Shri. Kumar is not
admissible as an evidence in terms of Section 36B of the Central
Excise Act, 1944, and relied on case laws ... United Metal & Steels (P) Ltd v CCE & Cus, 2003 (161) ELT
585 (Tri-Kolkata), Kamar Ali & Sons
Rathi Vs Commissioner of
Customs & Central Excise, Kanpur [2013 (291) ELT 161 (All.)
24
Customs Appeal No.40004 of 2024
referred to paragraph ... made before
the customs officer is not a statement recorded under
Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. It is
material piece of evidence
reason that demand itself is not sustainable,
penalties under various sections are not imposable. He relies on the
following cases:
M/s Vandana Global ... Delhi , (2024) 24 Centax 144
(Tri.-Chan.)
Punjab Chemicals & Crop Protection Ltd. vs.
C.C.E., Chandigarh
M/S Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited vs Cce, Chandigarh on 2 February, 2010
CUSTOMS EXCISE &
M/S Jetlite (India) Limited vs C.C.E., New Delhi on 18 November, 2010
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Central Excise on 7 December, 2009
IN
complaint against the builder as a service provider, under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 . The Supreme Court referred to its earlier decision in New Horizons
goods imported without a licence in contravention of the order passed under Section 3 of the Import and Export Act that fraud or misrepresentation only ... goods were not liable to be confiscated on that basis under Section 111(d) of the Act.
6. The ld. Advocate further relies
registered the above mentioned product as insecticide with the Directorate of Plant Protection, Ministry of Agriculture, Faridabad and that they have been regularly following ... which is registered as insecticide with Directorate of Plant Protection Quarantine and Storage and having Registration No.CIR-136/2002 (210)-Triacontanol (EW-135). Triacontanol
have been made by two sections of the
Companies Act, 1948 , by judicial disregard of the
principle where the protection of public interests
