Mumbai Court June 2001 Judgments

Pashupati Traders Vs. Commissioner of Customs (i)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- imposed on the applicant under clause (a) of Section 112 of the Act.3. The Commissioner has enhanced the value of consignment, comprising mainly electronic calculators, imported by the applicant, after declining to accept the transaction value on the ground that the description of the goods had been misdeclared. He has order their confiscation clause (m) of Section 111 of the Act with an option to redeem them on payment of fine. Counsel for the applicant submit that the goods are still pending clearance.4. The principal contention of the counsel for the applicant is that the reports of the market value upon which the Commissioner has placed reliance, have not been made available to the applicant. Prima facie, this appears to be so. However, we do not see how this makes significant difference at this stage. Given the fact of mis-declaration of the model numbers in the packing list attached to the consignment, whic...

Halol Leather Cloth Limited Halol Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Cent ...

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(135)ELT1041Tri(Mum.)bai

1. In the order impugned in this appeal the Commissioner has confirmed the duty demanded from the appellant in the show cause notice dated 4.9.1992 for clearances of coated textile fabrics made between 1.3.1987 to 11.6.1989. The notice invoked the extended period contained in the proviso under sub-section (1) of Section 11A of the Act.2. The appellant manufactures its product by coating knitted cotton fabrics with plastic. It had filed classification list for the goods claiming the benefit of exemption under entry to table to notification 63/87. This entry exempts from duty textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics classifiable under heading 5903.19. This entry exempts the goods from duty in excess of Rs. 6.50 per square metre plus duty for the time being leviable on the base fabrics under Chapter 52 if not already paid. In the classification list that the appellant had filed it had indicated description of the goods as textile fabrics impregnated, coated...

Patodia Polytex Ltd. and anr. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(97)LC370Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The question for consideration in these appeals is, whether in calculating the value of clearances made by the appellant for the purposes of Notification 1/93, it is the date on which the textured polyester yarn manufactured by the appellant was notified as being eligible for the benefit of the notification, or the date on which the appellant opted for the notification, that is to be reckoned.2. This issue has been decided by the Madras Bench of the Tribunal in CCE, Coimbatore v. Sri Kumaran Spinners Pvt. Ltd. 1997 (73) ECR 894 holding that it is the clearances from the date on which the manufacturer opts for the exemption that should be reckoned.3. We, therefore, allow these appeals and set aside the impugned order.Consequential relief according to law....

Shri Natraj Finishers and Amit Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The common issue in these appeals having been settled disposed by the decision of the larger bench of the Tribunal, we waive deposit of the duty and take up the appeals for disposal.2. In each of these orders impugned in these appeals the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-II has held that in computing the capacity of the stenters in the factory of each of these appellants under the rules provided for this purpose, the rail length of the galleries contained in the stenter is to be included. He has relied upon the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in C.M. Paints Vs. CCE 2001 (120) ELT 821.That decision is no longer good law, having been overruled by the larger bench decision in Sangam Processors Bhilwara Vs. CCE 2001 (127) ELT 679 holding that the rail length of the galleries is not to be taken into account in computing the capacity of the stenters.3. Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed and the impugned order set aside....

Torrent Gujarat Bio-tech Ltd., Vs. Torrent Gujarat Bio-tech

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The question for consideration in these four appeals is the eligibility of the manufacturer, Torren Gujarat Bio-Tech Ltd., to take credit under Rule 57Q. The Commissioner (Appeals) has two orders extending the benefit to some goods and denying the same to others. The department is in appeal against that portion extending the benefit and the assessee is against that portion of the order denying the credit.2. The common ground in each of these appeals of the department is that the capital goods in question were not specified in Rule 57Q as it stood at the relevant time. The goods could not fall within the description of goods used for producing or processing any goods or bringing about any change in any substance for the manufacture of the final product.3. It would be appropriate to first deal with the appeals of the assessee. The goods in question are classifiable into storage tank of various types, electrical transformers; pipers and pipe fittings; electrical motors and other provi...

Goel Packaging Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal is taken up for disposal with the consent of both sides after waiving deposit.2. The appellant imported a consignment of polypropylene which was permitted to be cleared free of duty under the exemption provided in notification 203/92. Notice subsequently issued to the appellant proposed to deny benefit of notification on the ground that one of the conditions subject to which exemption was available, that modvat credit should not have been availed of in the manufacture of exported goods, had been contravened. It is upon adjudication of this notice that the Commissioner has passed the order, impugned in this appeal, confirming the demand for duty and imposing penalty.3. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that its factory at Calcutta in which the exported goods were manufactured was not required to be registered with the Central Excise authorities for the reason that no goods were ever cleared from it for home consumption; its total production was exported. ...

A.M. Kanpurwala Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

1. The Applicant Shri A.M. Kanpurwala has come up before this Tribunal in this OA challenging the order/letter No. BSL. 533.28 PW1 Gr. I and II date 4.9.1995 issued by the respondents directing that the intervening period from the dated of compulsory retirement to the date of his reinstatement be treated as dies non.2. Heard learned Counsel Shri Ghaisas for the applicant and Shri Dhawan for the respondents, 3. In this case, it is seen that the applicant, who was working with Indian Railways was served on 22.8.94 a letter bearing No.BSL/P/576/EB/Review proposing to retire him compulsorily with effect from 13.9.94 and advising him to file representation if any relating to the proposed action. Further letter was issued on 13.9.94 stating that he would stand retired on 28.9.94. On his filing detailed representation against the order of compulsory retirement, his case was examined and by the impugned order dated 4.9.95 he was directed to be reinstated in service and the intervening period ...

Vasant Ladagya Gawand Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking to quash and set aside the order Annexure--'A-1' dated 6.12.1994, stopping of H.R.A. with effect from 1.12.1993 which is illegal and payment of the same.2. Perusal of the impugned order is necessary for proper appreciation of the subject matter which is as under: With reference to his application dated 23.3.1994, Shri V.L. Gawand, Artist Engraver, is informed that since his wife is in occupation of Govt. accommodation at the same station, he is not entitled for drawal of H.R.A. with effect from 25.12.74. Accordingly, his H.R.A. recovery for the period from 25.12.74 to 30.11.93 is worked out to Rs. 77,329/-. He is therefore hereby directed to remit the above amount in the Mint Treasury either in lumpsum or in suitable instalments by cash or through his monthly salary so that entire amount of recovery may be made before his retirement." 3. The perusal of the impugned order makes it clear that H....

Srikant D. Salunke (Dr.) Since Deceased by L.Rs Sonubai Dhondiram Salu ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(2)ALLMR187; 2002(2)MhLj173

D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner seeks to challenge the electricity bills raised by the Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking for the period 25th September, 1990 to 22nd May, 1993 and from 22nd May, 1993 to 22nd May, 1994. The original petitioner has since expired and his legal heirs have been brought on record. The case of the original petitioner is that the bills which had been issued by the respondent Undertaking had been duly and regularly paid by him. According to the petitioner Meter No. G 863642 which had been installed at his premises in which a Dental Clinic was being conducted by the petitioner, who is a Medical Doctor, was found to be defective upon investigation on 5th August, 1992. On 19th February, 1993 the respondent informed the petitioner that the meter was defective and that it was liable to be replaced. The petitioner has set out that thereafter, on 28th April, 1994, another letter was addres...

Arun Manikrao Shindekar Vs. Rameshwarsingh Sarnamsingh Kirad

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(3)ALLMR906; 2001(4)BomCR784; (2001)4BOMLR192; 2001(3)MhLj803

S.D. Gundewar, J.1. Heard finally at the stage of admission by the consent of the parties.2. This second appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 15-2-2000 passed by the learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Achalpur in Regular Civil Appeal No. 562/1991 affirming the judgment and decree dated 27-7-1990 passed by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge. Junior Division, Achalpur in Regular Civil Suit No. 155/88, whereby the learned Trial Judge decreed the respondent/plaintiff s suit for eviction and arrears of rent and damages.3. In short, the respondent/plaintiffs case is that the appellant/ defendant was the tenant of Gram Panchayat House No. 1492 situate in Ward No. 6 at village Pathrot, Tq. Achalpur, District Amravati (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit premises') belonging to him at monthly rent of Rs. 151/- which was increased to Rs. 200/- per month from January, 1983. The tenancy month of the defendant commenced from the 1st day of every English calendar month ...