Mumbai Court April 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.
Commissioner of C. Ex. and Customs Vs. Maharashtra Scooters Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT1060Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The limited issue in this appeal is whether Thermocol sheets packing used for transportation of scooters are eligible input in terms of Rule 57A or not. The Collector (Appeals) in the impugned order held it to be a input following the ratio of the CEGAT Judgment in the case of Jayshree Timber Products v. Collector of Central Excise 1992 (62) E.L.T. 235. In the appeal memorandum it is claimed that the scooter is not packed in the sheets. If it is to qualify for the term "packaging material" it must be made into a package. Therefore in the present case the sheets do not qualify as inputs. Citation is made of the Madras High Court Judgment in the case of Ponds (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise 2. I have heard Shri B.K. Suman, the ld. JDR and Shri L.B. Attar, ld.Advocate for the assessees.3. In the Jayshree Timber Products case, Iron Hoops were used to secure the plywood on wooden pallets. In allowing hoops as inputs under Rule 57A, the Tribunal observed that the term packagi...
Devendradas Nautandas and Co. and Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)(85)LC483Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Devendradas Nautandas & Co. filed a bill of entry showing weight of dry dates imported in 500 bags as 30000 kgs. On weighment, an excess of 3500 kgs was found. The Managing Partner of the importing firm Shri Santramdas Makhija in his statement confessed that he had knowledge of the excess dates. He also confirmed that the clearing agents did not have any such knowledge. The clearing agents in turn denied his knowledge. A written show cause notice and personal hearing were waived. The Additional Commissioner confiscated the excess dates valued at Rs. l,05,000/-M.V. but allowed redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 17,000/-. He imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on Shri Satramdas Makhija and of Rs. 25,000/- on the firm. Against this order, the firm and the managing partner filed appeals. These were decided by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order. Before the Commissioner (Appeals) the plea was taken that the excess was the result of moisture gain. It was also clai...
Special Prints Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT434Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These eight applications are for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the duties confirmed and penalties imposed. These arise out of the same set of facts and are therefore being disposed of by the single order.2. M/s. Special Prints Ltd. are engaged in processing of Man Made Grey Fabrics. The other three applicants namely M/s. Garden Silk Mills Inds., M/s. Vareli Textiles Inds. Ltd. and M/s. Surat Textiles Mills Ltd. were traders who entrusted the grey fabrics to M/s. Special Prints Ltd. for processing. The processed goods were generally supplied to the traders in Lump Form. The traders would cut and pack the process textile on their own, before marketing. In certain cases, M/s. Special Prints Ltd. himself undertake these processes for which an additional conisderation was paid by the traders. The traders had filed requisite declaration in terms of Notification No. 305/77 for availing exemption from licensing control. Such activity of processing of grey fabrics by M/s. Sp...
Commissioner of Cus. Vs. Bharat Pulverising Mills Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)(65)ECC205
1. These are three appeals filed by the department against the decision of the Collector (Appeals), Mum-bai who by the impugned Orders had held that the respondent in the appeals are entitled to benefit of Notification No. 204/92, dated 9-5-1992 reversing the findings of the Assistant Collector who in the Orders-in-Original had denied the benefit of the said Notification on the ground that the exported goods were manufactured by availing benefit of Modvat on the exempted materials.2. Facts of the case are the respondents have imported goods described as Hexa Chlorocyclopentadiene and sought clearance for home consumptions. They were transferee of an advance licence issued to M/s Selective Chemicals Ltd. who was a merchant exporter. It is noticed that the export products has been manufactured by their exporting manufacturer by availing benefit in terms of Rule 56A/57A of the Central Excise Rules. However, the said benefit of Modvat was reversed subsequent to the physical shipment of th...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Shubham Polymer Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC928Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The assessee, the respondent in this appeal by the Commissioner, was engaged in export of polypropylene tapes fabrics and woven sacks. The woven sacks were exported under Rule 191B. In the course of manufacture of these goods, some waste emerges at each stage i.e. manufacture of tape, manufacture of unlaminated tape and woven sacks. The assessee cleared such waste without paying duty. Notice was issued by the department proposing recovery of duty on such waste. In reply, the assessee contended that the benefit of exemption under Notification 243/79, as subsequently amended, would apply. It also contended that the fabric in question was classifiable under Chapter [Heading] 5408 of the tariff for which duty was nil. It is also contended that the waste of sacks would not be liable to duty not being manufactured product, citing in support of this proposition the Tribunal's decision in Kamat Packaging Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E. -1990 (47) E.L.T. 55 was cited. The Assistant Collector did not ac...
Killick Nixon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT1053Tri(Mum.)bai
2. On 15-3-1999 the applicant was absent and unrepresented despite notice. The Departmental Representative requested a few days time to study the matter and hence adjourned today.3. Duty has been demanded on the ground that the goods such as wedges, barrels, bright plates, sheathing and couplers which, we are told, are used as parts of structures such as bridges are correctly classifiable under 7308.90 as structures of iron and steel and not, as claimed by the assessee, under Heading 8466.00 as parts of machinery.4. The only ground in the stay application is that the goods had been classified under Heading 8466.00 from 1987 onwards and there is no good reason to change the classification. There is however no evidence at all in support of this contention and therefore it is not possible to say that there was a long standing practice of classification.Financial hardship is also not pleaded. Classification is not questioned. Accordingly, we direct the applicant to deposit Rs. 12 lacs wit...
Indian Standard Metal Co. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)(84)LC337Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Collector (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Assistant Collector that the cost of making of patterns used by the appellant in the manufacture of casting be included in the assessable value of such castings.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented despite issue of notice.We 155 have perused the appeal papers and heard the departmental representative.3. The contention in the appeal that no personal hearing was granted before approving the price list does not appear very material. It is clear from the Assistant Collector's order that the department added the cost of the patterns to the assessable value of the castings as declared by the assessee. However, the present order arises from a subsequent notice proposing to recover duty following such inclusion.The Assistant Collector recorded the contention of the assessee that the cost is not includible and the ground raised in support of this contention and dealt with it. Therefore, an ...
Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC920Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The applicants manufacture motor vehicle parts and I.C. Engines in their factory at Akurdi, Pune. Some of the I.C. Engines manufactured are sold in the market, some are captively consumed in the Pune factory on which no duty was paid in terms of the exemption Notification No.217/86. Some of the engines were cleared on payment of duty to the applicants' factory at Pithampur where they were used in the manufacture of motor vehicles and Modvat credit was availed of. Such utilisation at Pithampur was with effect from 16-3-1995 on which date the benefit of the cited notification ceased to be available where the utilisation of dutiable components for captive consumption was in a place other than the factory of manufacture. The I.C. Engines were sold to outside buyers at prices duty approved by the department. The price of I.C. Engines sent to Pithampur was also approved by the department.The assessable value for the I.C. Engines sold in the market and for the engines consumed at Pithampu...
Karna Dasharath Mali and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)BomCR802; (1999)2BOMLR425; 2000CriLJ1288
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. Since these four connected criminal appeals arise out of the same set of facts and a common impugned judgment we are disposing them off by one judgment.2. Through these appeals the appellants challenge the judgment and order dated 28-3-1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, in Sessions Case No. 508 of 1991, convicting and sentencing them in the manner stated hereinafter :i) under section 451 read with 34 I.P.C to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment; andii) under section 396 I.P.C. to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each in default rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.The substantive sentences of the appellants were ordered to run concurrently.It is pertinent to point out that along with the appellants were tried three others, viz: Ghashiram Chanderabhanu Goud, Girikumar Kuladhar Kumar and Bhaskar Rajani Biswal but they have been acquitted vide the impugned judgment and the State of Maharashtra has not impugned their acquittal ...
The Ahmednagar Merchants Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR133; 2000BomCR(Cri)133
ORDERV.K. Barde, J.1. The petitioner, Ahmednagar Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd., Ahmednagar (For short, hereinafter referred to as 'Bank'), has filed this contempt petition alleging that the respondent No. 4, Mr. D.S. Naik, acting as District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ahmednagar (For short, hereinafter referred to as 'Deputy Registrar'), passed the orders dated 4-9-1998, 26-10-1998, 24-11-1998, 19-1-1999 and 17-2-1999, and the respondent No. 5, acting as Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nasik Division, Nasik, passed order dated 21-12-1998 and thereby committed criminal contempt of this Court because the said orders were passed in contravention to the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, in Writ Petition No. 4862/1997. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed that they be punished for Criminal Contempt.2. Before going to the merits of the case, it will be proper to give the background. Mr. Sidheshwar Gangadhar Dharmadhikari mad...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »