Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat delhi Year: 1993 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.058 seconds)

Oct 06 1993 (TRI)

India Optical and Scientific Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Oct-06-1993

Reported in : (1994)(69)ELT511TriDel

..... would be impossible for the departmental officers to ever verify the correctness of the stocks and accounts and tally them with reference to excise requirements and that is indeed the rationale behind the provisions for record keeping including those relating to maintenance of daily stock accounts.17. in view of the above position, the departmental officers were not justified in demanding .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 1993 (TRI)

Collector of Customs and Central Vs. General Marketing and Mfg. Co.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Dec-21-1993

Reported in : (1994)(52)LC399Tri(Delhi)

1. these are two appeals, one filed by the collector of customs, madras and the second filed by m/s general marketing & mfg. co. these two appeals arise out of the same order and therefore are being disposed of by common order.2. these appeals have been filed by the appellants against the order of the learned collector of customs (appeals). as the imports in this case took place between 1986 and 1991, the learned collector divided the entire issue in two parts; (a) imports prior to 16.8.1988 covered by customs valuation rules, 1963 and (b) imports on or after 16.8.1988 covered by customs valuation (determination of price of imported goods) rules, 1988.3. on the 1st issue namely customs valuation rules. 1963f in his order, the learned collector held that the position regarding the valuation of goods under section 14 of the customs act, 1962 prior to 16th august, 1988 however, would be different since under the pre-amended section 14, there was no legal recognition of the concept of transaction value.after consideration of the case law and other relevant material on record and the various submissions made by the appellant before the learned collector (appeals) he held that "while the method adopted by the assistant collector to arrive at the set percentage of loading is neither rational nor legal in as much as he has sought to determine the percentage of loading on the basis of amount of commission received without taking into account the comparative description and value of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 02 1993 (TRI)

Gora Mal Hari Ram Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Nov-02-1993

Reported in : (1994)LC626Tri(Delhi)

1. this is an appeal filed by m/s. gora mal hari ram ltd., new delhi, against the order-in-appeal no. 134/ce/appeal/dlh/92, dated 30-4-1992, passed by the collector, central excise (appeals), new delhi.2. the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of detergent cakes and detergent/washing powder. the goods were sold by them through their distributors. they were having distributors for delhi region and distributors for outstation. they filed separate price lists for delhi distributors and for outstation distributors. higher prices were declared for delhi distributors and lower prices were declared for outstation distributors. in both the cases the sales were effected at the factory gate, and in both the cases the price lists were filed in part i of the price list proforma. part i of the price list proforma related to the determination of value for goods sold to unrelated buyers in the course of wholesale trade, under the main definition case, in terms of the provisions of section 4(1 )(a) of the central excises and salt act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act').3. it was alleged in the show cause notice that the delhi distributors and the outstation distributors were the same class of buyers, and that the class of buyers did not change merely because they are located in different regions, and that the difference in the prices could not be based upon territorial segregation.4. according to the appellants, different prices were charged by them from their different .....

Tag this Judgment!


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