged that they were hired labourers of the appellant and that the appellant had hired them for fabrication under the guise of bought out items of the appellant for manufacture of water treatment plant without a valid licence and without ..... already stated, the statements recorded in this behalf from s.s, ranganathan, indicate that the scheme of packing is the company's brain child and that it is derived as a result of labour of r&d for the standardization for grouping and combination of products. ..... dropped demand against various job workers on the ground that all vendors are independent manufacturing unit and those job workers are having relationship on principal to principal basis and are not hired labourers of the appellant who happened to be the principal manufacturer. .....

Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2001)(78)ECC383

..... we further notice that the appellant had taken a stand that they are not the "manufacturers" but only 'hired labourers'.although learned dr submitted that the relationship is that of "principle to principle" basis but we notice from the order of the commissioner, that such a finding has not been recorded ..... in the second circuit refrigerant gas is compressed in a compressor and then condensed in the condenser by exchanging the heat to sea water and then expanding to lower pressure through expansion valve and goes to the chiller to exchange heat with the water circulating in the chiller through ships/submarines and thereby providing air-conditioning to them. ..... we have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides.we note from the show cause notice dated 10.1.95 that the main allegation brought out jn paras 2 to 7 is that the appellant had manufactured "heat exchanger" on accepting the contract from dgnp and cleared it without payment of duty. ..... he submits that they had contested that the item is not a heat exchanger falling under heading 8419 and the rate of duty applicable was only 10% adv ..... wherein the condenser and chiller are heat exchangers effecting change of temperature by a process of condensing or ..... commissioner ought to have addressed himself to the question in greater detail and discussed the item, its nature, its technical details and as to how the item s required to be considered as a "heat exchanger" and as to why it is required to be classified under s.h. no. .....

Chief Engineer (irr.), Pwd Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2000)LC193Tri(Chennai)

..... he also further points out that the correspondence which was exchanged into in this case between the superintendent of central excise commencing from 21-9-1989 and the replies made to the said letter by executive engineer on 23-9-1989.further correspondence was made by ac by his letter dated 25-7-1990 which ..... contractors that these facts were known to the department and the order itself discloses that the work was carried out through the contractors on principal to principal basis and the contractors were not labourers and hence the duty confirmed is not justified. ..... , sand and these activities were independently carried out in terms of the contract awarded and each of the contracts and the terms of the contract, on a perusal, clearly indicates that it is on principal to principal basis and not a labour contract.9. .....

Alagar Polybags Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (1995)LC335Tri(Chennai)

..... eastern polybags as to the quantum of granules which exchanged hands between the two and also about the production of the goods in the appellants factory. ..... he also pleaded that appellants were not aware that granules received on loan exchange basis should be reflected in form iv account. ..... production of the goods based on the machinery installed, period for which it was run and the possible production that could emerge in the relevant period taking into consideration other elements like consumption of electricity, labour employed, etc. .....

M/S. T.N.E.B. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

..... /42/92 and the appellants therein is superintending engineer, coimbatore south, sultanpet and the refund amount involved is rs.3,05,662.11 the parties' appeals were dismissed on the ground that the rcc poles were manufactured by labour contracts and the relationship was not independent. ..... dt.15.12.2000 arising from the same impugned order in which it has clearly been held that the relationship between the appellant and the contractor was on principal to principal basis and the contractor was not a labour contractor. .....

Foods, Fats and Fertilisers Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (1985)(21)ELT133Tri(Chennai)

1. as the facts and circumstances in the above two cases are the same and are directed against the same order of the collector of central excise (appeals), madras, they are being disposed of together.2. these two appeals, one by m/s. foods, fats and fertilisers (hereinafter referred to as the company) (appeal no. 446/83) and the other by the collector of central excise, guntur (appeal no. 471/83) are against the order of the collector of central excise (appeals), madras, dated 1-9-83 in c. no. v/68/178/83 which itself is with reference to the order of the assistant collector of central excise, eluru, in c. no. v/68/18-4-1983 mp.1 dated 10-5-1983. the company claimed a refund of rs. 25,375.24 being the duty paid on three consignments of hydrogenated hardened rice bran oil of 31.415 mts.removed under gate passes nos. 129/17-10-82, 130/18-10-82 and 131/18-10-82 to m/s. hindustan lever ltd., calcuta. it was stated that the said three consignments were rejected by the consignee due to miv (moisture, impurity and volatile matter) and were brought back to the co's factory. the assistant collector held that "the provisions of rule 173l do not apply to the cases of outright rejection of the consignments by the consignee in the absence of any documentary evidence that the consignments are in fact returned by the consignee to the factory for being re-made, refined or re-conditioned". while examining an appeal from the company against this order, the collector (appeals) noted that the .....

