Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 123 (1.12 seconds)
Documents citing Navin Chemicals Mfg. And Trading Co. ... vs Collector Of Customs on 15 September, 1993

Commissioner vs Larsen And Toubro Ltd....Opponent(S) on 25 September, 2014

submitted that the present dispute does not relate to the rate of duty or to the value of any services and as such, the preliminary issue raised to the maintainability of the appeals deserves to be rejected. Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Navin Chemicals Mfg. & Trading Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs (supra), and more particularly, paragraph 11 thereof, it was submitted that the question involved should have a direct and proximate relation to the rate of duty or value of goods and that in the present case, no such issue is involved and therefore, the appeals are maintainable.
Gujarat High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - H Devani - Full Document

Commissioner Of Ce And Cgst Bhavnagar vs Krishna Constructions on 27 September, 2023

In coming to the conclusion they relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Navin Chemicals case wherein an observation was made that the case did not have a direct or proximate relation for the purpose of assessment either to the rate of duty applicable to the said goods or to the value thereof. All that the Additional Collector's order did was to confiscate the said goods allowing the assessee option of redeeming them upon payment of a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. That the assessee might avail of the option, pay the fine and clear the said goods. When question as to the rate of duty and value for the purpose of assessment might possibly arise is far too remote a contingency to Page 84 of 89 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 29 20:40:09 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/TAXAP/129/2023 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 27/09/2023 undefined satisfy the test that is laid down. Therefore it was held that the principle laid down in the said case squarely apply to the facts of this case, where question involved as stated earlier, was whether fish includes Molluscs and Crustaceans and as such the Crustaceans would otherwise mean and include Prawns/shrimps and hence Prawns and Shrimps should be regarded as a fish for the purpose of assessment and such meaning should be given to the expression "fish" incorporated as Item No. 7 to the Schedule to the Act.
Gujarat High Court Cites 78 - Cited by 0 - B Vaishnav - Full Document

The Commissioner, Cgst And Central ... vs M/S Ratnamani Metals And Tubes Ltd. on 26 March, 2020

7. The Supreme Court in the case of Navin Chemicals Mfg. & Trading Co. Ltd. vs. Collector of Customs, 1993 (68) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) has held that a dispute as to classification of goods and as to whether or not they are covered by an exemption notification relates directly or proximately to the rate of duty applicable thereto for purposes of assessment. Whether the value of goods for purposes of assessment is required to be increased or decreased is a question which relates directly and proximately to the value of goods for purposes of assessment.
Gujarat High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - H Devani - Full Document

Commissioner, Customs & Central ... vs M/S Eco Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. on 6 July, 2012

In the circumstances, in the light of the decision of the apex court in the case of Navin Chemicals Mfg. & Trading Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs (supra), the classification dispute having a direct nexus to the determination of the rate of duty, the present appeal which relates to a classification dispute would not be maintainable under section 35G of the Act to the High Court."
Allahabad High Court Cites 39 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Ashok Enterprises vs Commissioner Of Customs (Exports) on 25 February, 2016

The Hon'ble High Court clearly discussed the merits of the case and relied apex Court judgements in the case of CC Vs Harichand Sri Gopal (supra) and relied Navin Chemicals Mfg. & Trading Co. Ltd. Vs Collector (supra), Sheshank Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (supra) and also relied Madras High Court's decision in South India Exports Vs JDFT (supra) and held that mere discharge of export obligation per se cannot put an end and customs authorities has right to initiate proceedings against the importer for breach of condition of the exemption notifications. It is clearly established from the facts discussed in preceding paragraphs that the appellants had not utilised the quantity of S.S. coils imported under the DEEC Advance Licences and cleared duty free under the said exemption notification and failed to comply the condition of the notification and the adjudicating authority rightly denied the benefit of exemption notification.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Madhusudan Tantia vs Amit Choraria & Anr on 12 October, 2020

18. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant emphatically projects an argument that the ambit of Section 4 is not confined only to filing of applications u/s 9(1) of the Code, but extends to all matters under part II including the admission of such applications u/s 9(5)(i) is clear from the use of expression 'relating to the Insolvency & Liquidation of Corporate Debtors' and refers to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court 'Renusagar Power Company Ltd.' V. 'General Electric Company' (1984), 4 SCC page 679 (para 25), followed in 'Govind Prasad Sharma' V. 'Doon Valley Officers Cooperative Housing Society Limited' (2018) 11 SC 501 (para 4); 'Thyssen Stahlunion GMBH' V. 'SAIL (1999) 9 SCC 334 (para 23,24); 'Mansukhlal Dhanraj Jain' V. 'Eknath Vithal Ogale (1995) 2 SCC 665; 'Dhanrajmal Gobindram' V. 'Shamji Kalidas & Co.' AIR 1961 SC 1285; 'Navin Chemicals' V. 'Collector of Customs'-(1993) 4 SCC 320.
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Cites 40 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Steel Authority Of India Ltd vs Designated Authority, Directorate ... on 17 April, 2017

18. Two decisions of this Court would require a specific notice at this stage. The first is in the case of Navin Chemicals Mfg. and Trading Co. Ltd. vs. Collector of Customs2, where this Court has 2 22 taken the view that the expression “determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of customs or, value of goods for purposes of assessment” must be read as meaning a direct and proximate relationship to the rate of duty and to the value of goods for purposes of assessment.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - R Gogoi - Full Document

C.Ex.App./3/2020 on 11 August, 2021

9. We are inclined to apply the principles laid down in the above decisions of the Apex Court and other High Courts. The question posed would not fall under Section 35G of the Act but under Section 35L. Whether Education Cess levied and collected under Section 91 of the Finance Act, 2004 can be considered as a duty of excise for the grant of refund in the cases or by way of self credit un der notification dated November 14, 2001, is definitely related to rate of duty of excise for the purpose of assessment. We have, therefore, no hesitation to say that the point raised is directly related to the rate of duty of excise and that being so, the only remedy open to the Commissioner is to move the Supreme Court and this Court cannot entertain these applications under Section 35G of the Act, since appeal shall lie to the. High Court only against those orders not being orders related to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment.
Gauhati High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - S Dhulia - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next