Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.53 seconds)

Commissioner Of Central Excise vs Pratap Singh on 5 August, 2002

"However, so far as the basic arguments of the appellants is concerned that the provisions of the Central Excise Act would not apply for the purpose of levy of duty, I am entirely in agreement with the said submissions, which are based upon the ratio of the case law referred to above. In the present case also the department's finding is that the appellants had clandestinely cleared the goods to the DTA even though they had not been allowed to sell the same in India by the competent authority, namely, the Development Commissioner. Consequently, duty demand under Section 3(1) proviso to (ii) (ibid) cannot be invoked and duty etc. can only be realised in terms of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 as laid down in the aforesaid decisions. Hence, the duty demand is set aside.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 22 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Cce vs Pratap Singh And Kamachi Granites (P) ... on 5 August, 2002

However, so far as the basic arguments of the appellants is concerned that the provisions of the Central Excise Act would not apply for the purpose of levy of duty, I am entirely in agreement with the said submissions, which are based upon the ratio of the case law referred to above. In the present case also the department's finding is that the appellants had clandestinely cleared the goods to the DTA even though they had not been allowed to sell the same in India by the competent authority, namely, the Development Commissioner. Consequently, duty demand under Section 3(1) proviso to (ii) (ibid) cannot be invoked and duty etc. can only be realized in terms of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 as laid down in the aforesaid decisions. Hence, the duty demand is set aside.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 23 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1