Mumbai Court November 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.
Gupta Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-02-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT567Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Paragraph 47 and 48 of the Import Policy AM 1985-88 permitted NRI, persons of Indian Origin coming to India for permanent settlement to import certain machinery provided the importer was to come and settle in India within two years of the grant of such licence. In this case, certain machines were imported by one M.M. Patel. These machines subsequent to their importation were sold. Shri M.M. Patel continued to stay in UK. DRI seized these machines from various buyers after about 2 years of importation for violation of the post-importation condition.In the impugned order, the machines were confiscated but were allowed redemption on payment of appropriate fines. Two of the machines were purchased by the present appellants who filed the present appeal for setting aside the redemption fine.2. Shri S.R. Narayanan, ld. Consultant submits that the machines were purchased in good faith during the course of normal trade. He submitted that on use the machines found to be inferior qualitify an...
Patheja Forgings and Auto Parts Vs. C.C.E. and C.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT513Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner confirmed the proposal in the show cause notice demanding duty from the appellant on various grounds, ordered confiscation of plant and machinery and imposed penalty under 173Q.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. We have therefore read the memorandum of appeal, impugned order and other connected papers and heard the departmental representative.3. We shall deal with the demand for duty and penalty. The demand on the ground that some quantity of inputs were cleared by the appellant after paying duty equal to the amount of Modvat credit taken, whereas what should have been paid was the duty prevailing on the date of removal, cannot be supported in the light of the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in CCE v. Asia Brown Boveri - 2000 (120) E.L.T.228 holding that law only required reversal of the credit taken by the appellant when he received the inputs.4. The duty has also been demanded on the gro...
India Forge and Drop Stampings Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT530Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The major question for consideration in these appeals, one by the assessee, and other by its director (on whom penalty under 209A has been imposed) is the extent of invisible loss that is permissible. The appellant manufactures steel forgings. Its process of manufacture commences with billets and rods which it receives. The goods are sometimes subjected to heat treatment for tampering. They are thereafter cut to the required size; cut pieces heated to high temperature and forged by dies. The rough forging is trimmed and holes made in it. Subsequently it is heat treated and then subjected to shot blasting to remove scale deposited during the heat treatment. The final operation is grinding, to remove projection or burns as a result of forging to give the product a smooth finish. During all these processes, there is loss of material that is worked upon. Such loss may be visible as in the case of shaving, trimming etc. Some of the loss however is invisible as in the case of fine dust o...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Jay Chemicals Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT580Tri(Mum.)bai
1. By this appeal, the Commissioner challenges the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) that respondent was entitled to take Modvat credit, the Notional Modvat credit in October 1991 whereas the goods have been received and credit taken in June, 1991. While the respondent seeks adjournment, I am of the few that the matter can be decided in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in CCE v. Mysore Lac & Paints Works -1991 (52) E.L.T. 590. The ratio of the decision that notional credit can be taken at a later date, within reasonable period of taking the credit and that bench of the Tribunal found it to be six months, would squarely apply to the facts of the case....
Commissioner of Customs Vs. Maini Traders
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT388Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration by the Commissioner is the valuation of a consignment of glass sheets imported by Maini Traders, the respondent to this appeal.2. We have heard the departmental representative. The respondent is absent and unrepresented. The declared value of the glass sheets of Japanese origin imported by it in August 1994 is US $ 1460 per metric ton (tonne) CIR The department was of the view that the price should be equal to sterling pound 2903 per tonne. This was based on the price quoted in the London Metal Exchange (LME for short) of the FOB price of pound 2853 in addition to pound 50 towards the freight. The importer resisted the notice issued to it in this regard, contending that LME price should not be applied, and was in any case only applicable to goods of UK origin. The Asstt. Collector declined to accept these contentions. He said that the prices of the LME represented the contemporary international price; buyers and sellers accept these for entering into ...
international Dyestuff Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT574Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Collector (Appeals) has confirmed the view of the Asst. Collector that Modvat credit would not be available to the appellant on the duty paid on high density polyethylene woven sacks to pack chemicals manufactured by it. The Asst. Collector had cited, as a reason for denying credit the exclusion clause contained in Sub-rule (1) of Rule 57A. This clause excludes from consideration as inputs "bags or sakes made out of fabric (whether or not covered or laminated with any other metal) woven form strips or tape or plastic".2. The only contention in the appeal is that the bags are not made out of fabrics. They are made out of plastic material and classifiable under Chapter 39 of the Central Excise Tariff. Fabric is a textile product for which some dictionary meaning is cited.3. We are not able to accept this contention. The clause that we have quoted above in the explanation itself refers to fabrics woven from strips obtained from plastics, it is...
Brooke Bond Lipton India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT569Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Notice dated 16-9-1991 was issued to the appellant proposing classification of "Sweet Corn Cream Style" manufactured by it under heading 2104.10 of the Tariff in preference to the heading claimed by the appellant of 2001.10. By a corrigendum to the notice dated 8-11-1991 the product was proposed to be classified under heading 2107.91 in place of the heading initially proposed. The Asst. Collector after considering the cause shown, found that the material produced before him justified accepting the classification claimed by the appellant and dropped the proceedings. The department sought review of this order under Section 35E(4). In the application it proposed that the goods should be classified under heading 2104.10. The Collector accepted this contention and ordered the classification as claimed.Hence this appeal by the manufacturer.2. From the facts that we have narrated above, it will be evident that the classification proposed by the department before the Collector (Appeals) wh...
R.R. Electronics Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(73)ECC143
1. The impugned order of the Collector was passed on common notice issued, among others, to each of the appellant before us. The notice, in essence alleged that, as part of a larger conspiracy imports were made of different components which on assessment would constitute video cassette recorders (VCRs for short). Different such components were imported through Bombay Port, Airport and Ahmedabad. The components were obtained abroad by disassembling such VCRs. These components were sold, as a part of the conspiracy, to persons who assembled them into VCRs and sold them to Nikhil Traders. It was alleged that the VCRs were undervalued. In his order, the Commissioner has confirmed the existence of conspiracy and various facets of it and found guilty each of the appellants before us. He has ordered recovery of duty short paid on the earlier consignment which was cleared, confiscated the video cassette recorder which was seized during the proceedings and imposed penalties on each of them.2. ...
Girish Silk Mills Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-01-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT568Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Duty of Rs. 92,443/- has been demanded form Girish Silk Mills and equivalent penalty imposed on the firm, and penalties of Rs. 5000/- each imposed on Prahalad B. Talreja and P.C. Mulchandani, manager and proprietor respectively of the firm. Redemption fine, of Rs. 20,000/- is also required to be paid in respect of goods which were seized and provisionally released prior to passing the impugned order.2. The demand for duty, and imposition of penalty, are based on the finding of the Dy. Commissioner, confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals), that the embossing carried out by the applicant on the fabrics amounts to manufacture.3. In our stay order in application 1377/99 (appeal 1975/99) by Ronak Manufacturing Company, we had come to the prima facie view, after considering technical evidence, that such embossing not being of a permanent nature, but lasting only for a few washes, could not be considered to be manufacture, applying the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in Siddheswari Co...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›