Mumbai Court December 1997 Judgments

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Choksi Tube Company Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT618Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad against the impugned order captioned above. The issue is whether the goods viz. glass powder and glass slurry are inputs used in the manufacture of seam-less tubes or not.2. The ld. DR Shri D. Gurnani referred to the grounds of appeal and contended that the glass powder and glass slurry are not inputs because they were acting as lubricants in the production of seamless tube and these goods are in the nature of equipment rather than material used in or in relation to manufacture of the final product.3. None is present for the respondents, who have furnished written submissions to say that it has been their consistent stand that without the glass powder and glass slurry, SS tubes would not be manufactured as they could not be detached from the mould and this fact has not been denied by the revenue.4. We have carefully considered the submissions. We find that the function of the glass powder and glass slurry is n...

Ashik Textiles (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT376Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appeal is against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad demanding duty of Rs. 44,161.57 and imposing a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on the appellant. Collector has also confiscated yarn valued at Rs. 84,872.75 and ordered it to be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 10,000/-.3. The demand for duty has been made on two counts. The first count relates to a quantity of blended yarn of wool and viscose sold to a buyer at Amritsar. Subsequent to the commencement of the investigations relating to the appellant, this quantity was located at Amritsar and seized and tested for composition. The test showed it to contain 49.4% (sic) condu wool of 49.4% (sic) and the balance of man-made fibre of cellulosic origin. The price has been made up of viscose. The Collector concluded that since the predominent yarn was viscose it should be classifiable as viscose yarn eligible to duty and not as woollen yarn exempted from duty. This was also the base for confiscation. Advocate for th...

Mayo (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(98)ELT630Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants in this case filed a classification list No. 6/95-96 with effect from 24-4-1995 for their product honeypro granules classifying them under Chapter Heading No. 3003.10 with 15% duty as medicament. The product is described as 'readily digestible milk protein enriched with lysine, methionine, iron, zinc, calcium, honey, lecithin and vitamins. According to the direction for use, the granules are to be added in a measureful to a glass of warm milk and to be taken adding sugar to taste. The jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Div. I, Aurangabad issued 2 show cause notices for the period April 1995 to August 1995 and from September 1995 to January 1996 on the ground that honeypro is nothing but an edible preparation as food supplement for general health and energy. Since the preparation does not have any therapeutic or prophylactic use, the Asstt.Commissioner held that the correct classification should be under sub-heading 2108.90 of Central Excise Tariff ...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kuipers Tiesto

Court: Mumbai

A.Y. Sakhare, J.1. By this reference at the instance of the Revenue made under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), the Tribunal, Bombay 'E' Bench, Bombay, has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has rightly held that the assessee was entitled to the separate exemption in respect of passage money under s. 10(6)(i)(a), and the same was not subject to the ceiling fixed by s. 10(6)(viia)(A) of the IT Act, 1961 ?'2. In the asst. yr. 1973-74, the assessee Mr. Kuipers Tiesto, a foreign technician, was in the employment of M/s Century Enka Ltd. Bombay. He filed return of his income at Rs. 1,26,310. He revised his return and declared his total income as Rs. 84,720. The assessee has claimed exemption of Rs. 28,030 under s. 10(6)(i)(a) of the Act on account of passage money paid to him by his employer for proceeding on home leave out of India along with his wife and children. ...

Diwan Rahul Nanda Vs. Nitish G. Kotak and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR415; 1998(2)BomCR787; [2000]241ITR596(Bom); 1998(3)MhLj35

ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. ln the draft Notice of Motion, leave under Rules 147/148 of the High Court. O.S. Rules is granted to take out the Notice of Motion in terms of the draft Notice of Motion handed in. With consent of the parties, motion made returnable forthwith. Defendants waive service. Office is directed to register the Notice of Motion. The plaintiff is given time to register the Notice of Motion by 8th December, 1997. To be heard forthwith along with the Notice of Motion No. 3239 of 1995. This order will dispose of both the Notice of Motion.2. The Notice of Motion No. 3239 of 1995 was taken out for appointment of the Receiver of the suit property and for injunction. The Notice of Motion came up for hearing on 22nd November, 1995. Ad interim injunction was granted. A perusal of the order shows that it was agreed between the parties that a sum of Rs. 19 lacs were paid by the plaintiff to the defendants on the basis of the agreement dated 26th October, 1995. In view of the above, ...

Mohd. Ismail Mohd. Qasim Vs. Khurshid Ahmed Khan S/O Sattar Khan

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR24; 1998(2)BomCR834

ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. This is a Revision Application by the tenant under section 26 of the Hyderabad Houses (Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, 1954. Tenant filed an application under section 17 of the said Act before the Rent Controller, Aurangabad, alleging that the electricity supply which was enjoyed by him was withdrawn by the landlord and prayed for the restoration of this amenity. No ex parte interim order's passed in this case. After the landlord was served with a notice, he appeared and the matter was heard for considerable period. On 1st April, 1989, Additional Rent Controller, Aurangabad, passed the following order:'Tenant Shri Mohd. fsmail Mohd. Kasam r/o Railway Station H.No. 5/9/65,Aurangabad is permitted to take seperate Electricity meter from Ex.Engineer (M.S.E.B.), Urban Division, Aurangabad, at his own cost'.This order was challenged in Rent Appeal No. 10 of 1989 before the District Judge, Aurangabad, and the teamed District Judge, Aurangabad, held that it...

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. Kuipers Tiesto

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR411; [1998]230ITR128(Bom)

ORDERA.Y. Sakhare, J.1. By this reference at the instance of the Revenue made under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'E', Bombay has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly held that the assessee entitled to the separate exemption in respect of passage money under section 10(6)(i)(a), and the same was not subject to the ceiling fixed by section 10(6)(viia)(A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. In the assessment year 1973-74, the assesses Mr. Kuipers Tiesto, a foreign technician was in the employment of M/s. Century Enka Ltd., Bombay. He filed return of his income at Rs. 1,26,310/-. He revised his return and declared his total income as Rs. 84,720/-. The assessee has claimed exemption of Rs. 28,030/- under section 10(6)(i)(a) of the Act on account of passage money paid to him by ...

Cce Vs. Milton Plastics

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(74)LC807Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is an appeal filed bythe department against the impugned order passed by the Collector of Customs & Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. When the matter was called none appeared on behalf of the respondents in spite of the issue of notice. We have heard Shri M. Ali, learned Senior Departmental Representative for the Revenue.3. Accordingly to the department the respondents have filed two price lists in Proforma II effective from 10.8.1988 for their manufactured product. In both the price lists, description of excisable goods, price at wholesale trade and the class of buyers are the same. In the first price list, assessees claimed trade discount at 10% whereas in other price list it is 9%. The Assistant Collector in his order dated 12.4.1989 approved both the price lists allowing trade discount at 9% only. On an appeal filed by the assessee the Collector (Appeals) decided the issue in favour of the assessee as per order-in-appeal dated 23.1.1990.4. It was the contention of the depart...

Morarjee Goculdas Spg. and Wvg. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT420Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Appellant manufactured a consignment of fabrics which it declared to the department, to be made out of yarn comprising of 48% polyester and 52% cotton by weight. It claimed classification of the fabric under Chapter 52 as cotton fabric. Note 2(a)(A) to Section II of the Central Excise provides that fabrics classifiable under Chapter 50 to 55 and Heading 5806, 5209 consisting of a mixture of two or more textile material are to be classified as if consisting wholly of the one textile material which predominates by weight. The department tested the sample of this consignment and found it to consist of cotton 47.9% and polyester 52.1%. Since the polyester predominated the department proposed to classify the goods under Chapter 55. On a request by the assessee the goods were tested again. This time the fabric was shown to be 48.4% cotton and 51.6% polyester again meriting classification under Chapter 55. Classification was confirmed by Additional Collector after issue of notice and ...

Smt. Asha Anil Patil Vs. Shri Madan Rajaram Bagwe and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(1)ALLMR680; 1998(3)BomCR657

ORDERF.I. Rebello, J. 1. The petitioner by this petition impugns the orders/letter dated 17thApril 1995 whereby the petitioner claim for salary has been rejected.2. A brief narration of facts may be necessary to dispose off this petition.The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the School run by respondent No. 2 on 14th September, 1974. The petitioner was thereafter appointed as Head Mistress on 1st July 1977. Some allegations came to be made against the petitioner pursuant to which the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court. The Court refused stay. The respondent No. 2 held an enquiry in respect of the charges against the petitioner. The Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty. On 26th July 1986 the petitioner was dismissed from service based on the said enquiry report. An appeal was filed by the petitioner. The Additional Municipal Commissioner further remanded !he appeal for enquiry to the Education Officer on 10th October, 1988. The Education Officer exo...