Mumbai Court April 1998 Judgments
Tata Oil Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: (1998)(101)ELT298Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant received in its factory located in the Kandla Free Trade Zone glass bottles without payment of duty in terms of Notification 272/79 to be utilised for packing oil manufactured by it for export. Verification of the stock of bottles in September, 1986 showed a shortage of 1.62 lakhs bottles in the stock received from April, 1983 to 1st September, 1986 approximately 0.3%. The Additional Collector in the order impugned in the appeal has confirmed the demand for Central Excise duty on these bottles on the ground that it had not been utilised in the production or for packaging of goods meant for export, had not been shown to have been lost or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident. Hence this appeal.2. It is the contention of the appellant that the bottles broke in the course of handling in the factory and duty cannot be demanded on these goods in terms of paragraph (j) of the appendix to the notification.The contention of the Collector that the bottles were no...
Tag this Judgment!J. Mahabeer and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT442Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These appeals arise out of three different adjudication orders passed by Commissioner of Cus-toms-n, Mumbai. Appellants Chetan Packaging Corporation and V. Print are importers of offset printing machines. Appellants Mahabeer & Co. are the Indian indenting agents through whom the importers placed orders for the machines with the Czechoslovakia supplier M/s. Kovo Foreign Trade Corporation. The facts of the case in these appeals are similar. The two importer-appellants filed Bills of Entry (B/E) on 3-6-1991 for which the GIF value as per invoice was Rs. 8,95,578/-. An amount of Rs. 44,778/- was declared by the importers in the B/E as Local Agency Commission paid to appellants Mahabeer & Co. Copy of the orders placed by them with Mahabeer & Co.were also submitted according to which the importers were to pay an amount of Rs. 1,79,115/- to Mahabeer & Co. towards their commission and installation & technical advice. As per the break up given in the order out of this am...
Tag this Judgment!Devarsons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT772Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant manufactured in 1986 synthetic dyes classifiable under Item 14D of the Act. After clearing such dyes on payment of duty it blended some quantity of such dyes as quantities of different colours and made the resultant colour of a liquid by addition of solvent. In the order impugned in the appeal Collector (Appeals) -has confirmed the finding of the Assistant Collector that such blending amounted to manufacture of a new product and the blended dye is liable to duty under item 14D.2. Mr. Ashraf Marker, Manager of the appellant contends that this process was undertaken in response to orders from purchasers for specific shades. He contends except for the physical change the products do not change as a result of this process and such a process does not amount to manufacture.3. The departmental representative contends that the products have been rendered suitable for use by consumers as a result of and thus as a result of manufacturing process and generally adopts the reasoni...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Oil Mills Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC489Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant received in its factory located in the Kandla Free Trade Zone glass bottles without payment of duty in terms of Notification 272/79 to be utilised for packing oil manufactured by it for export. Verification of the stock of bottles in September, 1986 showed a shortage of 1.62 lakhs bottles in the stock received from April, 1983 to 1st September, 1986 approximately 0.3%. The Additional Collector in the order impugned in the appeal has confirmed the demand for Central Excise duty on these bottles on the ground that it had not been utilised in the production or for packaging of goods meant for export, had not been shown to have been lost or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident. Hence this appeal.2. It is the contention of the appellant that the bottles broke in the course of handling in the factory and duty cannot be demanded on these goods in terms of paragraph (j) of the appendix to the notification.The contention of the Collector that the bottles were no...
Tag this Judgment!Kantilal Chhotalal Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: (1999)68ITD395(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the assessee for the asst. yr. 1992-93 is directed against the order of the CIT revising assessment order dt. 14th November, 1994 under s. 263 of the IT Act to reduce deduction allowed under s. 80HHC of the IT Act. According to the learned CIT, the AO excluded 90 per cent of net amount of consultancy fees of Rs. 1,78,528 instead of correct gross receipt of Rs. 6,84,932. Thus, the AO allowed deduction of Rs. 4,43,029 in excess under s. 80HHC and to the above extent, the assessment order was erroneous and in so far, prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. He revised the order under s. 263 of the IT Act.2. The assessee has come up in appeal. The dispute relates to the issue whether gross or net amount of consultancy fees received by the assessee is to be considered. In the relevant assessment year under s.80HHC, the assessee was entitled to proportionate deduction of profits derived from export in certain proportion to the profit from business as provided by sub-s....
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Lever Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: (1999)68ITD85(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the assessee for the asst. yr. 1989-90 is directed against the order of the CIT(A) upholding rectification carried by the AO under s. 154 of the IT Act withdrawing deduction of additional tax of Rs. 29,84,136 raised in intimation under s. 143(1)(a) but allowed in ITNS 150 issued on making assessment under s. 143(3) of the Act.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the assessee filed return on 29th December, 1989. The AO sent intimation to the assessee under s. 143(1)(a) dt. 30th November, 1990, wherein additional tax of Rs. 30,29,075 was raised in respect of certain additions made for prima facie inadmissible items. Subsequently, this additional tax was reduced to Rs. 29,84,136 under s. 154 vide order dt. 18th June, 1991. The AO completed assessment under s. 143(3) of the IT Act vide order dt.30th October, 1991, on total income of Rs. 64,69,37,100. By that time, the assessee had cleared the demand raised through intimation referred to above. So, the AO ra...
Tag this Judgment!Mr. Oseas Sales Dias Vs. Mrs. Ethehelvina Arcanjale e'Souza and others ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)BomCR377
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 11th December, 1995, passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, in Execution Application No. 29/86/A. By the impugned order, the application of the decree-holders dated 23rd February, 1993, for attachment of goods lying in the shop of the judgment-debtors situated near the Head Post Office at Panaji was allowed and the goods therein were ordered to be attached. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants have filed the present appeal mainly on the ground that the shop in question was in possession of the appellant No. 1 pursuant to a registered Gift Deed dated 6th April, 1972, by the original judgment debtor late Joaquim Milagres Piedade Dias and his wife late Angela Dias and that, therefore, the trial Court erred in allowing the application and ordering the attachment of the said goods lying in the said shop.2. Shri S.S. Usgaonkar, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, who are the de...
Tag this Judgment!Celestina Rosario and Others Vs. Mrs. Mariquinha F.D. Rosario and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)BomCR889
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties heard forthwith. Heard learned Advocates for the parties.2. Land Acquisition proceedings under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be instituted in the year 1987 and written statement was filed by the parties including the petitioners in the year 1987 itself. The recording of evidence in the matter was completed in the year 1993 and from then onwards the matter is pending for judgment. On 4-7-96 the petitioners sought leave to file additional written statement incorporating certain facts relating to the Gift Deed dated 20th August, 1917 whereby they claimed that their right to the acquired land was to the extent of half as against 1/5 the claimed in the joint written statement filed previously. This application was rejected by the learned Addl. District Judge, Margao, vide impugned order dated 30th April 1997 which is subject matter of this revision.3. Heard ...
Tag this Judgment!Kantilal Chhotalal Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-1998
Reported in: (1999)63TTJ(Mumbai)527
ORDERShri Vimal Gandhi, V.P.This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 1992-93 is directed against the order of the Commissioner revising assessment order dated 14-11-1994 under section 263 of the Income Tax Act to reduce deduction allowed under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. According to the learned Commissioner, the assessing officer excluded 90 per cent of net amount of consultancy fees of Rs. 1,78,528 instead of correct gross receipt of Rs. 6,84,932. Thus, the assessing officer allowed deduction of Rs. 4,43,029 in excess under section 80HHC and to the above extent, the assessment order was erroneous and insofar, prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. He revised the order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act.2. The assessee has come up in appeal. The dispute relates to the issue whether gross or net amount of consultancy fees received by the assessee is to be considered. In the relevant assessment year, under section 80HHC, the assessee was entitled to propor...
Tag this Judgment!Hitachi Zosen Corporation Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: (1999)68ITD235(Mum.)
1. The following grounds have been taken by the assessee in this appeal. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) erred in holding that the assessee was not entitled to set off of loss from one source of income against income from another source under the same head of income under s. 70 of the IT Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) erred in holding that the assessee's entire income from Flourine Recovery Unit amounting to Rs. 3,04,964 was liable to tax at the rate of 40 per cent without deduction of loss of Rs. 1,68,569 suffered in the ONGC Contract." 2. The assessee is a company incorporated in Japan. During the relevant accounting period, it had two contracts in India. One was a turnkey contract with ONGC and the other was for the provision of supervision services to SPIC. The AO determined the loss from the ONGC contract at Rs. 1,68,569 and the profit from the SPIC contract at Rs. 3,04,965. The assessee had certain divide...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »