Mumbai Court October 2002 Judgments

Ethnor Ltd. Vs. Cit

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2003]126TAXMAN408(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.All these four Income Tax References under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment, as common issues are involved in all these references.2. Questions raised in each of the references are as follows :Questions raised at the instances of the assesseeI.T.R. No. 170 of 1987'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the surtax payable by the assessee was not deductible in computing the assessee's income under the head 'Profits and gains of business or profession'2.(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that expenditure of Rs. 8,61,010 incurred by the assessee on what has termed a 'sales, literature and Misc. promotional aids' was expenditure on advertisement, publicity and sales promotion and as such includible for disallowance under sub-section (3A) of section 37 of the Incom...

Twinstar Holdings Ltd. Vs. Anand Kedia

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN656(Bom)

S.H. Kapadia, J.By this writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks to challenge, inter alia, Notices dated 14-7-2002, 15-7-2002 and 15-7-2002 being Exhibit-J. 1 to Exhibit-J. 3 issued under section 226(5) read with the Third Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961 under which the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - respondent No. 1, has prohibited M/s. Twinstar Holdings Limited-petitioners from receiving shares mentioned in the impugned Notices. By the said Notices, the Depository Participant is also restrained from delivering the impugned shares to any person(s).Facts2. Petitioner-Twinstar Holdings Limited is a Mauritius based Company, being Overseas Corporate Body, registered under the Mauritius Companies Act, 1984. Petitioner was the holder of 100 per cent shares of three Investment Companies viz., Pravin Navin Investment & Trading Company (hereinafter referred to as the 'PNIT'); Dwarkaprasad Anilkumar Investment Private Limited (hereinafter referred to a...

industrial Engg. Co. and ors. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(106)LC706Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of LPG tankers, M.S. storage tanks, mounting of LPG tanks on rigid and trailer chassis and other fabrication work. According to the department the activity of mounting fabricated pressure vessel (LPG tank) on chassis of motor vehicles resulted in emergence of motor vehicle for transport of compressed or liquefied gas and as per Note 3 to Chapter 87 of the CETA, 1985, falling for classification under CETA sub-heading 87.04, attracting effective rate of duty of 15% ad valorem basic and special as applicable. The benefit of SSI exemption under Notification 175/86 or 1/93 was not available for products falling under CETA sub-heading 8704.00.2. On the above basis show cause notice dated 16.12.1993 demanding duty of Rs. 1,05,261=75 on three LPG tankers alleged to have been clandestinely removed without payment of appropriate duty was issued.The notice also proposed imposition of penalties on the company, its proprietor, father of the p...

Jogani Tyres (India) Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT196Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The applications are for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 18,46,892/-; and penalties as follows :2. Jogani Tyres (India) Rs. 2.52 lakhs approx.Lalit B. Jogani Rs. 10 lakhs 3. The duty has been demanded, and penalties imposed, on the finding of the Commissioner that four consignments of automobiles parts imported by Jogani Tyres between 1995 and 1996 were undervalued. The value is based on unit price of US $ 25 per tyre. The goods are stated to have been supplied to the applicant by Interocean Mercantile Company in Singapore and were shipped from Antwerp in Germany, Rotterdam, and Hamburg in Germany. The department's subsequent investigation led to its being supplied by the German Customs rules. Copies of two invoices purported to have been issued by Michelin Tyres, Karlsruhe (Germany) admittedly manufacturer of the imported tyres. These copies bear the address of Michelin Asia (HK) Ltd., and show the ultimate consignee to be Jogani Tyres. Each of the invoices for 558 tyres with a u...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Guru Ashish Ship Breakers

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Guru Ashish Ship Breakers, the importer imported a ship MV Transent for breaking. The memorandum of agreement entered into by the importer with the seller of the ship on 14.9.1998 indicated the price of the ship to be US$617421. The ship came to the anchorage of Alang port on 24.5.1998. An addendum to the memorandum of agreement was signed by the buyer and seller on 26.5.1998, reducing the price for long ton of light displacement tonnage to US$ 135 and the total purchase price reduced to US$ 556678.90. The basis of the amendment was on account of following discrepancies: 2. All Generators of the vessel are not according to the specifications as shown in the M.O.A. and hence it has no releasable value at all.3. There is water leakages in the cargo compartment at the bottom and as such the plate of the bottom is heavily damaged.5. The vessel is of very poor condition and has been laid up for a period of long time and therefore the plate of the vessel is very rusted and poor quali...

Bhimrao Nathuji Bhoyar Vs. Superintendent, Amravati Central Prison

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)477; 2003(1)MhLj567

J.A. Patil, J.1. Heard Ms. Udeshi, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Patel, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State. 2. Rule, By consent heard forthwith. 3. The petitioner is a convict, who has been undergoing sentence for imprisonment for life in Central Jail, Amravati, since 27-6-1996. He was, however, in jail as an under trial prisoner since 23-5-1995. During the last seven years of his imprisonment, the petitioner was granted furlough on five occasions but he could not avail of the same for want of surety. According to the petitioner, there is nobody to stand as surety for him. He has a mother, who is 72 years old and whose eye sight is affected. He has a step brother but he is not interested in standing as surety to the petitioner. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the direction should be given for his release on personal bond.4. On behalf of the respondent, it is contended that furlough was granted to the petitioner but he could not be released on furl...

Laxmi R. Karhadkar Vs. Resident Deputy District Collector and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR715; 2003(4)BomCR289; 2003(2)MhLj14

C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. This petition is filed by the petitioner for quashing and setting aside an order passed by the Resident Deputy District Collector, Mumbai City, respondent No. 1 herein, on October 7, 2002 by which he informed the President of the Regional Caste Scrutiny Committee, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai, to cancel the caste certificate obtained by the petitioner by submitting false documents in support of her claim.2. We have heard Mr. Anturkar, learned counsel for petitioner, Mr. R.D. Rane, Additional Government Pleader, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. P. A. Pol, learned counsel appearing for the newly-added respondents, in pursuance of an order passed by us today in Civil Application (Stamp) No. 42171 of 2002.3. Mr. Anturkar raised three contentions. (1) Once the Scrutiny Committee had scrutinised the case of the petitioner, and granted caste validity certificate, it had no power of reviewing the said decision. The only remedy available to an aggrieved party was to file...

Kumar Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(146)ELT438Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad vide his Order-in-Original No. 21/COMMR/200 confirmed duty of Rs. 17,06,211/- as payable by M/s. Kumar Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. He also imposed a penalty of equal amount on them. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1.7 lakhs on Shri P.D. Patel, Director of the Mills. Against this order two appeals were filed and also applications for waiver of pre-deposit. Tribunal vide Order Nos. C-I/1396-97/WZB/2001, dated 23-3-2001 directed the manufacturer mills to deposit 6 lakhs and Shri Patel was directed to deposit Rs. 20,000/-. Compliance was reported and noted by the Tribunal on 9-8-2001.2. On 3-7-2002 the appellant Mills received a communication from the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise. The operative portion of this communication reads as under : "In this connection, it is brought to your notice that after the introduction of Sub-section (2A) in Section 35C of CEA, 1944 in the recent Budget, any stay including a partial stay if gra...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Essar Oil Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)LC324Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Essar Oil Ltd. filed at Vadinar port in Gujarat six bills of entry for depositing into warehouse capital goods imported by it in that port. The bill of entry were also accompanied by requests for transfer of bonds from Vadinar to its private bonded warehouse at Jamnagar. The bill of entry were assessed and completed and the request order passed by the Commissioner of Customs permitting release of the goods. The request that was made to him for transfer of the goods to Jamnagar in bond was also accepted by him. The importer however did not proceed further with removal of the goods from Vadinar to Jamnagar for warehousing and by its letter dated 24-2-99 asked the Asst.Commissioner for substitution of the warehousing bill of entry by a bill of entry for home consumption. On the 26th Feb., the Asst.Commissioner granted this permission permitting substitution. The department appealed this order of the Asst. Commissioner to the Commissioner (Appeals). The contention that were raised in t...

South Asia Tyres Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The appellant imported machinery, spare parts of the machines and raw materials from the American company. The appellant entered into a technical collaboration agreement with Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., U.S.A., for manufacture of automatove tyres. The agreement provided for supply by the American company of know-how for which some amount was to be paid by the appellant. It also provided for payment of royalty by the appellant to the American company on the tyres that it manufactured and cleared in India. The Special Valuation branch of the Custom House examined the liability inclusion in the assessable value of the machinery of these amounts. After considering the material that was provided by the appellant, the Deputy Commissioner passed orders, holding that the amount which had already been paid towards the technical know-how was to be included in the assessable value. He said that the royalty on the tyre that the appellant manufactured would not form part of the value, becau...