M. Chinnadurai and K.L. Barnadraj Vs. Cc

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2003)(85)ECC403

..... now coming to the aspect with regard to the quantum of penalty on the appellants, so far as appellant chinnadurai is concerned, we have already held that he was a poor labourer working abroad and his name and services have been used by his previous employer bernad ra] for importing illegally the goods in question and the appellant himself admitted in the statements that these items ..... in the present case the importer (chinnadurai) specifically and in categorical terms stated that the cargo belonged to bernad raj, and that he was only a labourer with an income of 600 to 750 uae dirhams and that he was residing abroad alongwith 15 co-workers in a room and he neither knew driving nor was he having a driving licence and that the goods belonged to shri bernad ..... statement was obtained from the said chinnadurai on 23.9.1998 and 24.9.1998 wherein he stated inter alia that he was working in dubal from 10/93 as labourer on a monthly salary of 600 dirhams with m/s besco international owned by shri bernard raj and he came to india in may 1998 and he did not have any savings in the bank, did not purchase any car at dubai ..... on a reading of the statements given by chinnadurai coupled with his earnings abroad merely as a labourer earning 600 to 750 dirhams per month, together with the corroborative statement of various other persons and the conduct of the other appellant bernad raj, we come to an irresistible conclusion that the name and services of .....

V.A. Ashraf Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (1987)(13)LC428Tri(Chennai)

..... it is submitted before me by the learned counsel that the appellant who is a plantation labourer and who has worked for about two & half years in gulf countries, went to bombay from trichur to meet his childhood friend one najeeb for purpose of going abroad and not succeeding in that venture ..... the learned counsel also pleaded that the appellant is only a labourer and has been a victim of circumstance, lured by petty monetary consideration to play the role of a carrier and has 5 sisters to support. ..... it really passes my comprehension as to how a plantation labourer going all the way to bombay by train to meet his childhood friend for enquiring the possibilities of going abroad in connection with employment would be sent back by air by his childhood friend with a rexin bag without .....

Indian Arts Bureau, Iab Photos (P) Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2007)10STJ15CESTAT(Chennai)

..... during the period of dispute [1.8.2003 - 31.1.2005], the appellants paid service tax only on the labour charge component mentioned in the relevant invoices. ..... service tax was paid on the labour component and was not paid on the material cost. ..... such invoices indicated material cost and labour component separately. .....

J.N. Traders Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in : (2007)10STJ25CESTAT(Chennai)

1. for the period september, 1999 to march, 2000, the original authority demanded service tax of rs. 52,542/- from the appellants under section 73 of the finance act, 1994 with interest thereon at the rate of 1.5% per month under section 75 of the act and imposed penalties on them under sections 76 and 77 of the act. this decision of the original authority was upheld by the commissioner (appeals), whose order is under challenge in appeal no. s/01/2002. for the subsequent period (april to september, 2000), the original authority confirmed differential demand of service tax to the extent of rs. 1,96,229/- against the appellants with interest as above and also imposed on them a penalty of rs. 100/- under section 76 of the finance act, 1994 and this decision was sustained by the commissioner (appeals), whose order is under challenge in appeal no. s/04/2004.2. after examining the records, we find that the appellants had been rendering "clearing and forwarding service" to clients such as m/s.hindustan lever ltd. (hll, for short) and m/s. ind exports ltd. (iel, for short), in terms of an agreement covering the entire period of dispute. the agreement had inter alia provided for reimbursement, to the c&f agent by the companies, of expenses incurred towards freight from the place of clearance of goods (except in cases of delivery at godown). the agreement had also enabled the c&f agent to obtain remuneration for the services rendered by them to the companies. the appellants did not .....