CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
G.P. Agarwal, N.K. Bajpai, JJ.
Creative Cosmetics -Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise -Respondent
Final Order No. 222/92-C Appeal No. E/11582/85-C, 222 of 1992, E/11582 of 1985
Decided On : 22-07-1992
N.K. Bajpai, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal against the orders of the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara demanding duty of excise under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 on 564.5 dozen lipsticks valued at Rs. 54,192/- removed without payment of duty by the appellants during the period from 1-4-83 to 4-5-83 and imposing penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on them under Rule 173 Q(l) of the Central Excise Rules.
2. Briefly stated, the facts are that during a visit to the appellants' premises on 13-8-1983, the Preventive Officers of Vadodara Central Excise Collectorate Headquarters noticed that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Lipsticks falling under Item 14F of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. They were also manufacturing D-O-Dur Air Freshener falling under Item 68 on job work basis on behalf of M/s. Shingar Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd., Vapi. It came to light that M/s. Topiwala Trust were the proprietors of the appellants as well as of M/s. Ideal Cosmetics Corporation which was also situated in GIDC, Vapi near the Gunjan Cinema. The lipsticks as well as Air Fresheners manufactured in the factory of the appellants were sold through a distributor -M/s. Sharp Distributors. It was also found that M/s. Topiwala Trust were getting nail polishes falling under Tariff Item 68 manufactured on loan licence basis in M/s. Shingar Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. and selling them through the same distributors but the invoices were raised in the name of M/s. Ideal Cosmetics Corporation.
3. It is necessary to discuss the Notifications applicable in some detail. Notification 38/83-C.E., dated 1-3-1983 which came into force with effect from 1-4-1983 initially exempted first clearances of cosmetics and toilet preparations falling under Item 14F (hereinafter referred to as the said goods) for home consumption by or on behalf of a manufacturer from one or more factories upto an aggregate value not exceeding Rs. 2.5 lakhs cleared on or after the 1st day of April in any financial year from the whole of the duty of excise. This exemption was subject to the following conditions :-
(a) the aggregate value of the first clearances of the said goods from any factory by or on behalf of one or more manufacturers at nil rate under this notification shall not exceed Rs. 2.5/- lakhs in any financial year.
(b) the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods for home consumption .
(i) by or on behalf of a manufacturer, from one or more factories, or
(ii) from any factory, by or on behalf of one or more manufacturers shall not exceed Rs. 2.5/- lakhs during the preceding financial year.
(c) Where a manufacturer has not cleared the said goods in the preceding financial year, or has cleared the said goods for the first time on or after the 1st day of August in the preceding financial year, the exemption contained in this notification shall be applicable to such manufacturer,
(i) if he files a declaration with the Assistant Collector of Central Excise that the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods by him or on his behalf, for home consumption, from one or more factories, during the financial year is not likely to exceed rupees two and a half lakhs, and
(ii) if the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods by him or on his behalf, for home consumption, from one or more factories, during the financial year does not exceed rupees two and a half lakhs.
(d) Where the said goods have not been cleared from any factory in the preceding financial year, or have been cleared for the first time on or after the 1st day of August in the preceding financial year, the exemption contained in this notification shall not be applicable if the aggregate value of clearances of all excisable goods from such factory by or on behalf of one or more manufacturers, for home consumption, during the financial year exceeds rupees two and a half lakhs.
4. On 1st March 1983 itself Government issued another Notification No. 39/83-CE by
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.