Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Sorted by: recent Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat mumbai Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 5 results (0.047 seconds)

Apr 05 1999 (TRI)

Essar Oil Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-05-1999

Reported in : (2000)(117)ELT148Tri(Mum.)bai

..... the articles/equipments damaged were repaired and sent back on the rigs. the scrap and old/disposed of items value would be 10% of the total value. there was no rationale or basis for the valuation done by the officer of ongc, as it is made out as if it is new articles, as per the cross examination of the said .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 1999 (TRI)

Voltas Limited Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-24-1999

Reported in : (1999)(83)LC798Tri(Mum.)bai

..... instance and it cannot be read to mean 'effective rate of duty' as prevalent at the time of clearance of inputs for home consumption. the majority judgment had explained the rationale of rule 57f(1)(ii) and had observed that the said rule by placing a burden on the user to make the payment of duty a legal fiction has been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 28 1999 (TRI)

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Kirloskar Brothers Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-28-1999

Reported in : (2000)(115)ELT386Tri(Mum.)bai

1. the respondent had filed a price list in part i for the compressors manufactured by it. it also filed price list in part ii for the same kind of compressors showing the price lower by assessable value rs. 150 per compressor than in the part i price list for sales to bulk buyers.notice was issued proposing disallowance of the lower price on the ground that the bulk buyers did not constitute a different class of buyer and cannot be distinguished from other wholesale buyers, there cannot be more than one price for the same class of buyer. the notice was alleged that the claim for lower price, that the bulk buyers purchased a substantial quantity had not been justified. the asstt.collector declined to accept the assessee's contention that the price was on account of the fact that the bulk buyers constituted a different class because of the quantity of compressors that they purchased, and higher purchases in the past than other buyers. he confirmed the proposal in the notice.2. on appeal on the order the collector (appeals) accepted the contention of the assessee that the bulk buyers were a different class and that the lower price was permissible. hence this appeal.3. the departmental representative explains the reasoning in the appeal. this is that the normal price applicable to wholesale dealer should be made applicable to this bulk buyers and that the collector (appeals)'s conclusion that there can be more than one class of dealers is erroneous.4. the advocate for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 1999 (TRI)

Flat Products Equipments (i) Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-18-1999

Reported in : (2000)LC609Tri(Mum.)bai

1. the appellant manufactures metal rolling mills and "galvanising lines". rolling mills were, at the relevant time, classifiable under heading 8455.00 of the central excise tariff, and galvanising lines under heading 8479.00. relevant entries are reproduced below :-8455.10 all goods other than parts 10%8455.90 parts 15%84.79 machines and mechanical appliances having in- dividual functions, not specified or included8479.10 all goods other than parts 10%8479.90 parts 15% upto 15th march, 1995 the rate of duty applicable to sub-heading 10 and sub-heading 90 in each of the heading was the same -10%. with effect from that date, parts, classifiable under sub-heading 90 became liable to a higher rate of duty. subsequent to this date, the appellant cleared rolling mills and galvanising lines under sub-heading 10 at the lower rate of duty. notices were issued on the basis that what was cleared was parts liable to duty @ 15% and demanding their duty.appellant took the stand that what it contracted to supply was a complete rolling mills and galvanising lines and not a part and it was only as a result of requirement of the transport and installation having regard to the heavy weight and complex nature of the machinery that these were separately cleared. the commissioner however was not persuaded by these and he said that for the goods to be cleared under sub-heading 10 they must consist of the complete machine at the time of clearance which was not the case and held the goods to be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1999 (TRI)

Metro Steel Impex Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.)

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-03-1999

Reported in : (2000)LC460Tri(Mum.)bai

1. the appellants imported stainless steel sheets/plates and filed bill of entry stating them as 'second choice'. the invoice also described the goods in similar terms. the contract described goods as follows : 2. these goods after examination were cleared on payment of duty on 23-10-1996. these were stored in a godown from where they were seized on 27-3-1997 in the belief that the goods were of prime quality. in permitting clearance of the goods as second choice, the shed appraiser had found goods to be of second choice. the goods subsequent to seizure were re-examined by the expert customs appraiser. he observed that no surface defects or rolling defects were noticed on the plates which appeared to be of prime quality but advised on physical chemical/mechanical tests. subsequent examination by m/s. sail indicate that on examination of mechanical chemistry and other proprieties, the materials were of prime quality. the appeal papers contain mechanical composition, which is accepted by the appellants as related to the present case. another certificate shows "retest of the sample received from mumbai". the results do not describe the goods at all. it appears that samples from more than one consignment under seizure were sent for in the retest. the thickness is shown to be between 1.39 to 1.40 mm.shri v.m. doiphode states that the thickness of the contested plates was between 6.00 mm to 6.5 mm and therefore this result does not relate to the goods imported by the present .....

Tag this Judgment!


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