Mumbai Court November 2003 Judgments

Silvo Liacal Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(163)ELT136Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of polyethylene glycol of various grades manufactured by the appellant.2. The appellant manufacture polyethylene glycol ranging an average molecular weight of 200 to 6000 and claimed classification of these goods under chapter heading 29.13.00 of the tariff (in part of the period ) and under heading 29.40 (for the remaining period.) Notice issued to it proposed to classify the product in chapter 39 and also invoked the extended period of limitation in respect of the consignments cleared beyond six months from the relevant date. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has held the extended period of limitation not to be applicable, since the appellant had made the department aware the nature of the product but confirmed the classification of the goods in heading 3907.20 of the tariff and demanded duty of clearances made within the normal period of limitation contained in Section 11A of the Act.3. Chapt...

Pankaj Jagda Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(171)ELT125Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Vide Final Order Nos. C-1/2874 and 2875/WZB/2001, dated 19-9-2001, [2002 (140) E.L.T. 225 (Tribunal)] the Tribunal, while upholding confiscation of currency belonging to the applicants herein, permitted redemption of the currency on payment of a fine of Rs. 8 lakhs. The department issued a refund order of Rs. 20,11,403/- on the basis that the Indian equivalent currency was Rs. 28/01/257/-, The applicants contend that what should have been refunded to them was Rs. 37,87,694/- less Rs. 8 lakhs, which is the equivalent value of the seized currency as on the date of the final order of the Tribunal dated 19-9-2001 and rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Philips Fernandes v. CC, Mumbai (Final Order No. C-I/2781/WZB/2002, dated 11-9-2002) wherein the equivalent currency as on the date of the Tribunal's order was directed to be paid.2. The matter was adjourned to see whether in the case of Philips Fernandes what was refunded was the Indian equivalent currency as on the da...

Hindustan Liver Ltd. Vs. Cce and C

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(112)LC689Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The question for consideration is the eligibility to modvat credit by the appellant of the duty paid on organic surface active agents which it received and utilised by it in the cleaning of machinery that it employed in the process of manufacture of frozen desserts. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the denial of credit by the Asst. Commissioner on the ground that these chemicals were not used in relation to the manufacture of the final product.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. The contention in the appeal is that without the use of the surface active agents it would not have been possible for the appellant to keep the machinery in its factory free of microbes. It is necessary that the edible final product which is manufactured by using this machinery conform to the standard in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The decisions of the Tribunal in Pure Drinks Industries Ltd. v. CCE , Black Diamonds Beverages ...

A.T. Patel and Swiss Gallery Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT336Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These appeals arose out of the order of Commissioner of Customs (Pres), Mumbai. In the impugned order the Commissioner ordered confiscation of 121 wrist watches valued at Rs. 15,18,205/- and 203 pens valued at Rs. 56,250/- under Section 125(1) and allowed them to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 5 lakhs in respect of watches and Rs. 1 5,000/- in respect of pens provisionally. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on M/s Swiss Gallery under Section 112(b) and Rs. 50,000/- on Shri Asaraf Patel, the partner of the firm, under the same Section. Shri Ashraf Patel died during the pendency of the appeal. His brother Shri Aftab Patel, the legal heir was allowed to pursue the appeal. At the out set we observe that wrist watches were notified under Section 123 of the Customs Act, the pens were not.2. The impugned goods were seized from the premises of the appellants.The Commissioner in the impugned order examined the various contentions raised by the respondent before him in regard to...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Balkrishna Tyres

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This appeal is by the Commissioner against that part of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in which he has permitted the respondent to take credit on the basis of duplicate copy of the invoice issued in August, 1999 by the manufacturer of capital goods that the respondent received.2. The Commissioner has relied for his conclusion upon the provisions of the trade notice dated 26-9-1994 issued by the Aurangabad Collectorate, which, according to him, provided that credit was permitted to be taken on the original copy of the invoice. The appeal challenges the findings on the ground that the trade notice did not contain any such provision. A copy of the trade notice has been enclosed to the appeal. The trade notice consists of questions posed and the answers to these questions. Question 12 and the clarification to it read as follows: Whether it is essential that the invoice should be prepared in number of copies and marked as "original", "duplicate", "triplicate" etc.Further, wheth...

Hindustan Gas and Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(165)ELT311Tri(Mum.)bai

It is the case of the appellants that the impugned goods which were earlier cleared on 21-6-1996, were received back being rejected on 16-7-1996, The D3 intimation was prepared on 17-7-1996 and was filed on 18-7-1996 within 48 Hrs. of receipt. The goods were subsequently cleared after re-processing on 21-7-1996 on payment of duty. The refund claim for Rs. 63,342/- has been disallowed by the lower authorities on the ground that the D3 intimation was not filed within 24 Hrs. The applicants did not also file an application for condonation of delay initially but have submitted a letter dtd. 25-12-1996 subsequently explaining the delay on account of absence of Excise Assistant.2. After hearing both sides and perusal of case records, I find that even though there was a delay of 1 day in filing the D3 intimation, the Excise officials had sufficient time to visit the premises of the appellants and verify actual receipt of the material during 18-7-1996 to 21-7-1996. The fact that the goods wer...

Dgp Hinoday Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(93)ECC236

1. The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner denying modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs that it received.2. I have heard the representative of the appellant and the departmental representative.3. The first ground for denial relates to invoices in which they were duplicate and "intended for transporters was put by rubber stamp marking. The Commissioner has held that since the invoices did not contain these particular printed on it when it was blank, it cannot be allowed. The contention of the representative of the appellant that there is no requirement in the rules that such information must be printed has to be accepted. Sub-rule 4A of 57GG requires that the invoice must be "marked" "original for buyer etc." clearly putting such words by rubber stamp amount to marking and credit could not be denied on this ground. This is in fact the view taken by the single member of the Tribunal in CCE v. Hindustan Wires Ltd., 4. Credit has also been denied on wires and cables on...

Kalyani Packaging Industry Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(4)BomCR210; 2004(164)ELT12(Bom)

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. The grievance of the Petitioners relates to refusal on the part of the Respondents to permit the Petitioners to avail exemption from payment of duty under Notification No. 193/86,, hereinafter called as 'the said notification', in relation to the product manufactured by the Petitioners, even though the exemption under the said notification in similar circumstances was allowed to be availed by one of the competitors of the petitioners, besides there being a circular issued by the board on 15th May, 1995 clarifying availability of exemption from payment of duty under similar notification to the products manufactured by utilising the raw materials which had availed the benefit of exemption, from payment of duty under an exemption notification like the one bearing No. 193/86.2. Few facts relevant for the decision are that:The Petitioners are engaged in the business of packing Tea on job work basis for M/s. Sapat Packaging Industry (P) Ltd. M/s. Sapat Agro Pack Ind...

R.S. Sharma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2004(101)FLR651]; (2004)IIILLJ191Bom; 2004(1)MhLj1005

S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. This Writ Petition seems to have been filed on 3-7-2000, which is admitted by this Court by the order dated 25-2-2003. This Court considering the request of the petitioner that he is 75 years old, listed the petition for early hearing on November 10th, 2003.2. The challenge in this petition is made to the Judgment and order of the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, in Original Application No. 207/99 dated February 11th, 2000 and the communication dated July 9th, 1998, rejecting the case of the petitioner for compassionate allowance.We have heard the parties through their Counsel The Facts:3. The facts in brief leading to the controversy between the parties may be summarized as below:4. The petitioner was initially appointed as a Telephone Operator in the Telecom Department at Telephone Exchange, Nagpur with effect from 19-3-1949. The petitioner from time to time was promoted and, ultimately, held the post Group 'A' cadre as Divisional Engineer, i...

Sunita W/O Ravi Sangavai Vs. Ravi S/O Venkatesh Sangavai

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(5)BomCR898; 2004(1)MhLj870

B.B. Vagyani, J.1. Admit. By consent of both parties taken up for final hearing.2. This Family Court Appeal filed by appellant original petitioner in Petition No. C-40/2002 is directed against the order of return of petition for presentation before proper forum passed by incharge Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad. In brief, the facts giving rise to this family Court appeal are as under:3. The appellant is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. The marriage was solemnized at Pune on 26-1-2001 whereas reception ceremony was arranged on 28-1-2001 at Aurangabad. The marriage was also registered with Sub-Registrar at Aurangabad. After marriage appellant cohabited with the respondent at Bombay. It is serious grievance of the appellant that the respondent subjected her to harassment. Because of harassment, appellant was forced to withdraw her company. The mother-in-law of the appellant brought appellant to Pune and kept her in her company for the period of 10 days. Thereafter, app...