Mumbai Court July 2001 Judgments

Modistone Limited Vs. Vs. Bombay Tyre International Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These four appeals arise out of two commonly worded orders and were disposed off by this common order.2. The brief facts are that the assessee, namely M/s. Modistone Limited (formerly known as M/s. Bombay Tyre International Limited) are manufactures of tyres, tubes and flaps and other products falling under Chapter 40 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They availed of modvat credit in terms of Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules on the inputs used in the manufacture of the tyres and tubes.Tyres are meant for tractors of engine capacity not exceeding 1800CC are fully exempt from payment of duty in terms of notification 42/86-CE dated 10/02/1986 as amended. Therefore input credit is not admissible for inputs used in the manufacture of the incentive variety tyres and tubes. Since the assessee had availed modvat credit even on inputs which went into the manufacture of the exempted category of tractors, show cause notices proposing recovery of duty and proposing im...

Vip Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the eligibility of the bending strips, manufactured by the appellant out of polyvinyl chloride, to be considered as inputs used in or in relation to manufacture of travel goods at the time of manufacture. The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) reversing the finding of the Assistant Collector that the goods were inputs. The Commissioner (Appeals) has found the goods to be appliances and therefore falling within the exclusion clause of the explanation 218 and therefore not exclusion clause to the notification 217/86.E/85/94 (VIP Industries Ltd. vs. CCE) relying on the decision of the larger bench of the Tribunal in Union Carbide India Ltd. vs. CCE 1996 (86) ELT 613 after considering the use to which the goods are put, has found the goods not to be in the nature of appliances. While the departmental representative reiterates the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) he is not able to say why the ratio of that deci...

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Structural India Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. We are now informed by Shri Sarkar, learned DR that the Revenue has filed another appeal in May, 2001 which has now been numbered as E/1470/2001. Therefore the present application for fixing out of turn hearing of this appeal is dismissed with liberty to the Revenue to file a fresh application after the second appeal is also listed....

Eastman Cast and Forge Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(138)ELT1111Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The issue involved is being common, appeals taken up for disposal, after waiving deposit, with the consent of both sides.2. The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner demanding duty, imposing penalty on the appellant. The Commissioner has found that the goods imported by the appellant were not entitled to the benefit of exemption contained in notification 203/92, for the reason that the condition in the notification, modvat credit should not have been availed in the manufacture of export products, has been contravened.3. The common contention of each of the appellants that they had not received the show cause notice or a notice proposing the demand. Each of them relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in Futura Fashions Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC, Sheva 2000 (39) RLT 874. In addition, Mr. Veluswamy contends that on behalf of Saurashtra Ballpen Pvt. Ltd. that the exported gods were ballpoint pens and parts which were exempted from excise duty in the entry 3 of the table to the notif...

Odyssey Video Communications Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Acc,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. By order No. C-I/1739/WZB/2000 dated 11/05/2000 the above appeal was dismissed for non-compliance with the requirement of the stay order by which pre-deposit of Rs. 64 lakhs was directed out of the total duty demand of over Rs. 1 crore.2. The appeal has already been dismissed and there is no application for restoration of the appeal. Present application seeks permission for adjustment of Rs. 15 lakhs given as margin money for bank guarantee.Since the appeal has already been dismissed we have become functus officio and no further orders are called for in this case. The file is treated as closed....

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Vrijesh Natural Fibre and Fabrics P.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the valuation of goods imported by the respondent to this appeal, for the purposes of determining whether they were covered by the import licence that it produced for clearing the goods. The Assistant Commissioner held that the value was too low, and enhanced. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside this order on an appeal by the importer.2. It is not necessary for us to go into the aspect of valuation here in order to dispose of this appeal. Even assuming that the value claimed by the department is the correct value for the purposes of Section 14 of the Act, it is the value that the importer declared that will have to be considered for the purposes of import licence. This is the ratio of the judgment of the Bombay High Court in UOI v. Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd. 1984 (17) ELT 284. Therefore we find no reason to interfere....

Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. For reasons recorded below we waive pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 3,34,000/- confirmed as differential duty against the appellant in terms of Section 143 of the Customs Act, 1962 for non-compliance of the conditions of the notification 155/81-Cus dated 28/05/1981, namely non production of end use certificates and proceed to dispose of the appeal.2. The appellants who have asked for decision on merits state that since the matter is very old the could not obtain the consumption certificate for production before the authorities below but have now obtained the relevant end use certificate and have already forwarded the same to the Dy. Commissioner of Customs. They pray that the matter may be decided after examination of the certificates furnished by them.3. Since the certificates now been produced we set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the jurisdictional Deputy/Assistant Commissioner for fresh decision in the light of the end use certificates stated to have been produced b...

Western Ministil Limited Vs. the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. and ors.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

1. The appeals are filed by the same party but arise out of two different applications filed in two Original Applications of the Bank of Rajasthan, which are disposed of by common judgment by the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Mumbai, on 16.07.2001. Orders are passed on applications Exhibit 58 in O.A. No. 3202 of 2000 and Exhibit 92 in O.A. No. 1808 of 2000. Both these applications were made by the defendant No. 3 in the original applications namely Western Ministil Limited, a company.2. In order to understand controversy brief facts are required to be stated. The respondent No. 3 M/s. Virgo Steel, partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act was from time-to-time purchasing various semi-finished steel products such as RCS billets of various descriptions, size and other products from the appellants. In respect of the said transactions, the payments were made occasionally by the respondent No. 3, M/s. Virgo Steel under various letters of credit establis...

Indian Rayon and Industries Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)81ITD47(Mum.)

1. The Assessee is in appeal arising out of the consolidated order of CIT(A)-Central-I, Mumbai dated 16-1-98 against the confirmation of an addition of Rs. 11,72,000 being the value of which Jeep and Omni Buses and value of Rs. 51,41,000 in respect of guest house for the assessment years 1993-94 and also for the assessment year 1994-95, value of Jeeps and Omni Buses confirmed at Rs. 13,93,385 and value of Guest House at Rs. 51,41,000.2. In the assessment year 1993-94 as per order under Section 16(3) dated 7-3-1996 the W.T.O. has valued Jeeps and Maruti Vans at Rs. 11,72,000 and valued Guest House at Rs. 51,41,000. For the assessment year 1994-95 as per order under Section 16(3) dated 26-3-1997 the value of vehicles was at Rs. 13,93,385 and value of Guest House at Rs. 52,54,309.3. Regarding automobiles ie., Jeeps and Maruti Vans the assessee has not included the value of the same in its statement of wealth claiming that the Wealth Tax Act provides taxability in connection of Motor Cars...

Gope Laxmichand Badlani Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce, New Delhi and o ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(1)ALLMR429; (2002)1BOMLR464; [2002(93)FLR182]; 2002(2)MhLj755

S.J. Vazifdar, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service.2. The petitioner was employed as a Chief Manager with respondent No. 1. Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the Deputy General Manager, General Manager and Chairman-cum-Managing Director of respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 was appointed by respondent No. 3 to conduct an enquiry into the charges levelled against the petitioner. In the enquiry proceedings he is referred to as the I. A. i.e. Investigating Authority. Respondent No. 3 acted as the Disciplinary Authority in respect of the proceeding under the Oriental Bank of Commerce Officer Employees (discipline and appeal) Regulations, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations'). Respondent No. 4 is the Appellate Authority under the said Regulations.3. The petition challenges the findings of respondent No. 2 dated 19th March, 1999 holding the petitioner guilty of not discharging his duties with integrity, devotion and diligence; the order of responde...