Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: customs act 1962 Year: 1983 Page 9 of about 2,264 results (0.511 seconds)

Mar 15 1983 (TRI)

Art Work Exports Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

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

Decided on : Mar-15-1983

Reported in : (1983)LC623DTri(Chennai)

..... drawback), air complex, madras, rejecting their claim for payments of drawback on the export of syncot readymade; garments. by virtue of section 131-b of the customs act, 1962, this has been transferred to the tribunal to be heard as an appeal.4. the claim for payment of drawback on garments exported under shipping bill no. ..... 1. appeal under section 129 of the customs act, 1962 praying that in the circumstances stated therein the tribunal will be pleased to order duty drawback on the export of syncot garments.2. this appeal coming ..... has been allowed in respect of shipments made in 3une, 1979 under shipping bill nos. 2884, 2885, 2869, 2870, 2871 and 2875 for similar articles and by the same custom house. serial no.2730, inter alia, reads :- "all types of readymade garments made from textile fabrics but excluding garments made partially or wholly from... cotton... powerloom fabrics ...". ..... us that in terms of public notice no.80 of 79, dated 13-11-1979 such garments would be entitled to payment of drawback. this public notice amends the customs and central excise (duty drawback) rules, 1971 with effect, from 13-11-1979; they cannot have effect in respect of a shipment made in 3une, 1978. the ..... 519, dated 7-6-1978 was rejected by the assistant collector of customs, air drawback, madras, as he found that they were made out of powerloom fabrics of cotton and viscose, and serial no..2730 of the schedule to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1983 (TRI)

Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Mar-30-1983

Reported in : (1983)LC570DTri(Delhi)

..... finality attaches to assessment orders. mistakes are likely to be committed both by the assessee as well as by the assessing officers. it is for this reason that the customs act, 1962 itself creates a complete machinery for rectification of such mistakes through the process of claims for refund by the assessee under section 27 and demands of duty short-levied by ..... -register their contract. no doubt, the collector had, while according registration, ordered simultaneously that the goods imported by the appellants should be assessed provisionally under section 18 of the customs act, 1962 and subject to their executing a bond for the full differential duty involved between the heading 84.56 and 84.66 but, the appellants asserted, this provisional assessment could only ..... in this appeal is whether machinery and components etc. imported by the appellants for modernisation of their cement plant were entitled to be assessed under heading 84.66 of the customs tariff act, 1975 or not. in order to facilitate a proper understanding of the matter, we reproduce the text of heading 84.66 in the annexure to this order.2. ..... the appellants' cause. (3) the appellants indulged in a very clever device. they made no clear declaration in the body of their application for registration to the collector of customs and central excise, ahmedabad that the contract was for modernisation and replacement. they left the relevant column of the application, which was very material and vital with reference to regulation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 1983 (TRI)

Motor Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-19-1983

Reported in : (1983)LC1729DTri(Delhi)

..... the appellate collector that the appellants filed revision applications before the central government which have been transferred to this tribunal, under the provisions of section 131-b of the customs act, 1962 for disposal as if they were appeals presented before it.3. in the revision applications (hereinafter referred to as appeals), the appellants have reiterated their contentions before the ..... had been originally filed before the central government as revision applications as those have come on transfer to this tribunal, under the provisions of section 131-b of the customs act, 1962 for disposal as if they were appeals presented before it.2. the goods in relation to which the dispute in the present appeals has arisen are two consignments of ..... countervailing-customs duty). after clearance of the goods on payment of the duty so assessed, the appellants filed ..... "diamonds impregnated grinding wires". the customs authorities at madras assessed them to duty under heading no. 68.01/16(1) of the first schedule to the customs tariff act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the customs tariff schedule at 100% ad valorem (basic customs duty) plus 20% ad valorem (auxiliary duty) plus 15% (additional- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1983 (TRI)

The Food Corporation of India Vs. Collector of Customs and Central

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

Decided on : Apr-20-1983

Reported in : (1983)LC904DTri(Chennai)

..... the government of india in december, 1980: it has been transferred to the tribunal to be heard as an appeal in terms of section 131b of the customs act, 1962.5. before us, the learned counsel for the appellants stresses the responsibility of the traffic manager, new mangalore port under rule 82(1) of the new mangalore ..... the ground that the major port trusts act has not been made applicable to the said new mangalore port. this fact was brought to the notice of the board as early ..... of customs and central excise, bangalore, (having supervisory control over the new mangalore port) to the central board of excise and customs, wherein he has pointedly brought to the notice of the board the fact that "the mangalore port trust authorities were refusing to be custodians of imported goods under section 43(1) of the customs act, 1962 on ..... 1. appeal under section 129 of the customs act, 1962, praying that in the circumstances stated therein, the tribunal will be pleased to order refund of duty paid on goods short landed.2. this ..... found that at the relevant time the port authorities were not custodians of goods. when the matter was agitated in an appeal with the appellate collector of customs, madras, he found that the port authorities did not in fact accept any responsibility as custodians of goods; at the relevant time, the practice at the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 16 1983 (TRI)

Mackinnon Forwarding Service Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Decided on : May-16-1983

Reported in : (1983)LC1411DTri(Kol.)kata

..... was admissible and it should have been granted to them. shri chatterjee, on the other hand, contended that the onus under section 13 of the customs act, 1962 was on the appellants and no investigation by the department was called for. since they had failed to produce any proof that 11 bundles were actually ..... per s.s.miyatsura maru, the appellants paid duty of customs under bill of entry no. di 626 dated 16-5-1973. only 24 bundles were ..... /1976 dated 10-5-1976 passed by the appellate collector of customs, calcutta, which has been transferred to the appellate tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal, in terms of the provisions of section 131 b(2) of the customs act, 1962.2. on a consignment of 31 bundles mild steel angles imported ..... for refund had been rightly rejected.5. the tribunal observes that under section 45 the responsibility for custody of imported goods and their removal from the customs area, vests in the port trust. the appellants had been repeatedly contending that h out of 24 bundles on which duty was paid had not ..... issued a short-landing certificate for 7 bundles, the duty on which was refunded, on a claim made by the appellants to the assistant collector of customs. out of the 24 bundles, 11 bundles were reportedly pilferred and a claim was raised with the assistant collector for refund of the countervailing duty paid .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 1983 (TRI)

Shri Rajabali HussaIn Merchant Vs. Gold Control Administrator

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-27-1983

Reported in : (1983)LC1201DTri(Mum.)bai

..... a declaration as to the gold in his possession. shri shah has further submitted that panchanama etc, were under the gold control act and not under the customs act, 1962. in the review proceedings, govt. of india had considered the appellant's plea that the appellant collector had not referred to section ..... that the gold was liable to confiscation under the relevant provisions of gold (control) act, 1968 and customs act, 1962. statements of s/shri r.h. merchant and dinkerrai r. dhorne were recorded under section 108 of the customs act 1962 on the 25th day of october, 1977. a show cause notice no. xvi1/8 ..... the supreme court laying down the broad principles as to the proportion of punishment. the hon.supreme court has held that every contravention of the customs act or the gold control rules cannot, without more, be assumed to be fraught with consequences of national dimensions. the broad principle that punishment ..... law journal 885 : 1975 cen-cus 87(d). in the said judgment the hon. supreme court had held that "every contravention of the customs act or the gold control rules cannot, without more, be assumed to be fraught with consequences of national dimensions. the broad principle that punishment must be ..... he has further submitted that the appellant was in jail for 9 days. he has also submitted that simultaneously there were proceedings under the customs act. the said proceedings were dropped by revenue vide order no.viii/0-3/dg/78 dated the 7th july, 1980 which appears at pages .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1983 (TRI)

K.S. Diesels Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Jul-29-1983

Reported in : (1983)LC1383DTri(Delhi)

..... goods by instalment. he, therefore, passed the following order :- "i, therefore, order that the demand notice already issued in terms of section 72 of the customs act, 1962 be enforced." it is to be noted that the date of .this order is shown as 24-9-82.against the entry "date of issue" no ..... 172/83 b204/ 3-5-76 3. in this case the appellants had warehoused three consignments of machinery parts after executing bonds under section 59 of the customs act, 1962. in respect of one consignment, under bond no. b204/3-5-76, the warehousing period was shown as three years. in respect of the other ..... again, the order ends by saying "i, therefore, order that the demand notice already issued in terms of section 72 of the customs act, 1962, be enforced". this is clearly an order or decision of the collector relating to the exercise of a statutory power under section 72 of the ..... tribunal against the collector's order dated 24-9-82. shri gagrat fairly admitted that, in view of the recent amendments to section 61, customs act, through the finance act, 1983, the maximum period for which non-consumable stores could ordinarily remain warehoused was only one year, which could be extended by the collector ..... 72 was to be by the "proper officer", who was normally the assistant collector, shri gagrat pointed out that under section 5(2) of the customs act, the collector could exercise the powers of an officer subordinate to him. shri gagrat further submitted that in the collector's order there was a reference .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 1983 (TRI)

Sawant Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Sep-05-1983

Reported in : (1983)(14)ELT2030TriDel

..... law and it was, therefore, incumbent on the claimant to comply with the time-limit of 6 months stipulated in section 27(l)(b) of the customs act, 1962. the question of the assessment being without the authority of law as argued by shri mehta, does not, therefore, arise. i fully concur with brother ..... case of the appellants.3. sh. kunhikrishnan. departmental representative on behalf of the respondent defended the order passed by the customs authorities.4. under clause (a) of section 27(1) of the customs act, 1962, a claim for refund is to be made before the expiry of one year in case of any import made ..... appellate collector of customs, bombay by his order dated 26-9-1981, hence the present appeal.2. at hearing of the appeal, sh. ..... on 21-5-1981. the assistant collector of customs, air cargo complex, bombay airport, sahar bombay by his order dated 10-6-1981 rejected the application on the ground that it was barred by limitation of 6 months stipulated under section 27 of the customs act* 1962. the order was upheld in appeal by the ..... 16-12-1976 gsr 926(e) was in force under which nickel powders and flakes falling within chapter 75 of the first schedule to the customs tariff act, 1975 when imported into india were exempt from payment of duty as was in excess of 40% ad valorem. it appears that the appellants and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 1983 (TRI)

Kallatra MahIn and ors. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

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

Decided on : Nov-29-1983

Reported in : (1984)(16)ELT622Tri(Chennai)

..... 1. appeals under section 129 a of the customs act, 1962 praying that in the circumstances stated therein, the tribunal will be pleased to set aside the order of the central board of excise and custom-, dated 27-3-1980 in no. 753-758 of 1980.2. these appeals coming up for orders upon perusing the records and upon hearing the arguments of shri m ..... .c.) (amba lal v. union of india and ors.) is not at all relevant to the facts and circumstances of this case. this ruling arises under the provisions of sea customs act, 1878 while supreme court was considering the scope of sections 168, 171 a, 178a, 19, 167(8) and 5. the supreme court observed that if the burden of proof is ..... . 500/~ is a circumstance that militates against the department's version and would attract an adverse inference against the department under section 114(g) of the evidence act. (4) section 123 of the customs act is not applicable to appellant kallatra mahin in the circumstances of the case and the finding of the adjudicating authority that kallatra mahin is the owner of the ..... contravention of law.'' 20. the madras high court in the judgment reported in 1978 tax. l.r.1735 (r.s. kalyanasundaram v. collector of customs, madras) has held that departmental proceedings under section 112 of the customs act could not be said to be vitiated merely because they were based on consideration of the confession of the co-accused especially when such confession .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 28 1983 (TRI)

Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Decided on : Dec-28-1983

Reported in : (1984)(16)ELT654Tri(Kol.)kata

..... description on the invoice fully explains the case of the appellant that it is a spare and this description, has been accepted by the revenue under secsion 46 of the customs act, 1962. he has submitted that the appellant's appeal should be accepted.6. after hearing both the sides and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case i find ..... assistant collector had held that the importation of the goods was without a proper licence, and is prohibited under section 11 l(d) of the customs act, 1962 read with section 3(2) of the import and export control act, 1947 of the government of india, ministry of commerce and industry order no. 17/65, dated 7-12-1965. the goods were confiscated under ..... section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962 and a fine of rs. 3300/- was imposed. being aggrieved from the order passed by the learned assistant collector of customs, air cargo complex (import), calcutta, the appelant had filed an appeal before the collector (appeals), calcutta. the collector (appeals) had .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //