Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: standards of weights and measures act 1976 section 54 penalty for contravention of section 29 Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat mumbai Page 1 of about 1 results (0.099 seconds)

Kraftech Products Inc. Vs. C.C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(173)ELT508Tri(Mum.)bai

..... 10ml. therefore, the appellants' multi-piece packages having only 9gms in the multi pack under consideration is clearly exempt from the requirement of declaration of mrp under standard weight and measures act. in other words, it is not legally obligatory declare mrp of such packages.5. the first proviso to rule 34(b) provides that the ..... provisions of section 4a of the central excise act will not be applicable for ....... of assessment of duty on such packages. rule 34b of the rules under standard and weight and measures act is very clear and unambiguous. the sub-rule (b) thereof, provides that the provisions of the packaged commodities rules will not be applicable ..... .11.1999 which in para 2 and 3 provides as under. the matter has been examined. multi-piece package has been defined under rule 2 of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 as follows: "multi-piece package" means a package containing two or more individual packaged or labelled pieces of the .....

Cce Vs. Urisan Cosmetics Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... the appellants multi-piece packages having only 9 gms in the multi pack under consideration is clearly exempt from the requirement of declaration of mrp under the standard weights and measures act. in other words, it is not legally obligatory to declare mrp of such packages".cce, daman v. kraftech products inc.dealt with ..... law for the time being in force to declare on the package thereof the maximum retail sale price of such packaged goods.the standards of weights & measures act, 1976 and the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 require the marking of the retail price, batch number etc as prescribed for various commodities. ..... pieces contained in such multi-piece package (if such individual pieces are capable of being sold separately) is statutorily required under rule 17(1) of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977. (ii) that in respect of multi-piece packages of a commodity intended for retail sale and which are notified .....

Mehernosh Randeria Vs. Commissioner of Cus. (Acc),

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... single pieces in polythene bag for the purpose of transport and were not in a packaged condition. the question of plugs and sockets therefore being covered by the standard of weights and measures act does not arise as they were not in a packaged condition. the package containing single piece of mccbs was affixed with a label stating, ..... the packaged commodities rules and therefore no mrp was required to be declared. it was also submitted that if the goods are packaged in single pieces, provision of standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 do not apply as has been held by the kerala high court in the case of peico electronics & electricals ltd. v ..... and the other mccbs were packed in single piece carrying a declaration as required under rule 34 of the packages rules and were therefore not covered under the standard of weight and measures act as per decision of the keral and andhra pradesh high. court cited by the appellants and the provision of rule 34. there is no .....

Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur Vs. B.G. Constructions

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... has a strong bearing on the issue under consideration. accordingly, the different conditions for "wholesale package" laid down under clause (x) of rule 2 of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodity) rules, 1977 have to be independently considered and not in conjunction as claimed by the revenue. considering the clarification given in the above ..... refer to your letter no. 900 fl 0383 dated 14.8.2003 and to state that the sub clauses under clause (x) of rule 2 of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 relating to the definition of "wholesale package" are to be read independently and not in conjunction." the learned consultant ..... central excise act. they held that the goods in question in the form it was cleared by the respondent was exempt under rule 34(b) of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodity) rules, 1977 from the requirement of declaration of mrp and thereby from the application of section 4a of the act. according to .....

Swan Sweets Pvt. Ltd., Makson Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... individual pieces are cleared in whole packs of jar, boxes or pouches, as per the definition of wholesale package (commodity) vide rule 2(x) of the standards weights and measures (package commodities) rules, 1977 and the package being cleared not being covered as a multi piece package under rule 2(j) of the mrp rules ..... submit that the impugned packages in the form of 'pouches' and 'jars' are in fact 'wholesale packages' coming within the meaning of rule 29 of the standards of weights and measures (packager commodities) rule, 1977. the appellants further submit that the issue of goods sold in wholesale packs, sold to retailers and the applicability of ..... an ongoing dispute between the appellants and the department about the valuation of the confectionary. according to the appellants, there is no statutory requirement under the standards of weights and measures act, 1976 and the rules made thereunder, to declare the mrp on the wholesale package. it was also the contention of the appellants that .....

Rallis India Limited Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)(116)ECC447

..... submitted that the subject provisions apply only if the packages are intended for retail sale. the retail sale has further been defined under rule 2(q) of standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 as "retail sale", in relation to a commodity, means the sale, distribution or delivery of such commodity through retail ..... were not intended for sale but for free distribution by m/s. mahyco monsanto biotech (india) pvt. ltd. they were not covered by the provisions of standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1977 and were under no obligation to declare maximum retail price and therefore the provisions of section 4a in respect of the ..... and against the appellants accept this principle that the goods should be one in respect of which there is a statutory requirement under the provisions of standards of weights and measures act to declare the retail sale price on the packages. however, while one set of decisions hold that once the goods are specified .....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Urison Cosmetics Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2006)(108)ECC175

..... price.- (1) the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, specify any goods, in relation to which it is required, under the provisions of the standards of weights and measures act, 1976 (60 of 1976) or the rules made thereunder or under any other law for the time being in force, to declare on the package ..... this section. (ii) in relation to such goods there must be a legal requirement to declare the retail sale price on the package under the provisions of the standards of weights and measures act, 1976 (swma) or rules made thereunder or under any other law.5. it is not in dispute that the impugned goods have been specified ..... the retail sale price on the package of the impugned goods. the respondents claim that the impugned goods being less than 10 gms by weight are exempted from such requirement under rule 34 of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodity rules, 1977 (swmr) which reads as under: (1) nothing contained in these rules shall apply to any .....

Commissioner Of Central Excise Vs. L'Oreal India Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(167)ELT417Tri(Mum.)bai

..... 2. learned counsel for the respondents, who opposed the above arguments, submitted that the question whether relabelling of imported goods in terms of rule 33 of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodity) rules 1977, was no longer res integra, as this question was settled by the supreme court in favour of the assessee in ..... the lower appellate authority examined the scope of chapter note 4 of chapter 33 of the central excise tariff schedule as also the relevant provisions of the standards of weights and measures act, 1976 and held that pasting of statutory stickers by the respondents on the unit containers of cosmetics ready for sale was not a ..... cosmetics in fully packed form and had cleared the same for home consumption after pasting stickers to the containers, in terms of rule 33(4) of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodity) rules, 1977, during the period of dispute. they had not paid duty on such clearances, claiming that the activity of relabelling .....

L'Oreal India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... cosmetics in fully packed form and had cleared the same for home consumption after pasting stickers to the containers, in terms of rule 33(4) of the standards of weights & measures (packed commodity) rules, 1977, during the period of dispute. they had not paid duty on such clearances, claiming that the activity of relabelling ..... the lower appellate authority examined the scope of chapter note 4 of chapter 33 of the central excise tariff schedule as also the relevant provisions of the standards of weights & measures act, 1976 and held that pasting of statutory stickers by the respondents on the unit containers of cosmetics ready for sale was not a process ..... learned counsel for the respondents, who opposed the above arguments, submitted that the question whether relabelling of imported goods in terms of section 33 of the standards of weights and measures (packed commodity) act 1977, was not longer res inegra, as this question was settled by the supreme court in favour of the assessee in .....

Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Vs. Mistair Health and Hygiene ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... from the apex courts judgement in jayanti foods processing case. in that case, the counsel for the assessee had relied on rule 34 (a) of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules and pointed out that the goods in question was completely covered under the said rule inasmuch as the package specifically declared that it ..... out and, therefore, the goods were cleared without display of mrp thereon. on this basis, it is submitted that, by virtue of rule 34 (a) of the standards of weights and measures (packaged commodities) rules, 1997, the subject goods was exempt from the requirement of any mrp having to be affixed on the package and, consequently, it fell ..... the commissioner (appeals) held that section 4a was applicable only where the goods were printed with mrp and sold as such as per the requirements of the standards of weights and measures act and the rules made thereunder. it was also noted that the board had clarified in a circular dated 11/08/97 that, even where .....