Mumbai Court August 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.
Mukund Brass Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC474
1. These three applications relate to and arise from the same impugned order and are therefore dealt with by this common order.2. The applicants were availing benefit of Notification Nos. 83/94 and 84/94. The applicants were job workers. These notifications afforded exemption to goods falling under the schedule annexed to Notification 1/93 in certain circumstances. The goods cleared under the benefit of Notification 83/94 manufactured on job work basis were to be utilised by the principal manufacturer in the manufacture of final goods again falling under Notification 1/93. Where such use was not made, the notification made it obligatory on him to pay the duty. But where the duty was liable to be paid by the job worker i.e. the secondary manufacturer, then the burden of duty could not be shifted to the primary manufacturer.3. The goods manufactured by the present applicants were classifiable under heading 74 which did not benefit from the Notification 1/93. The assesees/applicants cont...
Ghoom Tax (India) P. Ltd. and Asia Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC471
1. These two applications arise out of the same order-in-appeal, and are therefore being disposed of by this common order.2. The applicants in both cases were engaged in texturising of yarn.The texturised yarn was not covered under the Annexure to Notification No. 1/93-CE up to 25.4.94, when the Notification No. 90/94 CE was issued bringing such yarn in the ambit of that Notification. The Notification provided different avenues to the assessees for clearance of goods. Clause (a)(i) permitted the assessees to clear the goods at the concessional rate where the assessees were availing of the facility of modvat credit either on the input goods or on the machinery used in the manufacture. Clause (a)(ii) in the alternative permitted clearance without payment of duty. The applicants in both cases were availing of the benefit of proforma credit under Rule 56A, when they chose to avail of the facility of the concessional rate prescribed in Notification No.1/93. Later demanded for differential ...
Psu Pipe Coaters Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)(66)ECC177
1. The appellant, at the relevant time, was engaged in coating with plastic pipes imported by a consortium which had been engaged by the Gas Authority of India Ltd (GAIL for short) for laying pipes for the Hazira Bijapur Jagdishpur Pipeline Project. The appellant was supplied the poles imported by GAIL and carried out the process of coating in its 100% Export Orient Unit (EOU for short) after obtaining permission from the department. In the appellant's factory some of plastic granules which it used to melt the coated pipe fell to the floor and got mixed up with dirt, gravel, stones and other miscellaneous materials as sweeping. In the course of the processes undertaken by the appellants some plastic waste also emerged in the form of strip. The appellant cleared both these form of goods without, apparently, issuing the gate pass required to a person for cleaning and sorting them. These goods were seized by the police for some unspecified reason and on these facts being brought to the n...
Universal Dyeing and Printing Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC75
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of Rs. 7.93 lakhs, demanded on the ground that the applicant had under-declared the cost of the gray fabric received by it for processing. The period involved is from January 1991 to March 1994.3. In the examples given in the Asst. Commissioner's order, he has proposed an increase of around 10% over the value declared by the applicant, for the reason that elements of profit, transport, shrinkage of fabric and octroi had not been included. The contention of the advocate for the applicant that from September 1991 onwards it added 10% to the cost declared by it, which is the total cost of raw materials and the processing charges, and that this addition will bring the cost to the value to be arrived at by accepting the proposal in the notice, is prima facie attractive. The Asst. Commissioner's attempt to get around this by saying that this does not include manufacturing profit is prima facie not acceptable; the Tribunal has held that the cost of...
Cosper Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC472
1.The stay application was converted into final hearing of the appeal with the consent of both sides.2. The appellants filed 4 bills of entry for clearance of Rough Marble Blocks of Italian Origin. The weight was declared to be 394.585 MT. On weighment the correct weight was found to be 426.440 MT. The importers accepted the excess. The value for the corrected weight was taken at Rs. 29,61,292. The import of such goods required possession of an import licence. The importers were not in possession of the licence.These goods were therefore confiscated. The Commissioner gave an option to redeem the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 43.00 lakhs and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 10.00 lakhs. Part of the goods was earlier cleared against revenue deposit and part of the goods is still under the custody and control of the customs.3. In this appeal the quantum of fine as well as of penalty is agitated. Shri Anil Balani submitted that the consignment consisted of Marble of three colours namely wh...
Commissioner of Customs Vs. K.R. Steelunion Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)(66)ECC801
1. This appeal is against the order of the Collector of Customs, Kandla. The respondent is a licensed unit in the Kandla Free Trade Zone (for short Zone) authorised for manufacture of cold rolled closed annealed and tin mill black plate coils by the Ministry of Commerce in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 8 of Chapter 3 of the Import Export Policy for 1983-84. The Ministry of Commerce permitted it to import subject to the conditions specified in the permission, one each of the following items: (e) Reconditioned, second hand cylindrical roll grinding machineries.2. On examination of the imported goods of which clearance was claimed in terms of this letter, the department found that the thyristor converter system, one complete furnace used and new raw materials and components for fabricating three more furnaces were imported. The Collector's order records that the first item was imported in place of a motor generator set permitted for the temper mill and the second in place o...
Chaphekar Engineering P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC468
1. The appellants availed benefit of deemed Modvat credit facility under different orders issued by the Ministry of Finance from time to time. The description of eligible inputs insofar as it related to the present appellants remained the same and read as follows : - "Steel Sheets of Thickness not exceeding 5mm, whether or not in coils".2. The assessees took credit on the basis of invoices covering goods procured from market sources. At a later date when these invoices were checked it appeared that the thickness of the steel sheets was not shown in the invoices when they were received from the dealers, but that the assessees had later incorporated these details in the challans. The Jurisdictional officers were of the opinion that this amounted to tampering and manipulation. The assessees also voluntarily reversed credit taken to the extent of Rs. 2,95,289/-. The statement of Shri Chaphekar Director of the assessee unit was recorded. A show cause notice dated 29-11-1994 was issued seek...
Jimmy Exports and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)(66)ECC808
1. These three applications are for waiver of deposit of penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on Jimmy Exports (Appln. No. C/Stay-1138/99/Bom) and Rs. 1 lakh on its partner Raju Patel (Appln. No. C/Stay-1139/99-Bom) and Rs. 25,000 on the other partner Rasik Patel (Appln. No.C/Stay-1140/99-Bom).2. The penalties have been imposed on the finding that they were involved in the export of secondhand machinery and scrap, valued at Rs. 1.4 crores and found to contain various kinds of machinery, parts of telephones, computers, typewriters etc. found by the Commissioner. The contention on behalf of the applicants is that they were not aware that the consignment contained these goods. They were simple farmers who had only asked their friend Mukesh Patel living in London to send the machinery. As soon as Raju Patel came to know of the presence of the consignment of other items, he disowned his interest by a letter to the department. Neither of the applicant had filed any bill of entry or made a declaration for ...
Odyssey Video Communications Vs. Air Cargo Complex
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC65
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 1.27 crores and penalty of Rs. 1.50 crores.3. The duly has been demanded and penalty imposed, on the conclusion of the Commissioner that the applicant was unable to comply with the terms of Notification 160/92. The notification grants exemption from partial import duty provided that the importer is able to fulfil the export obligation to a maximum of four times on the CIF value of the goods over five years from the date of import. The applicant had imported video recorders and such equipments in 1995-96. The goods were seized in November, 1997 by the department on its view that the applicant had disclosed its inability to fulfil the export obligation. The duty has been demanded, the goods confiscated and penalty imposed on this basis.4. The contentions for the applicant are that the departments action is premature because five years was available to it to fulfil the export obligation; the failure to fulfil the export...
Sidharth Processors Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)(66)ECC176
1. Application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 1.04 lakhs arrived at by the addition of some elements towards "manufacturing expenses" and "manufacturing profit" which the Assistant Commissioner (whose order has been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) felt ought to be added to the cost of job work declared by the applicant for processing grey fabrics received by it as a job worker.3. The applicant has declared Rs. 3.30 per metre as processing charges, and added another Rs. 3.68 per metre. It was explained that this addition was to provide for unforeseen eventualities.Since this amount would be difficult to be recovered from the supplier of the raw material after completion of the job work. There are decisions of this Tribunal to say that unless the contrary is shown the cost of manufacturing expenses declared must be considered to be included in the profit of the processors (Richardson & Cruddas (1972) Ltd. v. CCE 1999 (31) RLT 814). Prima facie therefore the addition...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »