Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1991)LC585Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the order in Original No. 21/MP/89, dated 9-5-1989 passed by the Addl. Collector, Central Excise, Vadodara.2. The Appellants are engaged in manufacturing/producing man-made fabrics falling under T.I. 22 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and hold L-4 licence. On 23-8-1984 the officers of the Central Excise (Preventive) Collec-torate visited the factory premises of the Appellants and during the same noticed certain quantity of fully manufactured man-made fabrics duly packed and in marketable condition at various places like Bonded Store Room, Folding and Packing Section, without being entered into statutory registers. It was also reportedly noticed that the Appellants were not even maintaining lot Register prescribed by the Baroda Collectorate vide Notification No. 1/75 dated 4-1-1975. The officers, therefore, seized the said unaccounted stock but released the same subsequently on execution of B-ll Bond by the Appellants. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1994)(55)LC492Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the order dated 21.5.1992 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. The background facts of the appeal are that the Assistant Collector of Customs, Special Valuation Branch, New Custom House, Bombay passed an order dated 22.11.1991 after investigation into the declared value of some of the consignments imported by the appellants herein from their Japanese Collaboration, Asahi Glass Company and ordered that invoice value may be accepted and that pending cases of provisionally assessment may be completed under Section 14(1)(b) of Customs Act, 1962 read with Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1963. The appellants herein had entered into two agreements with the overseas principles. One agreement is a technical collaboration agreement and the other is the equipment supply agreement. The Assistant Collector on examining these agreements bases this order for assessment under Section 14(1)(b) of the Customs Act and Valuation Rules 8 of their import...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1998)(98)ELT630Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants in this case filed a classification list No. 6/95-96 with effect from 24-4-1995 for their product honeypro granules classifying them under Chapter Heading No. 3003.10 with 15% duty as medicament. The product is described as 'readily digestible milk protein enriched with lysine, methionine, iron, zinc, calcium, honey, lecithin and vitamins. According to the direction for use, the granules are to be added in a measureful to a glass of warm milk and to be taken adding sugar to taste. The jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Div. I, Aurangabad issued 2 show cause notices for the period April 1995 to August 1995 and from September 1995 to January 1996 on the ground that honeypro is nothing but an edible preparation as food supplement for general health and energy. Since the preparation does not have any therapeutic or prophylactic use, the Asstt.Commissioner held that the correct classification should be under sub-heading 2108.90 of Central Excise Tariff ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1999)(65)ECC559
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether product described as 'TRICHUP' is classifiable as ayurvedic medicament under Heading 30.03 or as a preparation used as a hair oil falling under Heading 33.05.2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of ayurvedic medicines falling under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. One of the products manufactured by the appellant is known as TRICHUP OIL. The said product is manufactured under licence duly issued by the State Drug Control Authorities and the Joint Commissioner, Food and Drug (Control) Administration, Gujarat who have certified the product as an ayurvedic formulation. The appellant filed classification list for the year 1994-95 and thereafter declaration for the years 1995-96, 1996-97 classifying the same under sub-heading 30.03 and they were duly approved by the department without any objection. All the ingredients used in the TRICHUP OIL are ayurvedic in nature and are specified in "ARYABHISHAK" wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (1999)(65)ECC205
1. These are three appeals filed by the department against the decision of the Collector (Appeals), Mum-bai who by the impugned Orders had held that the respondent in the appeals are entitled to benefit of Notification No. 204/92, dated 9-5-1992 reversing the findings of the Assistant Collector who in the Orders-in-Original had denied the benefit of the said Notification on the ground that the exported goods were manufactured by availing benefit of Modvat on the exempted materials.2. Facts of the case are the respondents have imported goods described as Hexa Chlorocyclopentadiene and sought clearance for home consumptions. They were transferee of an advance licence issued to M/s Selective Chemicals Ltd. who was a merchant exporter. It is noticed that the export products has been manufactured by their exporting manufacturer by availing benefit in terms of Rule 56A/57A of the Central Excise Rules. However, the said benefit of Modvat was reversed subsequent to the physical shipment of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2000)(117)ELT495Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals are filed by M/s. Mistry Extrusion Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Mahesh J. Mistry against the impugned Order No. 42/MP/1993, dated 6-12-1993 praying for setting aside the same and for such other relief as deemed fit.2. The facts of the case are that the appellants have a factory at GIDC Saregaon Industrial Estate, Bhilad near Vapi in Balsar district in the state of Gujarat in a backward area where the transportation and infrastructure facilities are very poor. They are engaged in the manufacture of aluminium collapsible tubes...76.12 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, a small scale industrial unit and availing general exemption under Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 and holding L-4 Central Excise Licence. On 30-3-1990, the officers of the Central Excise Preventive unit at Vapi visited the factory and conducted search operations and seized the documents, registers, papers and records on 30th and 31st May, 1990. The statutory records for the period ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2000)(117)ELT97Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is the party's appeal against the above captioned impugned order dated 23-7-1998 praying for setting aside the same, with deemed suitable relief.1. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant imported a consignment of Teletherapy unit - Theratron 980C valued at Rs. 45,38,597 (assessable value) and filed Bill of Entry No. 9293/23-8-1989 claiming duty free clearance under Notification No. 64/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988 by furnishing NMIC and CDEC No. NMI/ENGG/389/88/506, dated 23-8-1989 and Z-37011/ 16/88-MG, dated 21-10-1988. The goods were allowed clearance without payment of duty. Department found that the appellant failed to produce installation certificate in terms of para 4(iii) of the notification, and so goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111(o) of Customs Act. Jurisdictional authority was requested to seize the same. It was found by it (jurisdictional authority) that the imported goods was found in the treatment room of the Importer's premises. Under ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2000)(118)ELT618Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an application for stay of collection of duty of Rs. 6,39,272/-. When the application for stay was taken up, it was thought that the appeal itself could be disposed of despite the objection of the DR. We have taken up the appeal itself after waiving the pre-deposit.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of ayurvedic medicaments. One of the products which they manufacture is "mahabhringraj tel". The product, it is claimed by the appellants, is ayurvedic medicine to cure various diseases namely irritation in eyes, sleeplessness, mental depression, etc. The active ingredients used in the product are hirde, beharde, avalkathi, nagar motha, kachara, makayacha pala and bramhicha pala which are know to possess the curing effect for various diseases. It is also claimed by the assessee appellants that the vegetable oil is also used merely as a medium for the active ingredients to reach the sculp to provide the necessary relief. The aforesaid herbs used as active ingredient...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2001)(129)ELT207Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals involve common facts and are therefore being dealt with in this single order.2. M/s. ICPA Health Products Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter called as "the assessees") manufactured "moyzen liquid" claiming classification thereof under heading 3303 and also claiming the benefit of Notification 167/86-C.E. which exempted products falling under certain tariff heading alone from payment of duty when manufactured without the aid of power. Three show cause notices were issued on 27-2-1998, 24-8-1998 and 24-11-1998 covering the period November, 1997 to September, 1998 alleging that the classification warranted was under Heading 3304 and alleging short levy of duty totally amounting to Rs. 2,98,292.15 on that ground. The Assistant Commissioner upheld the allegations, confirmed the duty and imposed penalty of Rs. 30,000/- on the assessees. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the assessees' contention that the goods were toilet water, set aside the lower order and allowed the appeal. A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)(139)ELT366Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant is a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products. Among these are rifampicin, ethambutol, isoniazid and pyrazinamide. Each of these medicaments finds use in the treatment of tuberculosis. All of them, except rifampicin, were exempted by entry 1 of the table to notification 75/94 (September 1994 to September 1999). The entry exempted from duty all formulations based on the list of bulk drugs specified in the first schedule to the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1987 as amended from time to time. These three were listed as bulk, to be used in the National Tuberculosis Eradication Programme, in the first schedule to the Drugs (Prices Control) Order. Rifampicin at the relevant time was partially exempted from duty by notification 30/88.2. Tuberculosis patients derive greater benefit from treatment by combination of the drugs used than from treatment by a single medicine.The Office Memorandum dated 4.7.1995 of the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers of Government of India expl...
Tag this Judgment!