Mumbai Court November 2003 Judgments
HusseIn Karolia Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT76Tri(Mum.)bai
1. None appeared for the appellants. Heard Shri S.V. Parelkar, learned J.D.R. for the Department. This appeal and the Stay application were filed on 31-1-1996. No explanation is available from the Registry as to why this stay application filed in January 1996 is being posted for hearing for the first time on 27-11-2003. By not listing the case and the stay application for hearing, the appellants have enjoyed automatic stay for the entire period from 1996 till date. Considering the delay involved in listing the case, the pre-deposit of duty and penalty is waived and the case is posted for final hearing on 29-12-2003. A copy of this order may also be sent to the Registrar for his information with reference to earlier Order No. C-IV/643-44/WZB/2003, dated 9-10-2003 [2003 (158) E.L.T. 38 (Tri. - Mumbai)]....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. D.C. Polyester Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT472Tri(Mum.)bai
1. After hearing both sides and perusal of case records, I find that Board's Circular No. 701/17/2003-CX., dated 12-3-2003 allows refund of unutilised credit of Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) on ex port of the finished goods even if such finished goods are not subject to levy of the said additional duty. As such, the department's appeal has no merit and the same is rejected....
Tag this Judgment!Shree Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: (2004)(168)ELT173Tri(Mum.)bai
1. None appeared for the appellants. Heard Shri S.V. Parelkar, learned J.D.R. for the Department. This appeal and the stay application were filed on 24-3-2000. No explanation is available from the Registry as to why this stay application filed in March, 2000 is being posted for hearing on 27-11-2003. By not listing the case and the stay application for hearing, the appellants have enjoyed automatic stay for the entire period from 2000 till date. Considering the delay Involved in listing the case, the pre-deposit of duty and penalty is waived and the case is posted for final hearing on 29-12-2003. A copy of this order may also be sent to the Registrar for his information with reference to earlier Order Nos. C-IV/643-644/WZB/2003, dated 9-10-2003 [2003 (158) E.L.T.387 (Tri. - Mumbai)]....
Tag this Judgment!Sadbuddhi Brahmesh Wagh and ors. Vs. Satish Raghvendra Wagh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR416; 2004(3)BomCR98; 2004(1)MhLj890
R.M. Lodha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 16th October 1997 whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the arbitration petition filed by the appellants herein under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for setting aside the Award dated 16th June 1997.2. The controversy arises from the facts and circumstances that we briefly narrate first. One Vinayakrao Vyankatesh Wagh was allotted a plot of land being No. 35, situate at 60, Saraswati Baug, Jogeshwari (East), Bombay. He held 5 shares in Kanara Goud Saraswat Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (for short the Society), Vinayakrao died on 11-11-1958 leaving behind his legal heirs viz. Brahmesh, Venkatesh, Raghvendra, Mangala, Mahabaleshwar and Radhika. After his death, the said plot was transferred in the name of legal heirs of Vinayakrao in the revenue record. By writing dated 1-2-1976. Raghvendra, one of the legal heirs of Vinayakrao addressed to the Chairman of the Society requested for transfer of share...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. National Organic Chemical Indust ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: IV(2004)BC402; 2004(4)BomCR246; [2004]120CompCas333(Bom); 2004(2)MhLj114; [2004]51SCL593(Bom)
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. These company applications have been taken out by several secured creditors who assert their right to be heard at the stage of admission of the Company Petition for winding up. The right of the secured creditors to be heard at the stage of admission is questioned by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited who is the petitioner before the Court in the Company Petition.2. Insofar as the legal position is concerned, Section 557 of the Companies Act, 1956 provides in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) that in all matters relating to the winding up of a company, the Court may, inter alia, have regard to the wishes of creditor's or contributories of the company, as proved to it by any sufficient evidence. The words 'relating to the winding up of a company,' used in Sub-section (1) of Section 557 are broad enough to comprehend within its purview the stages of admission and of the final hearing of a Company Petition for winding up. Therefore, as a matter of statutory interpretat...
Tag this Judgment!Kirtilal Kalidas Diamond Exports and anr. and Dimexon Diamonds Ltd. an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: [2005]139STC70(Bom)
1. Since common question of law arise in both the petitions, both the petitioners were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.2. In these petitions, the contention of the petitioners is that the presentation of exim scrip for verification and endorsement of payment of premium to the Director General of Foreign Trade under a scheme in terms of circular No. 11 of 1993 dated May 5, 1993 and amended circular No. 14 of 1993 dated September 13, 1993 by the Government of India is not a sale as defined in clause (28) of Section 2 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as there is no transfer and as the same was returned to the petitioners who have utilised them for importing goods and that the premium received on exim scrip/ REP, etc., on account of devaluation of the Indian currency on two occasions is not a sale price as defined in clause (29) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as there is no element of transfer or sale and that, therefore, they are not liable to pay any sales ...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Divisional Manager Vs. Mandabai Wd ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(4)ALLMR441; (2004)106BOMLR265
S.T. Kharche, J.1. The bunch of these first appeals involve common question and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. All the appeals arise out of the claim petitions instituted by the legal representatives of the deceased under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short the Act), granting compensation with interest to the respondents/claimants making the appellant/Insurance Company liable to pay jointly and severally.2. Brief facts are as under :The accident occurred on Deulgaon Raja - Jalna Road, two kilometres away from Deulgaon Raja, at about 5.00 a.m. on 17.5.1984. On 16.5.1984 one Ganpat Popalghate had hired the truck bearing No. MTB 1255 for carrying the marriage party of his son to village Loni in Beed district. After the marriage ceremony was over, the marriage party was returning by the same truck to village Rakshasbhawan. When they were on the way, the clutch rod of the truck was broken and, therefore, the truck driver parked the said t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Customs (import) Vs. Vipor Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT282Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal at the instance of Revenue challenging order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 25-5-98. The issue to be considered in this case is one regarding the date with reference to which rate of duty is to be decided.2. The respondent imported 200 bags of Glucona Delta Lactone F 5010 under Bill of Entry No. 10408, dated 31-10-95 and warehoused the same under Bond dated 6-12-95. The period of the bond expired on 5-12-96.The respondent failed to ex-bond the goods during the validity period and requested for clearance of the goods on 8-10-97. He sought to pay the interest and duty as applicable on the date of clearance.Department took the view that rate of duty shall be applicable as on the date of expiry of bond period. The adjudicating authority took the view that the importer had unauthorisedly kept the goods in the warehouse and that the expiry of bond is to be taken as the date of deemed removal of the goods. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Supreme Co...
Tag this Judgment!Aurangabad Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: (2004)(113)LC775Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The appellants have been denied the modvat credit on the following items: The claim of the appellants for credit on felt and wire mesh is supported by the large Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ghataprabha Paper &, Board Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore 2000 (38) RLT 297 (LB-CEGAT), which in turn has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of CCE, Patna v. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. . As regards the lubricating pumps, appellants' claim for duty credit is supported by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of BID Parry (I) Ltd. v. CCE, Trichy 2002 (150) ELT 765 (Tri-Chennai) : 2002 (105) ECR 110 (T) and the claim for duty credit on voltage regulator is supported by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Shanti Synthetics Ltd. . The appellants also claim that for the lubricating pump and voltage regulator, they had claimed duty credit on capital goods and h...
Tag this Judgment!Premier Founders and Engineers Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: (2004)(113)LC776Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Heard both sides. The appellants manufacture iron casting. They received certain iron castings from their customers as rejected for which they filed intimation in Form D-3 and also maintained a register in Form V. These castings were melted arid fresh castings were remade which were classifiable under the same tariff heading 7325 as the original ones. The impugned order has been passed rejecting the claim for refund under Rule 173L holding the castings received back and the new castings made after re-melting to be different classes of goods.The appellants cite several decisions in support of their claim that in similar situations refund has been allowed by the Tribunal: 1. CCE, Bhubaneswar v. Orissa Cement Ltd., Rajgangpur .CCE v. Insulated Conductors Pvt. Ltd. 2. After hearing both sides and perusal of the case records and cited case laws, I am of the view that the castings returned to the appellants and the castings re-made after re-melting can be treated as the goods of the same...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »