Mumbai Court December 1999 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
P.B. Traders Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC429
1. The applicant has sought for the waiver of the pre-deposit of duty amount of Rs. 80,22,475/-+ Rs. 12,03,372/- and the penalty of Rs. 92,25,846/- and for the stay of the operation of the impugned Order No.26/98 Commissioner-IV, Mumbai, dated 10-11-1998 pending disposal of the appeal and for such other relief deemed fit.1. The applicant is engaged in the manufacture of Metallic Yarn falling within the scope of Chapter sub-heading 5605.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and is availing the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 75/86, dated 10-2-1986. It has been filing the necessary declaration under Notification No. 13/92-C.E.(N.T.), dated 14-5-1992 for every year before the concerned Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise. It is alleged against the applicant and it has failed to take registration under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, and failed to file classification list and price list for the goods manufactured under Section 173...
Beheti Metals and Ferro Alloys Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC293
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 53.41 lakhs and penalty of Rs. 10.00 lakhs.2. Duty has been demanded on the ground that the applicant converted aluminium scrap received by it for the manufacture of Ferro alloys into powder classifiable under heading 76.03 of the tariff and did not pay duty on it. The extended period contained in the proviso to Section 11A of the Act has been invoked on the ground that this was not declared.3. The contentions of the advocate for the applicant are these.Applicant receives scrap of various kinds of which, all but one of which is fed directly into crucible. The exception is the scrap resulting from cutting sheets of aluminium which, because ofits size, has to be melted down and reduced to smaller lumps. Thus no powder emerges at any stage. It has not been shown that such powder, assuming it to emerge, conforms to the requirement of size specified in note 6 (b) of Section XV of the tariff. The test report of the smaller sized par...
Commr. of Central Excise Vs. KevIn Chemicals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC295
1. The department in this appeal, as appellant, has sought for the stay of the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Customs, Ahmedabad, wherein, the Order-in-Original confirming the demand of Rs. 33,105 and allowing the Modavt credit of Rs. 27,210 is set aside.2. The grounds on which the stay of the impugned order is sought for are, that on going through the invoice which shows that earlier 'Serial number for pre-authentication' was given the number 000914 which is cancelled and the No. 000314 was printed at the right bottom in the invoice. Invoice-cum-challan No. 240/95-96 dated 24.7.95 was given after preparation of the said invoice as the said Sr. No. was not found on the carbon copy on the reverse of the invoice and the same had been handwritten subsequently. In the other invoice Sr. No. of pre-authentication had been tempered by converting the earlier Sr. No.000642 to Sr. No. 000238. The actual invoice No. 164/95-96 was carefully handwritten without ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Satyen Dye and Chemicals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC643
1. The department as the appellant has sought for the stay of the order-in-appeal of the Commissioner(Appeals), Cen. Excise & Customs, Vadodara dated 18.5.99, on the ground that the respondents, the manufacturer of SO Dyes, has taken Mod vat credit on the strength of the invoices which are not having pre-printed serial number and the word 'duplicate for transporter' as per Rule 52-A, 57-GG of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The order-in-original has disallowed the Modvat credit of Rs. 82,112.50 on the above ground, after issuing the show cause notice and receiving the reply from the respondents and after hearing the respondents. The Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the appeal preferred by the respondents on the ground that there is no allegation in the show cause notice that the goods were not received in the factory and utilised in the manufacture of the final product, and the said invoices are not genuinef which were not pre-printed as duplicate for transporter and it cannot b...
Anchor Shipping Agencies Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT719Tri(Mum.)bai
1. With the consent of both the parties, the main appeal itself is taken up for disposal as it stands covered by the precedent Bench Order No. 2662/WZB/1999, dated 17-9-1999/29-10-1999 in E/Stay-1575/99-Mum in appeal No. ST/10/99-Mum.2. The subject matter of the instant case is almost identical to the subject matter of the decision of the Tribunal. The appellant was required to file ST-3 Returns for the quarter ending 1997 by 15-10-1997 which was filed by them on 31-12-1997, as observed by the Asstt.Commissioner, Service Tax Cell in the order-in-original dated 25-8-1998. There was a delay of 77 days in filing the return, though the service tax was paid by them, which resulted in the issue of show cause notice, which was replied by the appellant that they were under the impression that annual return is required to be filed like Income Tax. The adjudicating authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 7,700/- to be paid within 30 days from the date of receipt of his order under Section 77 of Chap...
Karnataka Ginning and Pressing Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC425
1. These two appeals are against the order of the Collector cofirming a demand for duty to the extent of Rs. 4,94,487.20, ordering confiscation of seized processed fabrics, permitting to redeem them on payment of fine, ordering confiscation of plant and machinery M/s. Karnataka Spinning and Processing Factory (the assessee for short) with an option to redeem them on payment of fine and imposing penalties on the assessee as well as Ramesh Agrawal, its General Manager, the other appellant.2. The show cause notice adjudicated upon by the Collector in the impugned order, was in consequence of the interception by the officers of a truck relating to goods processed by the appellant and further investigations into the activities of the company. The demand for duty is made on three different counts. The first of Rs. 13,822.00 is on goods seized from the shop of the appellant at Old Hanuman Lane, Bombay; the second of Rs. 63,181 is of goods seized outside the shop at the Old Hanuman Lane; the ...
Mahendrabhai H. Patel Vs. Commissioner of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC297
1. These ten applications relate to ten appeals filed against the same order of the Commissioner impugned before us. These are, therefore, being disposed of vide this common order.2. We have heard Shri V.S. Nankani, Advocate appearing along with Shri Vipin Jain, C.A. for applicants Rajendra J. Parekh, Ajay S. Parekh, Hemubhai B. Thakore, Bhairanbhai J. Prajapati and Manubhai D. Masani.We have heard Shri N.B. Sonawane, Consultant for Mahendrabhai H. Patel, Govindbhai P. Patel, Choksi J. Hargovindas, Natwarlal P. Patel and Ashok Kumar P. Patel.3. Rajendra J. Parekh was the owner of M/s. Kamal Refinery. Ajay S.Parekh was his nephew. On receipt of information that smuggled silver was in the premises, the Customs officers reached the refinery on 10-12-1990. The officers noticed 702 chorsas (square shaped pieces) of silver and two round shaped silver pieces. 534 silver chorsas bore markings "electro refined silver -999", whereas the other pieces were unmarked. The pieces totally weighing 35...
Syed Afzal HussaIn Hussaini s/o Syed Abed HussaIn HussaIn Vs. Hon'ble ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR838; 2000(1)MhLj685
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. The subject matter of this petition concerns the land located in Survey Nos. 11 to 16, 19 to 20, 21/1, 21/2, portion of Survey No. 4 and a portion of Survey Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 10, situated in Mohalla Daudpura locality within the city municipal limits of Aurangabad. 2. One Shri Ranchhoddas Anandidas Gujarathi claimed to be the owner of this property and he was facing attachment order in Execution Proceedings No. 13/3 of 1956 in the District Court at Aurangabad wherein the decree holder one Shri S. Shriniwasrao and Yeshwantrao had prayed for execution of decree passed in their favour against the land holder namely Ranchhoddas Gujarathi. In the said proceedings, an application under Order XXI, Rule 83 of the Code of Civil Procedure was presented and permission was obtained to sell the attached property i.e. the agricultural land in the above mentioned survey numbers. Such a permission was granted on 6th August, 1958 by the Court and consequently the land holder ag...
Ramchandra Mukta Shelkar and Others Vs. Karbhari Pandharinath Tarade a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)BomCR23; (2000)2BOMLR467; 2000(1)MhLj361
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle J.1. One Bhimraj Nana Tarade was the owner of agricultural land, admeasuring 3 Acres 23 Gunthas, located in Survey No. 124/ 1 of Village Aradgaon, Taluka Rahuri, District Ahmednagar and on his death sometimes in 1945 the said property was succeeded by his second wife Vithabai who was issueless and Bhimraj had sons from his first wife, who were perhaps minor at the relevant time. The present petitioner was inducted as a tenant by Vithabai by way of oral lease and he was cultivating the said land on the basis of the said lease. On the tiller's day i.e. on 1st April, 1957 he was in possession of the said land as a cultivator and it appears from the recordthat proceedings under section 32-G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (Bombay Tenancy Act, for short), were instituted suo motu by the A.L.T. and Additional Mamlatdar, Rahuri sometimes in the year 1960. Though the tenant's statement was recorded on 22nd July, 1960 in these proceedings, the proceed...
Blue Star Limited Vs. in the Matter of the Scheme of Arrangement of Bl ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)BomCR525; (2000)2BOMLR774; 1998(1)MhLj181
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. The object of this petition is to obtain sanction of this Court to the arrangement embodied in the scheme of arrangement under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. By way of this scheme of arrangement, the business and undertaking of Blue Star Limited, hereinafter referred to as 'the B.S.L' with relation to its International Software Division, for short I.S.D, as defined in Clause 1.4 of the scheme of arrangement, hereinafter referred to as 'the Scheme', shall stand transferred to and is vested or deemed to be transferred to and vest in Blue Star Infotech Limited, hereinafter referred to as 'B.S.I.L.' without any further act, deed, matter or thing so as to become the property of B.S.I.L. but subject to all charges affecting the same. 2. B.S.L. was incorporated on 20th January, 1949 under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 as a Private Limited Company limited by shares in the name of Blue Star Engineering Company (Bomba...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »