Mumbai Court February 2003 Judgments

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Jas One Securities

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)2STR80

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of (Appeals), who has condoned the delay in filing of quarterly return in ST-3 (for service tax) for the quarter ending March, 1995. It is the contention of the Revenue that although the plea of the respondents that they were new in business and were not aware of the rules and regulations of the newly introduced service tax was sufficient to condone the delay for the quarter ending December, 1994 (which was already condoned by the adjudicating authority), the same reason could not hold good for the quarter ending March, 1995.2. I have considered this submission and perused the impugned order.The assessee/respondent has not shown reasonable cause for failure to comply with the requirements of filing return even after they have become aware of the requirements under the provisions of the service tax enactment. Therefore, I hold that lower appellate authority was not justified in condoning the delay for the second quarter viz.,...

Finolex Cables Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT468Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants herein, who are manufacturers of electric wires and cables, were receiving various inputs for the manufacture of their final products. They had availed Modvat credit of Rs. 9,69,184/- (i) vide their RG 23A Part-II Entry No.337, dated 22-4-94 on the strength of a Subsidiary Certificate No.7/93-94, dated 14-6-93. Enquiries revealed that they had actually received the inputs viz., C.C. Copper Rods 8 mm dia. weighing 59,800 Kgs. vide their Goods Inward Note dated 7-6-93, according to which the material was received in their factory on 30-5-93. The credit was proposed to be denied on the grounds that the goods were received in May, 1993 without the cover of a valid duty paying documents as per the first proviso of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and also for the reason that the goods received on 21-4-1994 in respect of which credit was taken on 22-4-1994 cannot be the same goods which were received on 30-5-9...

Malik and Company Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT466Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The brief facts of the case are that based on interception of one hand cart transporting Arc Welding Machine on 29-04-87 and statement of partners of M/s. Malik & Company and M/s. Malik Weld, it appeared to the department that the clearances of both the above mentioned units were required to be clubbed, as both were run by the members of the same family and the units were shown on paper as separate units for the purpose of availment of small scale exemption, which was not admissible. Show cause notice proposing recovery of duty of Rs. 3,60,475/- on goods cleared. Over and above, the exemption limit set out in Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-86, proposing confiscation of seized goods and penalty upon the partners of the M/s. Malik & Company and M/s. Malik Weld was issued to the appellants. Notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai, who confirmed the duty demand issued to M/s. Malik & Company, which was found to have floated M/s. Malik Weld f...

Hindustan Coca-cola Beverage Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These two applications relate to two appeals both arising out of the order. These are, therefore, taken up together for disposal. The applicants manufacture aerated water and fruit pulp or fruit juice based drink bearing the brand name "Maaza". From 01/03/2001, "Maaza" was exempted from duty. The applicants were availing of modvat credit on common inputs used in their products as also on the machinery. Rule 57AD of the CE Rules, 1944, provided for maintaining separate accounts of common inputs and for taking credit only on those inputs, which were intended to go into the dutiable products, in the alternative, the exempted products would attract duty at the rate of 8%. The appellants, however, continued to clear "Maaza" without paying such duty.2. Show cause notice was issued seeking recovery of Rs. 59,37,801/-under Rule 57AD(2) (b) read with 57AH of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 50% of the modvat credit availed on capital goods of Rs. 34,55,840/- was also sought to be recovered, ...

Balasaheb L. Manwathakar Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)STR126

1. This is an application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 1,09,500/- imposed by the authorities below upon the applicant courier agency for failure to apply for registration, failure to pay service tax and failure to furnish quarterly returns in form ST 3.2. The submission of the applicants is that they are only a branch office while the liability to pay service tax lies upon the head office.3. On hearing the learned DR (the applicants are not present in spite of notice); and on perusal of the record, we find that the plea that the applicant is only a branch office has not been substantiated as the applicants were not able to provide any details of the location of their head office. This is a matter which has to be considered only when the appeal is finally heard. Since no prima facie case for total waiver has been made out, in the above circumstances, we direct pre-deposit of Rs. 20,000/- towards the penalty within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this orde...

Rhone Poulenc (India) Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus., Acc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT1000Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant placed an order with System Software Associates, France S.A. for supply of software at a price of US $ 83700. The software contained in floppy discs was dispatched to the appellant by courier from the supplier in United States of America. The package containing floppy discs was accompanied by invoice showing their value to be US $ 24.01. The courier paid the duty assessed from this value, cleared the goods from Customs and delivered them to the appellant/ who received the amount on 9-11-1996. It is stated that the package was not opened before 13-1-1996 as the concerned department of the appellant was closed on account of Diwali. On opening the package and examination of the floppy/ it found to contain software. It is further stated that on 15-11-1996, the appellant addressed a letter to the Assistant Commissioner, