Mumbai Court August 2001 Judgments

Tata Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The duty of Rs. 5.62 lakhs approx. has been demanded and penalty of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on the ground that the binders made by the applicant which it captively uses as an adhesive basis in the manufacturer of non-woven textiles are liable to duty under 35.06 of the Tariff.2. The applicant's contention is that the binder lacks stabilisers and polymerising agent, and therefore has a short shelf life, rendering it unmarketable. There is no substantiation whatsoever of this claim before us, no substantiation also appears to have been offered before the Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals). We are therefore prima facie unable to accept his claim. The reliance by the counsel on the Supreme Court judgment in Moti Laminates Pvt. Ltd. v.CCE 1995 (76) ELT 241, and on the circular of the Board No. 464/30/99 dated 30.6.99 is misplaced. The Supreme Court judgment was based on the finding of the fact that the product under consideration by it had a short shelf life and hence was not...

Silverwing Investment and Trading Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Acc,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(149)ELT601Tri(Mum.)bai

2. The appellant obtained by transfer an advance licence and utilised it for the import of goods which it cleared without payment of duty in terms of notification 203/92. The goods were cleared in 1994. The notice issued to it dated 29.1.1999 proposed denial of the benefit of the notification on the ground that modvat credit had been availed of in the manufacture of the exported product, contravening one of the conditions subject to which the exemption is available. It also invoked the extended period contained in the proviso under Sub-section (1) of Section 28 of the Act on the ground that the importer wrongly declared on the export document that modvat credit had not been availed of. The Commissioner having confirmed the demand for duty and imposed penalty, the importer is before us.3. The appellant being a transferee of licence, it would be evident that it would not have filed any documents for export and therefore could not have made any wrongful declaration in this document. The ...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)81ITD219(Mum.)

1. In this appeal filed by Revenue the order of the learned CIT(A) that interest under Section 215 was not chargeable by the AO in the assessment made under Section 143(3) r/w Section 263 is disputed. Facts of the case leading to this appeal, briefly, are that the AO completed the assessment for asst. yr. 1985-86 for the first time on 28th March, 1988, and levied interest under Section 215 amounting to Rs. 13,67,999 which was reduced to Rs. 8,63,650 in appeal. The assesses thereafter made an application under Rule 40 of IT Rules seeking waiver of this interest and Dy. CIT, Special Range-18, Bombay, as per his order dt.28th March, 1989, reduced the interest under Section 215 to Rs. 4,13,630, as he waived the interest levied by the AO to the extent of Rs. 4,40,020 in exercise of his powers under Rule 40(1) of the IT Rules. Thereafter the assessment originally made on 28th March, 1988, was set aside by the order of the learned CIT, Bombay City-VI, Bombay, dt. 30th March, 1990 and the AO ...

Laxmikant Shankarlal Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002BomCR(Cri)170; 2002CriLJ1040; 2002(2)MhLj471

R.K. Batta, J.1. The applicant apprehending arrest in connection with the offences under, Section 3 read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, sought anticipatory bail which was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, vide order dated 30th July, 2001.2. In order to appreciate the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, it is necessary to enumerate the facts of the matter.3. According to the prosecution the crime branch received information that blue kerosene had been illegally unloaded at Ramsons Castings Pvt. Ltd. Nagpur, (for short to be referred as 'Ramsons casting'). Accordingly, the crime branch police staff went near the factory yard of Ramsons Casting. One tanker bearing No. MH 31 M 2541 had entered into the said company at about 4 p.m. on 23-7-2001. After about 15 minutes the raiding party along with the Panchas went inside the premises of said Ramsons casting and found that k...

Shivkumar S/O. Baburao Karlekar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(3)BomCR745

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 2nd November, 1999 passed by the Scrutiny Committee rejecting the caste claim of the petitioner. Few facts, relevant for the decision, are that, the petitioner was admitted to the Engineering course in Shyamlal College of Engineering, Udgir-respondent No. 4 herein, in the year 1998-99. He was admitted to the said course under a reserved category pursuant to the claim of the petitioner that he belongs to Lingder caste. The claim was sought to be supported by the caste certificate dated 30th April, 1994 issued by the Taluka Executive Magistrate at Billoli. The caste claim of the petitioner having not been verified at the time of the admission to the college and the issue regarding of the caste claim was kept pending for a considerable time, as such, the petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 4889 of 1998 and this Court by an order dated 24th November, 1998, had directed the respondent No. 2 to decide the caste claim of t...

Diviya Chemicals Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant exported dye intermediates, and as a result, obtained a value based advance licence entitling it to import goods free of duty in terms of notification 203/92. It imported such goods between the years 1992 and 1994, clearing them without payment of duty in terms of the notification. Notice dated 6.12.1998 issued to the appellant, proposed recovery of the customs duty payable on the goods imported by it which had been foregone by applying notification 203/92. The notice alleged that the benefit of the notification was not available for the reason that one of the conditions subject to which exemption is available, that modvat credit should not have been availed in the manufacture of the export product, had been contravened. The appellant filed its reply in March, 1998. It contended therein that it had reversed the amount of duty taken as credit as also the interest payable on such duty, and was therefore covered by the Amnesty, Scheme which was introduced from 3.1.1997. ...

Pure Metal Exports Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Kandla

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(146)ELT152Tri(Mum.)bai

2. The appellant is a unit, located in the Kandla Free Trade Zone, stated to be engaged in the manufacture for export of aluminium and brass scrap. It cleared 20% of its export production to the domestic tariff area on payment of excise duty applicable to such clearances by notification 2/95. The notice issued to it proposed denial of the exemption contained in the notification on the ground that one of the conditions in the Import & Export Policy, subject to which the benefit of the notification is available, of achieving the required value addition had not been fulfilled by the appellant. It therefore proposed to disallow the benefit of exemption. The Commissioner having confirmed the denial, the appellant is before us.3. The basis for the view incorporated int he show cause notice that the value addition has not been achieved is a report to the department of the Development Commissioner of the Free Trade Firm. That report was not enclosed to the show cause notice or otherwise m...

Apar Industries Ltd. and M.J. Shah Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Duty of Rs.25.83 lakhs and equivalent penalty are required to be deposited by the assessee and a penalty of Rs.5 lakhs imposed on M.J.Shah, its General Manger, is required to be deposited.2. The question involved in these appeals and in appeal E/1702/01 of Apar Industries is common. It revolves round the clearances made, stated to have been made from one unit of the firm (with which we are concerned in these appeals) to another, which is the subject matter of the second appeal. After hearing counsel for the appellant we are of the view that the appel as themselves could be disposed of on a short point. Taking not of the adjustment by he department of Rs.14.85 lakhs from the refund due to the appellant, we direct deposit of another Rs.5 lakhs within one month from today. Thereupon we waive deposit of the remaining duty and penalty and their recovery.3. These appeals and appeal E/1702/01 will be listed for hearing on 8th October, 2001, subject to compliance with this order....

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Modern Denim Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(148)ELT124Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal from Revenue was argued by Shri George. The respondents were not present. On earlier occasions also the respondents had remained absent. The appeal is, therefore, decided on merits on perusal of the documents including the letter of the respondents dated 15.5.2000.2. The appeal memorandum shows that the impugned order was received by the jurisdictional Commissioner on 1.11.95. The appeal was filed on 8.3.96. The Registry communicated to the appellant Commissioner vide letter dated 9.12.99 that an application for condonation of delay was required to be filed. So far there is no reaction to this communication. In the aforesaid letter, the respondents claimed that on this ground alone the appeal from the Revenue may be dismissed.3. Even otherwise, I have gone to the case records. For failure to show proof of export, the demand was confirmed on the assessee and penalty was imposed. This order was set aside by the Collector (appeals) on the observation that the assessee had ...

Lloyds Metal and Engineers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(147)ELT255Tri(Mum.)bai

2. Two orders of the Commissioner impugned in these appeals dismissed the appeals filed before him by the appellant, for failure to deposit of the entire duty and penalty that was confirmed. The order of the Assistant Commissioner were passed in the following circumstances. The appellant manufactured steel pipes. It cleared most of these pipes for home consumption on payment of duty. It cleared some quantity without payment of duty to a buyer, who after subjecting the pipes to various processes, exported them. Clause (b) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 13 provides that the Central Government may specify materials the removal of which may be permitted by the Commissioner without payment of duty for use in manufacture in bond of export goods. Notification 47/94 issued by the Central Government under this rule specifies all excisable goods and prescribed the procedure for this purpose. Rule 12 enables the government to grant rebate of duty paid on excisable goods or duty paid on material used in...