Mumbai Court October 2003 Judgments

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Lloyds Metals and Engineering

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Revenue in the present appeal has challenged that part of the Commissioner's order vide which he had allowed the benefit of modvat credit in respect of Silo Encasing, Dust Collection System and Pint Oil Liner.2. We have heard both sides duly represented by Shri A. Chopra, Ld. JDR for the Revenue and Shri Vishal Agarwal, Ld. C.A for the respondents.3. The Commissioner while extending the benefit to Silo Encasing has held as under :- "Silo encasing falling under sub-heading No.8419.00 are used with Day Bin Silos. These encasings are required for fixing the silos at their place of installation. For manufacture of sponge iron, huge quantity of raw material is to be continuously fed to the rotary kiln. To avoid production loss due to interrupted supply of raw material and for segregation of raw material from the direct reduction process, day bins along with conveyers, weigh feeders, motors and control panels are installed near the rotary kiln. The raw material requirement of the day...

Haresh Kumar P. Sheth, Harsh Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both sides for some time on the applications for waiver of predeposit of balance duty of Rs. 18,45,157/- (out of the total duty demand of Rs. 26,95,157/- confirmed against M/s. Harsh International, Rs. 8,50,000/- has been deposited) and penalty equal to duty imposed upon them and penalty of Rs. 3 lakhs on Shri Haresh Kumar P. Sheth who is the Constituted Attorney of M/s. Harsh International and penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs on M/s. ICC Wordlwide Courier, we found that it was possible to decide the appeals themselves as the grievance of the appellants is that of contravention of the principles of natural justice, in as much as, in spite of repeated request, expert's opinion on valuation of goods was not supplied to the appellants.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 9.2.98, on the basis of an intelligence gathered, the officers of the Air Intelligence Unit (AIU) Commissionerate of Customs, Mumbai seized incriminating documents from the office premises of M/s. Harsh Inte...

Peacock Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. (Ep)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT542Tri(Mum.)bai

1.The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 19,71,092/- and penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Export Promotion) Mumbai. The demand confirmation is as a result of denial of the benefit of duty free import of capital goods under Notification No. 160/92-Cus., dated 20-4-1992 on the ground of non fulfilment of export obligation against EPCG Licence dated 21-9-92 held by the applicants herein for import of capital goods.2. We have heard both sides, we find that it is an admitted position that the export obligation was not completely fulfilled in stipulated period. We also note that although the applicants had applied to the DGFT for the extension of the period for fulfilment of export obligation, initially their application was rejected and their subsequent application is pending. However as noted by the Commissioner the period for fulfilment could not be extended beyond 31-3-2001.Therefore prima facie the applicants have not mad...

Tanna Knitting Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT608Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 12,99,485.56 and penalty of Rs. 12,99,000/-and penalty of Rs. 12,99,000/ on the Proprietor arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Surat. The demand has been confirmed on clearances of Knitted Fabrics of Man Made Fibres falling under Chapter Heading No. 60.02 and manufactured with the aid of power during the period 24-9-97 to 12-4-99 without payment of duty.2. None appeared for the applicants, in spite of notice, hence we heard ld. JDR and perused the records. We find that the case of the department regarding use of power for dyeing and calendering process, the basis that they are liable to pay the duty, is based upon the statements as well as upon the fact that electric motors were found installed and that the dyeing and calendering machines were attached to the electric motor. The contention of the applicants is that during the period of demand no power was being used, and that the factory w...

T.E.L.C.O. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. When this appeal earlier came up for hearing on 30.06.2003, the matter was adjourned by the Bench to await the decision of the Larger Bench in the reference made by the Bangalore Bench in the case of Faxtel Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C. Cochin - 2003 (56) R.L.T. 652 (CEGAT-Ban.). The learned Chartered Accountant for the appellants informs that the Larger Bench has not yet decided the reference.2. After hearing both sides, I find that on this issue there are two decisions of the Honourable Supreme Court and that the matter can be decided applying the ratio of the Apex Court decisions. Hence, I am of the view that it is not necessary either to refer to the conflicting decisions of Tribunal Benches or to await the decision of the Larger Bench on such conflicting decisions and I proceed to decide the appeal, which is pending for over 6 years and relates to a refund claim filed in August, 1995.3. Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 inter alia allows filing of a refund claim of duty ...

Golden Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT828Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants herein are manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Chapter 28, 29, and 30 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. One of the products is Sodium Bichromate, during the manufacture of which Yellow Sodium Sulphate is produced, and is either sold as such or sent to job workers for conversion into White Sodium Sulphate. The appellants debited the amount of duty on the quantity of Yellow Sodium Sulphate sent for job work and then took credit of the duty paid when returned from job worker. The objection of the Revenue was that Cenvat credit had been availed on invoices showing self as a consignee, and on this ground two show cause notices one dated 25-6-2001 and the other dated 28-11-2001 were issued proposing recovery of credit of Rs. 6,22,467/- and Rs. 4,25/154/-respectively. The notices also proposed imposition of penalty. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand raised in the notices and also imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on the assessee ...

Purshotam C. Thackar Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(163)ELT41Tri(Mum.)bai

1. M/s. Purshotam Chaturbhuj Thackar, Gandhidham, is a Custom House Agent at Custom House, Kandla, holding a Custom House Agents licence.The licence was issued to them under Regulation 10(1) of the Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 (CHALR). They are the appellants in this case.2. The appellants' CHA licence came up for renewal in 1999. In the impugned order, the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, rejected renewal application and revoked the licence of the appellants in terms of Regulation 21 read with Regulation 12 of the CHALR. The issue before the Commissioner was that the appellants have not transacted any business as CHA at Kandla Custom House throughout the year 1998-99 and hence have failed to fulfil the norms fixed under Regulation 12(2) by the Commissioner, as stated in Public Notice No. 21/96. The appellants pleaded before him that due to cyclone in Kandla, they could not transact business in that port and hence the shortfall, if any, in the volume of transaction ...

ispat Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)LC843Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The authorities below have rejected the claim of the appellants for refund of Rs. 5,36,02,238/- on the ground that they were capable of using the accumulated credit refund of which was being claimed, and hence they did not fulfill the condition laid down under Rule 57AC(7) of the Central Excise Rules providing for refund only if the accumulated credit is not capable of utilization for payment of Central Excise duty on any final product cleared for home consumption or for export on payment of duty, and that the appellants had not produced any evidence to show that they have not claimed drawback under the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995 or rebate of duty under Rule 12 in respect of exports due to which the credit was accumulated.2. We have heard Shri V.K. Jain Ld. Chartered Accountant and Shri A.Shukla Ld. SDR. The appellants explanation that due to slump in the domestic market and corresponding boost in the export market, major portion of the production is exp...

Bharat B. Patel and ors. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(115)LC470Tri(Mum.)bai

1. By the above applications, the applicants seek modification of stay Order No.C.I/754-63/WZB/2002 dated 7.3.2002 directing pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 1 Crore and Rs. 66 lakhs by Shri B.B. Patel and Shri Snehal B. Patel respectively (Directors of M/s. Hytaisu Magnetic Ltd.) and Rs. 16 lakhs by Shri Vishnu Patel, Excise Clerk of the company.3. By the impugned order challenged in the appeals, the Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed a duty demand of approximately Rs. 9 crores against M/s. Hytaisun Magnatics Ltd. being the Central Excise Duty evaded by them by procuring raw materials under forged CT. 3 certificates and diverting the same to the open market without re-warehousing and without utilising the same in the manufactures of video magnetic tapes and cassettes for fulfillment of export obligation as per Notification No. 1/95 CE dated 4.1.1995 and Notfn. No. 13/81 Cus dated 9.2.81. He also confirmed Customs duty of Rs. 15,18,671/-. He also imposed a penalty of over Rs. 9 cro...

Bharat Automotive Pressings Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for waiver of predeposit of duty of Rs. 1,15,238.74 and penalty of Rs. 76,339/- arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), the period in dispute is March 1994 to January 1999. The issue in dispute relates to inclusion of additional consideration in the form of dies and moulds received free of cost. The applicants do not dispute the demand on merits; however it is their contention that the demand for the period up to August 1998 is barred by limitation as although admittedly they did not disclose the fact of receipt of additional consideration to the department, there was no intention to evade payment of duty, as M/s. TELCO to whom the goods were sold by the applicants would be able to avail modvat credit of the duty paid by the applicants in terms of Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules and therefore there could have no intention on the part of the applicants to evade payment of any duty.2. Ld. SDR reiterated the finding of the adjudica...