Mumbai Court October 2002 Judgments

Kalyani thermal Systems Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The appeal by Kalyani Thermal Systems Ltd. is against the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Pune, ordering confiscation under Clause (d) and (m) of Section 112 of the Act of forging press imported by it, imposing penalty under Section 112 of the Act of Rs. 6 lakhs. The appeal by K.S. Ajmani, its chief executive officer, is against the penalty imposed on him under Section 112 of the Act of Rs. 3 lakhs.3. The facts are not in dispute. The importer declared the machine to have been manufactured in 1992 and relied upon a certificate to this effect of a chartered engineer in the Cezch Republic, from where the goods were imported. The department, being suspicious of the correctness of this claim, made enquiries with the manufacturer of this machine, and was told by him that manufacture of this product had been discontinued in 1969. It is on this basis that the Commissioner has come to his conclusion.4. The counsel for the appellant does not dispute the liability to confiscation of th...

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...

Ashok S. Khator and Khator Fibres and Vs. Commissioner of Central Exci ...

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal before him for failure to deposit the entire duty and penalty by the assessee and penalty by its director. After hearing the parties, we have decided to take up the appeals, after waiving deposit.2. The notice issued to the assessee and its director noted that there has been short levy of duty on the fabrics processed and cleared by the assessee for the reason that the value of 400 lots was lower than it ought to have been. Penalty was also proposed on the director. It was the contention of the counsel for the appellant that the assessee and its director only acted upon declarations that were given by the owners of the grey fabrics to the assessee in terms of notification 27/92 and that the show cause notice did not allege any knowledge or wilful intent to evade duty on the part of the manufacturer. This may be so.However, we find it difficult to understand why the manufacturer could not have exercised reasonable precautions in th...

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...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. S.N. Traders

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(153)ELT324Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Central Excise Authorities on a search of the premises found that one Shri H.H. Patel was assembling wrist watches and clearing them without payment of Central Excise Duty. Show cause notice was issued seeking recovery of duty amounting to Rs. 1,11,006.08. This demand was confirmed and equal amount or penalty was imposed. Shri Patel then filed an appeal. The issue before the Commissioner was whether benefit of Notification No. 8/99 and 9/99 was available to the manufacturer or not. The plea was also made that assembly did not amount to manufacture. The Commissioner held that such assembly amounted to manufacture. He further examined the classification of the goods in view of the fact that classification under Chapter Heading 9101 and 9102 would put the watches out of the purview of the exemption Notification. On examination of the Tariff Entry, he arrived at the conclusion that the goods would merit classification under heading 91.10. Against this order, the Revenue have filed ...

Samadhan Pandit Nagre and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)1BOMLR485; I(2003)DMC594; 2003(2)MhLj386

B.B. Vagyani, J.1. This criminal writ petition filed by the petitioners depicts a sorry state of affairs. The facts emerged out from this criminal writ petition show as to how the public servants have committed illegalities. Because of illegal detention even after order of acquittal, petitioner No. 1 has claimed compensation of Rs. 2 Lakhs from the State Government. 2. The facts giving rise to this criminal writ petition are as under : The petitioner No. 1 Samadhan was married to deceased Surekha on 17-1-1997. The petitioner No.1 Samadhan and his mother Savitribai, who is petitioner No. 2, subjected Surekha to cruelty. It is alleged that serious atrocities were committed on Surekha. She was physically and mentally tortured. Surekha could not bear the harassment and ultimately, committed suicide on 2-5-1997 by sprinkling kerosene oil on her person and setting herself on fire. Therefore, the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 304B read...

Anwar @ Sikandar @ Akbar @ Faiyaz HusseIn Kasim Qureshi Vs. the State ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)114

J.G. Chitre, J.1. Appellant Anwar @ Sikandar @ Akbar @ Faiyaz Hussein Kasim Qureshi is hereby assailing correctness propriety and legality of the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No. 688 of 1992 - 308 of 1992, wherein this appellant was tried along with seven other accused and was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 392 of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years. The prosecution case, in brief, can be stated as mentioned hereunder.2. The incident of train robbery took place on 16/7/1991 on a running train between V.T. and Kurla. The appellant and his associates as per prosecution case, boarded a compartment in that train wherein P.W. Ashok Thakur who had got in from V.T. was sitting and wanted to go to Wadala, to purchase Mangoes. He was in First Class compartment. At Wadala he got down and purchased Mangoes and boarded the train to go to Bandra. The said unfortunate...

Tasty Bite Eatables Limited and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)BomCR311

V.C. Daga, J.1. This petition is directed against the order in original dated 19th October, 1987 ('impugned order' for short) passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, who in exercise of powers conferred under section 122 of the Customs Act, 1962 ('Act' for short) confiscated 'form, fill and sealing machine' under section 111(d) and (m) of the Act and gave option to the petitioners under section 125 of the Act to pay fine of Rs. 6,50,000/- and also imposed penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/- for the reasons recorded in the impugned order. FACTS:2. The facts in short reveal that petitioner No. 1, being armed with Industrial Licence issued by the Ministry of Industries, Government of India for manufacture of Tomato Paste/Puree, Frozen Vegetables and Ready-to-serve Food, desired to import 'Form, fill, and sealing machine'. Accordingly, order was placed on the foreign supplier on 17th December, 1986. The goods arrived at Bombay Port on or about 20th August, 1987 and the petitioners filed prior Bil...

Machindra S/O Rambhu Chavan and ors. Vs. Ahmednagar Forging Ltd. and a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)105BOMLR259

A.P. Deshpande, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. An order passed by the Taxing Officer directing recovery of Rs. 69.250/- as deficit court fees has been challenged by the present application. In the instant petition there are 278 petitioners, petitioner Nos. 1 to 277 are the workmen employed in M/s. Ahmednagar Forging Ltd., a registered Company, whereas petitioner No. 278 is a registered Trade Union. The respondent No. 1 is a Company engaged in manufacturing of engineering goods and the respondent No. 2 is a recognised Union. A complaint came to be filed by the present petitioners alleging indulgence by the respondents, in unfair labour practices under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act. In the said complaint, the respondent No. 1 moved an application and contended that the complaint is not maintainable as there is a challenge to the settlement. The Industrial Court accepted the preliminary objection raised by the resp...

Shree Dudhaganga Vedganga Ssk Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant, a sugar factory, was permitted to store sugar that it manufactured without payment of duty in a temporary godown. The sugar was destroyed by a fire which broke out in the godown. The appellant paid duty on this quantity which had damaged in the fire. It reprocessed part of the sugar and cleared it without payment of duty.It subsequently filed a claim for refund of the remaining part of the duty paid on the damaged sugar on the ground that it was entitled to remission in terms of Rule 49. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has held that since the permission that was granted for storage was subject to the condition that no remission would be claimed under Rule 49, there was no case for remission, dismissed the claim.2. The representative of the appellant requests adjournment on the ground that its counsel is busy in the Supreme Court. The matter has already been adjourned once on the ground that the counsel was busy and I therefore do not propose to ...