Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.31 seconds)
Documents citing Sri Ram Automotive Alloy Castings Pvt. ... vs C.C.E. on 5 March, 2001

Analog & Digital Systems vs Commissioner Of C. Ex., Bangalore on 5 February, 2002

In support of his contention he referred to the decision of the M.P. High Court in the case of Vilayat Hussain v. U.O.I, reported in 1997 (95) E.L.T. 19 and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pioneer Alloy Castings Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad, 1997 (95) E.L.T. 72 and Amal Products Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara, 2002 (139) E.L.T. 230 (T).
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 21 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Kaveri Alloy Castings P. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 5 January, 2004

In Raj Ratan Castings v. CCE, 1999 (105) ELT 709 (T) the Tribunal held that "We are of the view that one more opportunity is required to be given to the assesses in all these cases and assessement is required to be done as envisaged under Sub-section (4) to Section 3A. Sub-Section (4) to Section 3A requires that actual production for the relevant period shall also be taken into consideration in determining duty payable. This sub-section also requires that on representation, an opportunity being heard in person shall be granted before finally determining the capacity and duty payable by the assessee".
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Chennai Rerollers vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 29 May, 2001

2. Appearing on behalf of the Appellants, the Ld. Counsel submits that the Appellants had informed the Assistant Commissioner vide their letter dt. 27.8.98 since they were unable to run the industry because of recession and various other factors, they closed their industry; that the Appellants have paid monthly Rs. 12,063/- towards excise duty per month till August 1998 without any default; that they had informed the TNEB about the closure of their unit with effect from 31.7.98 and they have been paying monthly duty amount of Rs. 12,603/- from the month of September, 98 onwards. This letter dt. 27.8.98 was also enclosed. The Ld. Counsel has also pointed out that the demand has been issued for the period covering even four days after the date of issue of show cause notice which is not sustainable. The Ld. Counsel has also relied on the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Panem Castings Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE., reported in 2000 (126) ELT 636 (T) wherein the delay of sending the notice of closure of a factory was condoned. The factory was closed on 31.7.98 and they have had given intimation on 29.8.98. In view of the above submissions the Ld. Counsel has prayed that the delay be condoned and the matter be allowed abatement of duty for the period when the unit was closed.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1