| CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION
2008-TIOL-623-HC-P-H-CX.pdf + excise story.pdf
CCE Vs Hindustan Polyster Lines (Dated: October 31, 2008 )
Central Excise – Appeal against remand order of the Tribunal – No substantial question of law – The Tribunal having given the assessee an opportunity of cross-examination, on facts of the case, we do not find any ground to hold that such a view was liable to be interfered with in appeal under Section 35- G of the Act, which lies only on substantial questions of law.
Cross examination to be allowed – Though the tax authorities are not bound by technical rules of evidence, principles of natural justice are required to be followed, which require that the assessee is given the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses, if so warranted by the facts.
Commissioner's inaction not appreciated – the impugned order was passed two years ago. No stay was sought or granted. Still, the Commissioner has failed to carry out the direction of the Tribunal, by which the Commissioner was bound, only on pretext that appeal was filed. Such conduct of the Commissioner can hardly be appreciated: PUNJAB AND HARYANAHIGH COURT ; 2008-TIOL-2040-CESTAT-DEL.pdf
M/s Hindustan Ferro & Industries Ltd Vs CCE, Kanpur (Dated: October 21, 2008)
Central Excise - unaccounted receipt of the raw material, corresponding manufacture and clearance of final products - the entire activities appear to have been done with meticulous planning in secrecy - demand of duty and penalty upheld. : DELHI CESTAT;
SERVICE TAX SECTION
2008-TIOL-2039-CESTAT-DEL.pdf
CCE, Meerut Vs M/s Highway Motors (Dated: October 6, 2008)
ST - Tour Operator Service - assessee runs buses as 'contract carriage' - Since Motor Vehicles Act defines tourist vehicles as the one adapted and maintained in accordance with the specification prescribed in the law, and that there is no evidence in this case to that effect, Revenue has no case :DELHI CESTAT; 2008-TIOL-2038-CESTAT-KOL.pdf
M/s Morias Construction Co (P) Ltd Vs CCE & ST, Ranchi (Dated: September 17, 2008) ST - Refund - assessee is into construction business - claims refund of tax mistakenly paid by them - Revenue rejects - assessee argues that they have developed residential complex on their own and for themseleves in pact with the land owners in JV - Held, since the issues involved in the case cannot be made out from the order of the lower authorities, case remanded for passing a speaking order : KOLKATA CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION
2008-TIOL-2037-CESTAT-MAD.pdf
CC, Chennai Vs M/s Universal Ventures (Dated: September 1, 2008)
Customs – classification – musical boxes made of plastic – the design supports the intended use as jewelry boxes – classifiable under 3926.90 - Standard clocks mounted on beautiful casings of wood are not toys as contended – classifiable as other clocks under Ch 9105. : CHENNAI CESTAT; |