Vimla R. Shah Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Vimla R. Shah vs Commissioner of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Dec 09, 2003

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/33362

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/33362
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T Gowri, K Kumar
Decided On: Dec 09, 2003
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vimla R. Shah

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs

Legal References

Reported In: (2004)(164)ELT213Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the application is for waiver of deposit of duty of rs. 7,70,988/- demanded from gazebo of which the late husband of the applicant was the sole proprietor.2. the duty has been demanded on the ground that the benefit of exemption contained in 11/97 would not be available to nylon tricot flocking imported by the appellant for the reason that it was not intended for use in the leather industry. in its common order passed in 2003 on stay application of mahavir and gazebo, the tribunal had waived deposit on the ground that the issue was covered by the decision of madan enterprises v. cc, 2001 (134) e.l.t. 763. the present stay application has been filed only because the appeal of gazebo was dismissed on it being known that the proprietor had expired.subsequently, his widow, the heir of the importer has come on record.3. in this situation, we waive deposit of the duty and stay its recovery.

Full Judgment

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 7,70,988/- demanded from Gazebo of which the late husband of the applicant was the sole proprietor.

2. The duty has been demanded on the ground that the benefit of exemption contained in 11/97 would not be available to nylon tricot flocking imported by the appellant for the reason that it was not intended for use in the leather industry. In its common order passed in 2003 on stay application of Mahavir and Gazebo, the Tribunal had waived deposit on the ground that the issue was covered by the decision of Madan Enterprises v. CC, 2001 (134) E.L.T. 763. The present stay application has been filed only because the appeal of Gazebo was dismissed on it being known that the proprietor had expired.

Subsequently, his widow, the heir of the importer has come on record.

3. In this situation, we waive deposit of the duty and stay its recovery.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Vimla R. Shah vs Commissioner of Customs Same Subject MRTP Same Judge S T Gowri, K Kumar