Mumbai Court March 2000 Judgments
Bank of America Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2001)78ITD1(Mum.)
1. We find it convenient to dispose of these three appeals of the assessee, for the assessment years 1992-93 to 1994-95, involving common issue, by this consolidated order.2. The common issue involved in these appeals is relating to the rate of tax chargeable on the income of the company for the respective assessment years. The relevant facts in this case are that the appellant, viz., Bank of America is a resident of the United States. It had filed the returns of income for assessment years 1992-93 to 1994-95 in India. Assessments under Section 143(3) had been completed for the said assessment years. In the case of domestic companies, the rate of tax provided under the respective Finance Acts is 45 per cent. Besides, surcharge at the rate of 15 per cent is chargeable. In the case of companies other than domestic companies the rate of tax provided under the respective Finance Act is 65 per cent. However, no surcharge is payable by a company other than a domestic company. The appellant ...
Tag this Judgment!Muthayya Muthu thevar Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(72)ECC568
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Three persons viz., Muthayya Muthu Thevar, Prem Khatke Rasal and Amarjitsingh Nasibsingh Jaisar were tried by the Special Judge for Greater Bombay in N. D. P. S. Special Case No. 722 of 1991 for an offence punishable under section 8(c) read with 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the N. D. P.S. Act). The learned Judge found them guilty for the said offence and vide his Order dated 21st March, 1995 sentenced each one of them to undergo 10 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, in default to suffer six months R. 1.Aggrieved by the aforesaid convictions and sentences, Muthayya Muthu Thevar has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 1995; Prem Khatke Rasai has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 255 of 1995; and Amarjitsingh Nasibsingh Jaisar has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 417 of 1995.Since the said appeals arise out of the same set of facts and a common impugned Judgment, we are disposing them of by one judgment.2...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: [2001]250ITR592(Bom)
1. A short point which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the expenditure incurred on hiring of yellow taxis stood disallowed under Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it stood at the relevant time. The relevant year of assessment is 1985-86. The Act as it stood at the relevant time, inter alia, stated under Section 37(3B), Explanation (c), that expenditure incurred on hire charges for engaging cars plied for hire stood disallowed. In the present case, the assessee has incurred expenses on hiring taxis (yellow taxis). Therefore, Section 57(38) has no application to the facts of the present case. In the circumstances, we do not find any error of law in the decision of the Tribunal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi), Through G.M. Central Railway, Cst Vs. Rajan Kuma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2001)ILLJ270Bom
S.S. Nijjar, J. 1. Rule. Respondent waives service. Heard forthwith. 2. The Petitioner by the present petition has impugned the orders dated October 26, 1999 and December 15, 1999. 3. By the first order the Tribunal decided 3 preliminary issues raised by the Petitioners before the Central Industrial Tribunal. The issues which were decided were: (i) whether the domestic inquiry held was against the principles of natural justice and fair play, (ii) whether the finding of the inquiry are perverse and (iii) whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide the reference.4. I have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners. Jn so far as the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the reference, learned Counsel relied on Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to contend that the Industrial Tribunal would have no jurisdiction. Section 15 ousts the jurisdiction of the Civil Court and confers the same on the Tribunal created under the Act. The expression 'Courts' would ordinarily mean C...
Tag this Judgment!Akai Impex Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-2000
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT610Tri(Mum.)bai
1. We have heard the Counsel for the applicants on the stay applications and read the applications filed by Mohammed Shafi Haji A.Sattar and Abdul Hameed Abdul Roff. These two applicants are absent and unrepresented despite notice. We have also heard the departmental representative in reply.2. Penalty has been imposed on M/s. Akai Impex under the Customs Act and Central Excise Act, and each of the applicants before us. In the impugned order, the Commissioner has found that M/s. Akai Impex was a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) and entitled to the benefit of Notification 1/95. This notification exempts from excise duty goods intended to be exported. The exemption is also available to such goods despatched to another EOU for further processing and manufacturing by that unit. The Commissioner finds that four consignments of polyester yarn which was texturised by this applicant were purportedly shown to have delivered to M/s. Ratan Raj Texturising Pvt. Ltd., an 100% EOU, situated at Ankles...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Standard Fabricators (i) Pvt.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2000
Reported in: (2000)(69)ECC663
This is the Department's appeal against the above captioned impugned order dated 31.3.94 praying for setting aside the same and for other relief as deemed fit.1. The facts in brief are that respondent is manufacturing excisable goods fabricators falling under Chapter 84 of Tariff Act under the Excise License. The respondent availed Mod vat credit of Rs. 24030 on the strength of gate pass, endorsed more than twice which is not proper duty paying document, and took notional credit of Rs. 1702 at a later date in contravention of Rule 57B of Central Excise Act, Superintendent Central Excise Range III issued show cause notice on 19.5.92 to show cause why Central Excise duty of Rs. 25,732 should not be demanded and recovered under Rule 571, and why penalty should not be imposed under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules. The respondent replied it on 11.6.92. Personal hearing was held on 23.2.92. Respondent was heard, Excise Consultant Shri B.D. Birari and Shri D.D. Pradhan Executive Administra...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Forwarders P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2000
Reported in: (2000)(70)ECC574
1. When this application for stay of the order dated 21-9-1991 was argued, it appeared that the point of law being extremely short, the appeal itself could be taken up for disposal. This was done after hearing of Shri J.C. Patel for the appellants and Shri K.L. Ramtake, JDR for the Revenue.2. The Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai issued a notice to the appellants proposing to hold an enquiry against them under Regulation 23 of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984. The article of charge was served on the CHA. The Asstt. Commissioner was nominated as the enquiry officer. The notice directed the CHA to file a written reply and also to appear before the enquiry officer when so directed. The noticee filed due reply on 23-4-1998. The enquiry was held by the nominated Asstt. Commissioner. The departmental witnesses were examined and cross examined. Thereafter, the presenting officer duly appointed by the Commissioner of Customs filed written briefs. A copy thereof was given to the present appel...
Tag this Judgment!ibkey Plastics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2000
Reported in: (2000)(70)ECC818
1. This is the parties appeal against the above captioned impugned order dated 21-7-1995 praying for setting aside the same, and credit lying in balance on 14-10-1992 and RG 23A Part H may be allowed to be utilised for payment of Excise duty on HOPE sacks/bags as processed of manufacture remains the same. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant manufactures HDPE/PP Tapes, fabrics and woven bags under Chapters 54 and 63 respectively. Under Section STB of the Central Excise Act and Central Board of Excise and Customs issued an Order No.8/92, dated 24-9-1992 classifying them under Chapter 39. The appellant was already availing Modvat credit in respect of HDPE/PPE granules for payment of excise duty on HOPE Tapes. They filed revised Modvat declaration dated 14-10-1992 and also claimed transfer of balance lying in RG 23A Part n amounting to Rs. 1,73,356.40 Basic Excise Duty + Rs. 26,002.70 Special Excise Duty under the letter dated 14-10-1992. They had shown the inputs lyin...
Tag this Judgment!Smita Conductors Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. (Appeals)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2000
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT595Tri(Mum.)bai
1. On hearing Shri R.C. Sethi, ld. Consultant for the applicants and Shri Deepak Kumar for the Revenue, it appeared that at this stage itself the main appeal could be taken up for disposal, both sides agreeing this was done after granting waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 29,27,903/-.2. The appellants manufactured goods for supply to various Govt.Agencies and undertakings at prices quoted exclusive of excise duty and sales tax, on the ground that the supplies would be made under the World Bank Loan, and the various duties paid by the manufacturer would be refunded to them. As a condition of the contract the assessees received advance payment of 10% of the contract amount. Against this advance, the assessees had to file Bank Guarantee against default, of equivalent amount. After issue of show cause notices, the Assistant Collector passed the orders directing that the notional interest, on such advances was includible in the assessable value and confirmed the resultant differential duty. Aga...
Tag this Judgment!indo Magnetic Cassettes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-2000
Reported in: (2000)(70)ECC44
1. These two applications relate to two appeals arising out of the same common order. They are therefore being disposed of together vide this single order.2. M/s. Indo Magnetic Cassettes Pvt. Ltd. are a unit situated in SEEPZ, Mumbai. They had filed a bill of entry for importation of "V.O. with Hubs with Super Anti-Fungus Protector". The same wording was appearing in the invoices, the packing list and the two Bills of Lading.Examination of the goods showed that they were mainly consisting of complete Video Cassettes and only 47 pes out of 9000 pc. answered to the description in the import documents. These goods were seized. After issuing of show cause notice and hearing the notices, the Commissioner passed the impugned order, confiscating the goods, but permitting their redemption on payment of fine and also imposing penalties of Rs. 2 lakhs on the importing company and of Rs. 5 lakhs on Shri Satish Mehta, the Director thereof, who is the second applicant before us. The two appeals an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »