Mumbai Court November 2002 Judgments

Shantilal Doshi Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(107)LC52Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appeal taken up for disposal, after waiving deposit, with the consent of both sides.2. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Assistant Commissioner in the order impugned before him, that the appellant was liable to pay duty on the intermediate products that it manufactured on which it utilised in the manufacture of the final product in the same factory.3. The counsel for the applicant contends that each of the intermediate products which is manufactured is specified in the table to notification 1/93 and each of them therefore is entitled to the exemption contained in that notification. He says further that the Chapter VI of the Explanation to the notification provides that in computing the aggregate value of the products for the purpose of exemption, the value of intermediate product manufactured and captively consumed of goods manufactured and used in the further finished goods shall not be taken into account. Cumulatively...

Banarsi Marble Stones Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The question for consideration in these appeals, three by the importers and three by the Commissioner, is the quantum of fine for redemption of the used diesel engines imported by these importers and ordered to be confiscated under Clause (d) of Section 111 of the Act for want to an import licence.2. In the common order impugned in these appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the find for redemption a little over 100% except in the case of Banarasi Marble Stones Pvt Ltd where it is around 104% and also the penalty.3. The contention of the counsel for the importers is that shortly after the goods were imported, in July- August the same issue has been considered by this Tribunal and that Bench in its order in Siddhi Foods & Drinks Pvt Ltd v. CC (appeal C/984/99) and if found that various orders of the Commissioner has fixed fine of around 100% to be reasonable and applied that.4. The contention of the departmental representative is that the margin of profit has been foun...

Sarla Polyester Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT323Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The applications are for waiver of deposit of duties and penalties as follows :Name Duty PenaltySarla Polyester Ltd. Rs. 33,48,060/- Rs. 33,48,060/-Madhusudan Jhunjhunwala - Rs. 15 lakhsSatishkumar Sharma - Rs. 5 lakhs.Dinesh Chandra Pandey - Rs. 2 lakhsM.M. Sanghavi - Rs. 2 lakhsHindustan Cotton Co. - Rs. 5 lakhsGopal Bhagwan Dutt Sharma - Rs. 1 lakhJaipur Golden Transport - Rs. 50,000/-Co. P. Ltd. 2. The demand for duty is on yarn of different types like textured, lycra etc. manufactured by Sarla Polyester Ltd., the assessee, a 100% export oriented unit, on the ground that it has not paid duty on the goods cleared in the domestic tariff area. Madhusudan Jhunjhunwala, is its Chairman, and Satishkumar Sharma, Dineshchandra Pandey and Gopal Bhagwan Dutta Sharma are its employees. Hindustan Cotton Co., of which M.M. Sanghavi is a division, had been penalised because it was shown as consignor in the transport documents issued by Jaipur Golden Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. which carried the ...

United Television Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(153)ELT315Tri(Mum.)bai

2. These two appeals by United Television, a division of United Software Communication Ltd., are against the orders of the Commissioner confirming two demands for duty issued to it and imposing penalties.Appeal 2930/02 is against the order of the Commissioner demanding duty of Rs. 5.32 crores approx on television serial films that the appellant made and cleared between 1-3-1993 and 30-11-1997, imposing a penalty of Rs. 2.02 crores approx. Appeal 2938/02 is against the order of the Commissioner demanding duty of Rs. 1.99 crore approx and imposing a penalty of Rs. 91 lakhs on advertising films for television made and cleared between 1-1-1994 to 31-5-1998. The notice issued in the first case is dated 3-4-1998 and therefore, except for a period of three months, deals with larger period of limitation. The notice in the second case is dated 4-2-1999 and the entire period is sought to be covered by larger period of limitation.3. The common basis for the invocation of the extended period is t...

Hagel Capsule Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT751Tri(Mum.)bai

1. On the last occasion it was made clear to parties that appeal will be liable to be taken up for disposal. This has been done and after hearing, we proceed to declare our order.2. In the order impugned before us, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the appellant was not entitled to take Modvat credit of the additional duty paid on consignments of chemicals which were inputs for manufacture of Pharmaceuticals imported by Glaxo India Ltd. He has approved the reasoning of the Assistant Commissioner that the importer Glaxo India Ltd., did not comply with the requirement prescribed by the departmental authorities with regard to intimation to be given to customs authorities of its intention to avail credit before the goods were cleared from the customs.3. The counsel for the appellant contends that the goods had been received in the factory under cover of triplicate copy of the bills of entry and credit cannot be denied only on the ground that there is some minor procedural imperfect...

Compusoft Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(154)ELT241Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appeals are against the order of the Commissioner demanding duty on what is found to be computer system manufactured by Compusoft and National Control Systems, and imposing penalties on these two firms and the partners Manoj Shah and Sushila Shah.2. The counsel for the appellant limits his arguments to imposition of penalties, apart from the contention that penalties could not be simultane ously imposed on a firm and its partner/ he raises the point that the appel lants' plea that putting together various units of a data processing system did not amount to manufacture. He points out that two different Benches of this Tribunal has come to two diametrically opposing conclusion in the matter. The Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in its decision in Universal Music System and Anr. v. CCE [1999 (107) E.L.T. 505 (T) = 1998 (79) ECR 880] held that the activity does not amount to manufacture. The Bench of the Tribunal at Delhi in its decision in Computer Aid v. CCE - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 68/ ...

Shri Manohar Laxman Kulkarni Vs. Smt. Padmavathi W/O. Laxman Ganesh Ku ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(3)MhLj951

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This writ petition takes exception to the order passed by the Revenue Authorities in relation tot he Mutation Entry No. 4702 indicating that the Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 herein as the owners in respect of the suit lands to the exclusion of the Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 herein. The land in question is situated at Village Kasegano, Taluka, Walwa, Dist. Sangli. The said land was originally owned by the Saraswati Kulkarni. She adopted Laxman G. Kulkarni on 2.11.1935. When that adoption took place, the Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 herein respectively were three sons of said Laxman. All the three sons were born prior to adoption. After above said adoption, the Respondent No. 3 Sou. Kalindi was born to said Laxman and Respondent No. 1. It is not in dispute that the said Saraswati predeceased Laxman whereas Laxman died on 10.1.1987. After the death of Laxman, the Respondent No. 3 Sou. Kalindi daughter born after adoption filed application before the ...

S.P. Mishra and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(2)SLJ44CAT

1. This application has been filed for a direction to the respondents to assign correct seniority to the applicant in the grade of Chargeman Grade-B (Junior Engineer Grade II). The applicants impugned the order dated 30.11.98 by which representation of Applicants No. 1 and 2 was rejected.2. The applicants were working as skilled artisans at the relevant time. According to the rule, they were entitled to appear for the selection as Intermediate Apprentices to be absorbed and posted as Chargeman Grade-B (redesignated as Junior Engineer Grade II). According to the recruitment rules, the post of Chargeman Grade-B is filled in 50% by direct recruitment, 25% by Intermediate Apprentices by holding selection from amongst skilled artisans of the Mechanical department and 25% by the rankers.3. The applicants applied for the post and appeared for the written test and the interview and they were selected by order dated 18.4.1992.4. As per procedure and rule, the Intermediate Apprentices have to u...

Hmp Engineers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Notice issued to the appellant alleged that it had wrongly taken modvat credit totalling Rs. 52179/- on the ground that no duty had in fact been paid by Resha Wires Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore who issued the invoices and proposed penalty on the appellant. The notice invoked the extended period contained in Rule 571(ii). After considering the cause shown by the manufacturer, the Commissioner has confirmed the denial and imposed the penalty. Hence this appeal.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. I have read the memorandum of appeal and the relevant papers and heard the departmental representative.3. The only basis for denying the credit, contained in the notice issued to the appellant, and contained in the order of the Commissioner, is that the officers of the Directorate of Anti Evasion "had traced out that M/s. Resha Wires (P) Ltd., Bangalore had evaded Central Excise duty by suppression of production and clandestine removal of Super Enamelled Copper Wire ...." This...

Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. White-en-all Products

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT571Tri(Mum.)bai

This is a Revenue appeal challenging the Commissioner (Appeals) order that credit on inputs used in the bottles which get broken during the manufacturing of the final product was not required to be reversed.Such breakage had occurred during the period August, 1992 to February, 1993. The appeal from the Revenue is on the ground that at a material time the credit taken by the assessee on such inputs which were not used in the process of manufacture of the final product was not permissible under the rules. The relevant portion of the appeal memorandum reads as under :- "During the material time i.e. 1992-93 the provisions of Rule 57D(1) were as under :- credit of specified duty allowed in respect of any inputs shall not be denied or varied on the ground that part of the inputs is contained in any waste, refuse, or by-product arising during the manufacture of the final product, whether or not such waste, refuse or by-product is exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon ...