Mumbai Court August 2001 Judgments

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Carbon Corporation Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(149)ELT775Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The respondent to this appeal is engaged in the manufacture of graphite electrodes. In the process of such manufacturer, it uses graphite blocks, which also manufactures in the factory, which, in order to conduct electricity required for the functioning of its furnace, is required for making the graphite electrodes. Notification 217/86 exempts goods specified in column 2 of it referred to it as input manufactured in a factory and used within the factory or any other factory of the same manufacturer in or in relation to the manufacturer of the final product. The explanation of the notification as 'inputs' does not include the goods specified in it. Among these are, machines, machinery, plant, equipment, apparatus, tools, or appliances used for processing or producing any goods or for bringing about any change in any substance in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that these graphite block...

Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti Vs. Matulya Mills Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(2)BomCR725; (2002)ILLJ347Bom

ORDER1. Both these notices of motion are taken out by the petitioner-trade union. The respondent No. 1 is the mill company and the respondent No. 2 is its director. Both these motions seek to espouse the cause of 660 workmen of the 1st respondent mill company.2. Notice of Motion No. 18 of 2001 seeks a direction to the respondent No. 6, i.e., BIFR [before whom the proceeding for revival of 1st respondent mill company is pending under the provisions of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 ('the Act')], to deposit in this Court the amount of Rs. 2,76,04,000 with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum from June 1999. That amount is lying with the respondent No. 6 and it is the case of the petitioner that that amount should be disbursed towards the unpaid wages of the employees. Prayer (aa) of the motion is for an order to disburse the unpaid wages of the employees from this deposit. This motion is opposed by the respondent No. 1 through a reply by one of its dire...

Pushpa Suresh Bhutada and anr. Vs. Subhash Bansilal Maheshwari and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(4)ALLMR600; 2002(1)BomCR152

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. In this proceedings the dispute is essentially between the sisters on one side and the brothers and mother on other-for declaration and for recovery of money and partition of family properties. In this view of the matter, the parties were told to explore the possibility of settlement, for which reason the matter was adjourned in the past. However, it appears that the parties are under some misconception and are unwilling to have a meaningful dialogue with positive attitude of settlement, nor the Advocates representing them have succeeded in persuading their respective clients in this behalf or to impress upon them the exigency for an amicable resolution of their dispute, which process would obviate avoidable delay and more particularly heavy litigation expenses. From the submission made across the Bar it is evident that the respondents-original defendants have taken a stand that they are not interested in settling the matter with the appellants. This submission is...

Rajendra Naik Vs. State

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2002)DMC38

P.V. Hardas, J.1. The appellant stands convicted, for an offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and for payment of fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default Simple imprisonment for two months. It is this conviction and sentence which is assailed by the appellant in the present appeal.2. The facts necessary for the decision of the appeal are set out hereunder :The appellant was married to the deceased on 18th April, 1998. The appellant was working as a Chemist in Tulip Company at Bambolim. After their marriage, the deceased Lata and the appellant started residing near a temple at Santa Cruz and thereafter shifted their residence to Merces. They had last resided at Calapur. The prosecution has alleged that since the solemnization of marriage, the appellant was treating his deceased wife Lata with cruelty and, therefore, the deceased on 5th November, 1998, poured kerosene oil on her person and set herself ablaze. T...

Panchmahal Steel Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that steel strips and seals used to pack the steel that the applicant manufactured are not capital goods within the meaning of rule 57Q. This conclusion is not disputed by the counsel for the appellant.3. However, the appellant had raised an alternative before the Commissioner (Appeals) which he records. This was that the goods would be inputs and entitled to credit under rule 57A. The Commissioner has not given any finding on this.4. The departmental representative contends that no declaration for these goods was filed under rule 57G. However, by applying the ratio of the larger bench in CCE vs. Modi Rubber Ltd. 2000 (119) ELT 197, that the declaration that the appellant filed under rule 57Q would suffice, the credit was therefore available under rule 57A....

Windals Auto Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Applicant by its letter dated 19.7.2001 prays for withdrawal of the appeal on the ground that the issue has been settled under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme 1998. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn....

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

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal from the Revenue was argued by Shri J.M. George.Respondent were absent inspite of notice.2. The Respondent assessee availed of modvat credit on the basis of dealer's invoice which did not bear printed serial numbers. This was the requirement of Rule 57G/57GG read with Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Assistant Commissioner directed reversal and imposed penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that although when the show cause notice was issued the invoices did not bear printed serial numbers the defect was subsequently remedied and rectified by having stamped serial numbers. He further observed that verification of the records of the sellers and receiver had established the duty paying character of the goods. On his allowing the assessee's appeal the Revenue have filed the present appeal.3. Reliance was placed on the circular No. 180/14/96-Cx dated 07/03/1996 which directs that the serial numbers must be printed on the invoices before the book containing t...

Yeast Alco Enzymes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. One appeal has been filed against order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of 22 appeals before him. It is not possible for me to accept the contention of the counsel that the appeal should be treated as being filed against all 22 orders, in view of the explicit provision of the Cegat Procedure Rules. This appeal is therefore being treated as an appeal against the order no.603 first mentioned by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The issue relate to the eligibility to take credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of ethyl alcohol which was exempted on payment of duty by notification. Counsel for the applicant says that the duty in question has been paid, and points to letter dated 30.3.2000 addressed to the Superintendent saying that debit has been made of Rs. 1,80,000/-. Therefore, subject to this duty having been paid, I waive deposit of the penalty imposed on the applicant attributable to the appeal in question and stay its recovery. It is clarified once again that ...

Landt-sargent and Lundy Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. On hearing both sides it appears that the appeal itself could be disposed off at this stage. This was done on granting waiver of pre-deposit of service tax confirmed of Rs. 4,32,375/-.2. The appellant provided engineering services to M/s Larsen & Tourbo Limited and paid the service tax and also included the same in the bills raised on M/s Larsen & Tourbo Limited. They later (sic) that M/s Larsen & Tourbo Limited being consulting engineers themselves were liable to pay the service tax on the services rendered by them to the customers. On that ground they filed a refund claim of the tax already paid. The Dy. Commissioner accepted the contention and directed refund to be paid. This order was reviewed by the jurisdictional Commissioner in terms of Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994.3. In the notice sent to the present appellant it was claimed that since the burden had been passed on by the present appellant to M/s.Larsen & Tourbo Limited, in terms of the provisions of ...

M/S Cadmach Machinery Co. Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal itself has been taken up for disposal after waiving deposit. In the order impugned the commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal by the appellant before me on the ground that there is a delay of 52 days and he has given a finding that it was due to negligence on the part of the appellant. It is not mentioned in the order as to whether a show cause notice for hearing has been given. In the absence of a show cause notice having been received by the appellant, the impugned order is bad in law. I therefore set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) who shall first issue a notice of hearing and hear the appellant and thereafter decide the appeal....