Mumbai Court February 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.
Nihan Plastic Inds. P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT909Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is a stay petition filed by the appellant against the decision of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals) made in Order-in-Appeal No. P/132/98, dated 8-7-1998.2. In this appeal the question involved is whether polystyrene and polyethyelene generated in the manufacture, can be used as inputs in relation to manufacture under Rule 57F or not. In this case, Mr.Nankani during the course of argument before me pleads that since there is a failure of natural justice in this case, the appeal might itself be disposed of remanding the matter to the Collector (Appeals). Shri Suman, the ld. DR conceeds there is a failure of natural justice in this case. Hence the appeal was taken up for hearing after waiving the pre-deposit.3. It is interesting to note that the instance of hearing dated 16-4-1998 was given to the appellant informing them on 6-5-1998 that the appeal will be taken up. The appellant's letter dated 2-5-1998 received by the appellant on 4-5-1998, where the appe...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Electrical Products of India
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)(108)ELT648Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The assessee in this case claimed Modvat credit oh inputs titled as "dog bone", "corner piece" and "resiglass tape". The Assistant Commissioner allowed their claim. Against this order, the department approached the Collector (Appeals) who in the impugned order upheld the. order of the Assistant Commissioner.2. In this appeal from the Revenue argued by Shri K.M. Patwari reliance had been placed oh the following judgments in stating that Modvat credit had been wrongly extended to the assessee :-Collector of Central Excise v. Ganesh Steel Industries -1992 (60) E.L.T. 271.Paro Food Products v. CCE 3. The assessee requested for adjournment on the ground that they are opting for the benefit of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme. I find that the disposal of this case is not related to this scheme and therefore, proceeded to decide the case.4. The assessee had declared "dog bone" and "nomex paper" under Heading 5516. In the Bill of Entry also the same description had been showed.The Customs authori...
Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Shree Nijrang Poly Pack Inds.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT520Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These three appeals arise out of the same common order and are therefore being disposed of in this common order.2. The assessees in this case were engaged in the manufacture of polythene bags. The name of the user buyer was printed upon these bags.The assessees had claimed printing ink as an eligible input. The Assistant Collector accepted this contention of the assessee. The Department then approached the Collector (Appeals) who upheld the belief of the lower authority that printing ink was an input. Against this order of the Collector, the revenue has filed this appeal.3. I have [heard] Shri K.M. Patwari for the revenue and Shri K.M.Mondal for the assessees.4. In the appeal memorandum, reliance continued to be placed on two judgments of the Tribunal namely Parle Products 1992 (57) E.L.T. 152 and Petro Chemicals 1991 (52) E.L.T. 592, in negating the ratio of the judgment in the case of Multilayer Composites Pvt. Ltd. 1993 (63) E.L.T. 565 (Tribunal). I have examined the three judgm...
Standard Agro Engineers Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)(84)LC811Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee M/s. Standard Agro Engineers against the decision of Collector of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai made in order in appeal No. 163/93-BCH dated 26.3.1993 whereunder he set aside the assessment of Bill of Entry No. 3899 dated 12.12.1991 made in provision of Section 17 of Customs Act.2. The appellant imported a consignment of "TAM Brand Taper Roller Bearings up to 85 mm vide Bill of Entry No. 3899 dated 12.12.1991. On 6.3.1992 an order of assessment was made on the Bill of Entry. The appellant (sic) felt that the order of assessment passed by the Asstt.Collector was wrong. By Authorization dated 13.11.1992, the Collector of Customs II for Mumbai Customs authorised filing of an appeal under Section 129(D)(2) of the Customs Act. The appeal was heard by the Collector (Appeals), who by the impugned order set aside the assessee (sic). Hence the present appeal.3. Shri Kantawala appearing on behalf of the appellant challenges the impugned order. He states th...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Rajkumar Engg. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT393Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These are two appeals filed by the department against the decision of the Collector, Customs & Excise, Aurangabad made in Order-in-Original No. 353/CEX/93, dated 8-12-1993 and Order-in-Original No. 261/CEX/93, dated 27-10-1993. The Appeal No. E/654/95 has been filed against the Order-in-Original No. 353/CEX/93, dated 8-12-1993 and Appeal No. E/655/95 has been filed against Order-in-Original 261/CEX/93. It may be mentioned here that in Order-in-Original No.261/CEX/93 the Collector has dropped the show cause notice because of the finding given by him in file relating to Order-in-Original 226/CEX/93, against which, we by our Order-in-Appeal Nos. E/656 & 658/95 on 8-1-1999 have accepted the assessees contention and decided in their favour and against the department.2. In these cases, the facts of the cases are that the assessees were manufacturers of Audio system tape recorder and have cleared the goods to selling company namely Videocon International Ltd. (VIL in short) with w...
B.P.C.L. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)(111)ELT927Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. B.P.C.L. the appellant is a manufacturer of petroleum product which it obtains by refining crude oil. We are concerned in this appeal with quantities of high speed diesel oil (H.S.D). It is distributed from its warehouse attached to its refinery at Mumbai to various warehouses situated elsewhere.2. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Additional Commissioner was adjudicating on notices issued to the appellant asking it to explain the quantities of goods which it removed from its warehouse from Mumbai without payment of duty for transportation to other warehouses and it had not explained as having been received in those warehouses. It was the assessees contention before the Additional Collector, and it is the contention before us, that the ships which carried the H.S.D. did not always discharge the quantities specified in the AR 3A applications as a they were intended to be discharged as mentioned in the applications.This happened quite frequently because movement of H.S.D....
Mirc Electronics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC386Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two applications are for waiver of duty of Rs. 29.79 lakhs approximately and penalties of Rs. 28,42,674/- under Rule 57U(6) and Rs. 1,36,204/- under Rule 57-I (4) and redemption fine of Rs. 10 lakhs on plant and machinery and Rs. 2 lakhs imposed on Vijay Kumar the other applicant, the assessee's Company Secretary.2. Having heard both sides we find that out of the entire duty amount except Rs. 75,000/- has been deposited. It is contended that the balance is not required to be paid. Penalty imposed on the assessee is prima facie not maintainable in view of the fact that it took credit wrongly allegedly to have been taken prior to 9-1-1996 in view of the fact that the credit was taken January to August, 1996 whereas the Rules 57U(4) and 57U(6) were enacted on 23-7-1996. There is nothing in the order of the Commissioner or in the notice justifying the imposition of penalty on Vijay Kumar as distinct from any other employee or Director of the company. The fact that as Company Secr...
Appasaheb Sheshrao Chavan and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)ALLMR260; 2000(1)BomCR657
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Writ Petition No. 5003 of 1998 is filed by the Members of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Jalna, challenging the Order, dated 23-11-1998 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jalna, bifurcating the market area of Jalna Market Committee into two separate Market Committees, namely, Jalna and Badnapur, in exercise of the powers under section 44 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 and the Rules made thereunder (hereinafter, referred to as 'the said Act').2. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Jalna had a sub-market yard at Badnapur. The District Deputy Registrar, Jalna, appointed himself to be the Administrator in place of the earlier Administrator, by an Order, dated 14-9-1993. On 1st August 1994, the newly elected Market Committee assumed office. On 17-2-1995, the Director of Marketing wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Market Committee, Jalna, asking him to submit a report abou...
Shri Harish G. Bulchandani Vs. Shri Subhash Mancharlal Arora and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)BomCR462
ORDERT.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. None appears for the petitioner. Shri Joshi appears for the respondents 1 and 2.2. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Dy. Registrar, Co-operatives Society, Nashik which was confirmed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Nashik by its order passed under section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The matter arises out of the refusal of admission to the membership of respondents to Deolali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Lam Road, Deolali Camp. The said society had refused the admission to membership of the respondents 1 and 2. Against this refusal, the appeal was filed before the Dy. Registrar, Co-operative Society, Nashik and the said appeal was allowed by him and he directed the 4th respondent society to enrol the respondents as members. Against this order a revision has been filed by the petitioner, challenging this order before the Divisional Joint Registrar, Nasik and he dismissed the revision by confir...
Yeshwant Subrao Bidkar Vs. Shikandar Allabaksha Nagaraji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-04-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALLMR2; 1999(2)BomCR460
ORDERT.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. Mr. R.D. Sawant, Advocate, holding for Dilip Bhosale, appeared for the petitioner. None has appeared for the respondent.2. This petition arises out of an application filed by the petitioner landlord for eviction of the respondent tenant on the grounds of arrears of rent, bona fide requirement for own occupation of the landlord and also for the reconstruction, as the building is in very dilapidated condition. All these grounds have been accepted by the trial Court and an eviction was ordered. On Appeal, the order of the trial Court was reversed. As regards the arrears of rent, during the period of revision against the order, fixing the standard rent was pending, the lower Appellate Court observed that when the revision is pending against the order of fixation of standard rent, one cannot hold technically that the tenant is in arrears, The learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, contended that the proper course for the tenant would have been to ex...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »