Mumbai Court October 2000 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.
Mehtab Khan S/O Madar Khan and ors. Vs. Sarfaraz Khan HussaIn Khan and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-2000
Reported in: 2001(5)BomCR397; 2001CriLJ895
S.S. Parkar, J. 1. Heard Mr. M.S. Shaikh learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.2. This matter has a chequered history. Though complaints were lodged with the police in respect of the offence of murder the police had not taken cognizance and, therefore, a private complaint was lodged in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur. The case is still at the stage of committal after the process was issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. This is the second time that this case has travelled to this Court, both the times at the instance of the accused who were originally seven in number now reduced to five due to the death of two accused persons during the period from 1984 to this day. On the earlier occasion after examining about four witnesses before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the case was committed to the Sessions Court after issuing process to the accused. That was challenged before the Sessions Court which made reference to this ...
Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Tata Ssl Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT170Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) received by the Central Excise, Surat-H on 25-3-1999, three appeals were filed on 19-6-2000. Applications were made for condonation of delay. The scrutiny of the applications showed that they were not verified by the deponents. On 17-8-2000, notice was sent directing the compliance. The notice also clarified that the absence of compliance would render the appeals liable to dismissal.2. When the cases were called out today, there was no compliance. Even otherwise, we find that the reasons given by the Commissioner are not sufficient to seek condonation. The application itself states that the ratio of the impugned order was originally accepted but at a much later date on reconsideration, the decision was taken to file appeals. The change of mind of the Collector is not a ground for proving that the delay was caused by existence of sufficient grounds....
Metrit Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT174Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants request disposal on merits. We have heard Smt. Reena Arya for the Revenue.2. The limited issue for consideration is classification of the degreas-ing agents manufactured by the appellants. The Revenue have classified it under 3402.90. The appellants desired classification under Heading 38.23.3. The chemical test showed the various products manufactured by the assessees as consisting of Alkaline Chemicals, Silicates Phosphates and a small amount of OSAA. The metal article was immersed in the solution of these products to remove oil, dirt and grease. The Assistant Collector held that these were not separate chemically defined product and therefore would not fall under Chapter 38. He cited the sub-headings and Explanatory Notes of the HSN. He held that the contested products were akin to cleaning preparations. The Collector (Appeals) observed that the primary function was of cleaning and therefore the classification under Chapter 34 was most appropriate.4. In the appeal...
Mafatlal Fine Spg. and Mfg. Co. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT171Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants desire disposal on merits. We have heard Mrs. Reena Arya for the Revenue.2. The appellants manufactured textile fabrics and filed classification list from time to time inter alia showing the rates to duty and cesses on these fabrics including the related laws and the exemptions. The classifications were duly approved and the clearances made. Show cause notice dated 26-4-1993 alleged that the assessees had not paid handloom cess on chindies and trade samples of cotton fabrics. Demand of Rs. 11,000/- was made over the extended period alleging wilful mis-statement etc. The assessees claimed limitation on the ground that classification lists had duly been approved. It was claimed that the Chindies and trade samples were shown to be of Medium-A, Medium-B, varieties listed in the relevant notifications. The Commissioner after hearing the assessees confirmed the demand. Hence the present appeal.3. In the written submissions reliance is placed on Tribunal Judgment in the cas...
Pattern Tex Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)(128)ELT286Tri(Mum.)bai
1. There are eight appellants before us against a common order of the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda. By this order, the Collector found that each of the appellants manufactured parts of textile looms and cleared them without payment of duty. He further found that none of them was entitled to the benefit of Notification 175/86 for the reason that they had not filed declaration for obtaining exemption from the operation of Rule 174, which provides for licence for manufacture, and further they were not registered, as provided in paragraph 4 of the notification as small scale industries, by the appropriate governmental authority.2. We have indicated in the preceding para graph only those portions of the order which are in appeal before us. We are not concerned with the other aspects of the matter, where the Collector has found in favour of the appellants.3. The common advocate for all the appellants, Mr. Sridharan, contends that the activity carried out by the appellants does not am...
Siddharth Polymers Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT692Tri(Mum.)bai
The appellants filed 3 Bills of Entry declaring the goods as rough marble blocks/slabs. The column for declaration of the import licence etc. was kept blank. The particulars for each lot were declared in the Bs/E. At the material time, there was some information with the Customs about some persons attempting to clandestinely clear marble through the Kandla Port. The consignment was, therefore, subjected to thorough examination. Weighment of this consignment showed that there was an excess of 23.735 MTs of blocks and 56.05 Sq. Mts of slabs which came to about 6% and 13% of the total quantity respectively. Samples were drawn and on examination by technical authorities, the goods were found to be marble. Statements of the importers and Custom House Agents were recorded. The CHA admitted having written on one B/E that the marble was freely importable even knowing the fact that the goods were restricted item. In the statement of the CHA some other imports made by him were referred to. The ...
Gupta Dyeing and Printing Mills Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT765Tri(Mum.)bai
In these two matters, Gupta Dyeing and Printing Mills has filed this application praying for referring the questions 1 to 4 to the High Court along with the statement of facts under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act. (1) Whether shortage in weight will attract the provision of clause 3(3) of Export Trade Control Order No. 1/88 ETC when as per this clause if in any case it is found that the value, sort, specification, quality and description of the goods to be exported are not in conformity with the declaration of the exporter in this respect or quality and specification of such goods are not in accordance with the terms of export Contract, the export of such goods shall be deemed to be prohibited? (2) Whether the appellate Tribunal was correct in law in giving a liberal interpretation to the words "value, sort, specification, quality and description" use in clause 3(3) of Export Trade (Control) Order (1/88 ETC) when the words "weight" are not incorporated in this clause 3(3) of the Ex...
Classic Stripes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT844Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The duty of Rs. 75.66 lakhs approximately confirmed in the impugned order has already been deposited. The applications are therefore now limited to penalties of equivalent amount imposed under Section 11 AC of the Act on the manufacturer and of Rs. 1 lakh under Rule 209A on its Director, Kishore Musale.2. Having heard both sides we waive deposit of the deposit of the penalties and stay their recovery for the following reasons.3. The goods which are printed sheets of plastic, containing the logo of the product advertised, in addition to the printed material, have been classified by the Commissioner as parts of illuminated signs under Heading 94.05 of the tariff. The explanation of the Advocate for the applicant that such a sheet has to be placed in a sign consisting essentially of an external structure with glass in front to house it and a light source placed behind the printed material to ensure visibility and presentation is not rebutted by the departmental representative. If that...
Swastic Tar Products Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT759Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The common question for consideration in these five appeals is whether the process of oil blowing of bitumen from petroleum amounts to manufacture, and whether duty is leviable on such blown bitumen when the bitumen from which it has been obtained has already paid duty.2. We have heard Mayur Shroff for the appellants in E/1185,1732 and 4311/96. The other two appellants are absent and unrepresented and have requested decision on the written submissions filed by them.Bitumen Products India v. CCE - 1989 (44) E.L.T. 504 a Bench of this Tribunal had come to the conclusion that oil blowing of petroleum bitumen causes a chemical change in the bitumen resulting in transformation of a new commodity and that therefore air blown bitumen is a commodity different from the substance within which it was produced. However, two benches of the Tribunal have subsequently independently come to the conclusion that the ratio of this decision is not to be followed. In National Tar Products v. CCE - 2000...
Raymond Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT808Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appeal permitted to be retained here, as the appellant's registered office is in Mumbai. The Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee before him for failure to deposit the entire duty demanded of Rs. 33.48 lakhs.2. The advocate for the applicant says that the question before him was whether the assessee was entitled to reduce the assessable value of the fabric manufactured by granting "flag allowance". This allowance is granted in cases where minor defects come to notice during the weaving of the fabric as a result of which its value would be lower than the value of first quality fabric not having such defects.3. Apart from the fact that on merits this submission seems reasonable, the applicant has also pointed out the order of the same Commissioner (Appeals), who has dismissed the appeal before him accepting this submission. In his order passed on 10-2-2000, 15 days before the stay order in the present matter was passed, the Commissioner (Appeals) has ...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »