Mumbai Court December 2003 Judgments

Kare Labs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(168)ELT99Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellants had manufactured Polybion Tablets and removed the same on behalf of loan licencee M/s. E. Merck (I) Ltd. for export under Bond.The consignment could not be exported due to packing defects and was received back in the factory under the provisions of Rule 173M and after rectification of the defects cleared for home consumption under invoice dated 15-10-1999. The quantity under Export was 78,400 strips and 500 strips of samples while quantity cleared on duty was 77,760.Quantity of 1,140 strips were lost during the reprocessing.2. The appellants were asked to pay duty of Rs. 1,22,328/- on goods originally removed for export but which could not be exported and were returned to the factory. Hence this appeal.(a) Return route of Rule 173M as followed does not prescribe the recovery of duty on account of packing/re-packing amounting to manufacture vide Chapter note to Chapter 30 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1986 applicable to the goods in this case.(b) If the re-processing reso...

Modern Denim Ltd., Modern Denim, Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for stay of operation of the order and waiver of predeposit of duty and penalties arose out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise Ahmedabad II in the impugned order the Commissioner demanded Rs. 11,82,56,9801/- of Central Excise duty invoking extended period of limitation, interest under Section 11AB, imposed a penalty of equal amount of duty under Section 11AC, penalty of Rs. 2 crores on M/s. Modern Denim, Rs. 50 lakhs on Shri K.K. Sharma Vice President (Commercial) and Rs. 50 lakhs on Shri R.K. Kalia, Execitove Director of M/s. Modern Denim.2. The issue pertains to clearance of excisable goods during the period October 1995 - October 1996., by a 100% EOU, M/s. Modern Denim Ltd. who manufacture Denim fabrics.3. M/s. Modern Denim are a 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of Denim Fabrics. They have another unit namely Modern Demim who also manufacture the same goods. Officers of Central Excise (A.E.) visited the above units and found that M/s. MDL has n...

Gopi Chand and Company Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for waiver of pre deposit of duty of Rs. 73,672/- arises out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The duty liability arises as a result of assessing fuel and oil under appropriate headings of the Customs Tariff while it is the contention of the applicants that since the fuel and oil are contained in the vessel and machinery they are to be regarded as integral part of the vessel and hence to be classified under Chpater Heading 89.08 as decided by WCO in its opinion and as held by the Tribunal in several orders including that in the case of Ghaziabad Ship Breakers v. CC 2003 (151) ELT 636. He therefore prays pre deposit requirement may be waived pending appeal.2. The prayer is opposed by the Ld. DR who points out that the applicant did not produce any material to show the location of the fuel and oil on which duty demand has been confirmed in the vessel. Further he submits that the Masters report now produced (and stated to have been produced before the lower a...

Sagar Sanjog Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)90TTJ(Mumbai)1077

ORDERH.S. Sidhu, J.M. :The assessee has filed the present appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)-XX., Mumbai, dated 3-10-2002, for assessment year 1996-97, on the following grounds :1. 'The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming the order of the assessing officer treating the receipts of Rs, 20,00,000 and Rs. 5,00,000 as revenue receipts.'2, 'The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the sums of Rs. 20,00,000 and Rs. 5,00,000 paid to the appellant society were the compensation for commercial exploitation of the property and the transfer fee respectively.'2. The assessee is a society formed and registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, in or about the year 1972 for the purpose of acquiring a plot of land No. 50-C, at J.P. Road, Versova. There was an existing bungalow on the said plot which was occupied by one Shri B. Devi Singh as a tenant of the property owner. The assessee constructed a residential building comprising of 66 flats for ...

Nitco Tiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC414

1. The appellants arc engaged inter alia in the process of cutting, polishing, reinforcing with fibreglass and resin coating duty paid marble slabs. They are also engaged in production of marble tiles and novelty and furniture items of marble such as pen stand, ash tray, paper weight, table top, table base, etc. They purchased marble slabs imported by M/s. Maharashtra Tiles and Marble Company Pvt. Ltd., or by M/s. Cosper Impex Pvt. Ltd., who imported and cleared slabs on payment of basic customs duty and countervailing duty. The importers also imported raw marble slabs and cleared them on payment of basic duty (CVD is exempted) and men sent the blocks to job workers for conversion into slabs and after conversion into slabs job workers cleared them to the appellants herein on payment of duty. On 23/09/1998 the officers of the Central Excise headquarters (Preventive), Mumbai, visited the factory of the appellants on receipt of specific intelligence that they were clearing the goods with...

Tetra Pack India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC345

1. The above appeals arise out of two separate orders one passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara and the other by the Commissioner(Appeals) Vadodara. The issue is common in both the appeals which are hence heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of different commodities falling under Chapter 48 and 76 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985. They filed price lists in Part 1 and Part II for their products during the period November 1991 to August, 1994 claiming deduction on account of secondary packing, durable and returnable, consisting of wooden or iron pallets and plastic film wrapped against consignment each on the pallet. The department was of the view that the packing was neither durable nor secondary under Section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Central Excise Act, according to which the cost of packing of any excisable goods which are the goods delivered at the time of removal e...

Esskay Steel Rolling Mills and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The applications fr waiver of pre deposit of duty of Rs. 10,41,361.45 and a penalty of Rs. 4.00 lakhs imposed on the firm and a penalty of Rs 1.00 lakh on Shri P.S. sharma, its managing partner, arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane II.The duty demand has been confirmed as a result of denial of benefit of exemption under notification 208/83-CE to M.S. flats (patties) on the ground that the conditions of the notification, relating to specified inputs not clearly recognisable as non duty paid, has not been satisfied.2. On hearing both sides, and noting that the applicants' claim throughout the proceedings that they are purchasing rerollable scrap, some of which is obtained as a result of breaking of ships, has not been controverted, the ratio of the large bench decision of the Tribunal in CCE Vs. Adarsh Rerolling Mills 2002 (143) 533, holding that the inputs being rerollable scrap are not to be regarded as waste and scrap and hence the benefit of the exe...

Viraj Alloys Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The applications for waiver of pre deposit of duty of Rs 24,83,793/- and a penalty of equal amount imposed upon M/s Viraj Alloys Ltd, and penalties of varying amounts, as set out in the annexure to this order, arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane II.The duty has been confirmed on the ground that M/s Viraj Alloys Ltd availed modvat credit without actual receipt of inputs namely ship breaking scrap into their factory. The case of the department, as seen from para 69 of the impugned order is that registration numbers of vehicles on which inputs were declared to have been transported to M/s Viraj Alloys Ltd as were shown on the invoices of the suppliers were either non transport vehicles or transport vehicles of a lesser tonnage capacity not fit to transport the heavy inputs declared on the invoices. Penalties have been imposed on the other applicants, who are either suppliers of the inputs to M/s Viraj Alloys Ltd or transporters, on whose vehicles inputs...

Commr. of Cen. Excise Vs. Garware Polyster Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC373

The respondents herein manufacture X-ray film and photographic paper falling under Chapter 37 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985, during the course of manufacture of which coated polyester films waste/scraps arise. Such waste/scrap was cleared without filing any classification list and without declaring the correct assessable value thereof, at Nil rate of duty. On the basis that waste/scrap in question was covered by CET subheading 3915.90 attracting effective rate of 30% adv.duty by virtue of Notification No. 15/94 dated 1.3.94, two show cause notices proposing recovery of Rs. 14,357/- and Rs. 35,903.90 were issued and adjudicated by the Asstt.Commissioner who confirmed the demands and also imposed penalties of Rs. 2,000/- and Rs. 3,000/- respectively. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demands confirmed and the penalties holding that the waste/scrap arising during the course of manufacture of X-ray film and photographic paper are outside the purview of Central Excise Tariff and...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Shri Mushtaq Abdul Razak Khilji

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(177)ELT1138Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These two appeals were heard earlier on 27/11/2003 when the learned J.D.R. sought 15 days time for filing proper verification. Shri A.K.Saxena, learned J.D.R. appearing for the Department today states that in view of the Note at Sr.No. 1 under form EA-3, the verification is required only when the appeal is filed by an appellant other than the Commissioner himself. As such, he states that there is no requirement for filing of verification in this case as the appeals have been filed by the Commissioner concerned.2. I am of the view that the explanation given by the learned J.D.R. is acceptable and therefore, I proceed to hear the main appeals. I find that the impugned orders passed by the Commissioner has been reviewed by the Board. The Review order passed by the Board finds the following infirmity in the impugned order:- "A. Commissioner has not properly appreciated the evidence which has come on record which clearly links up the Indian Currency with the sale proceeds of smuggled go...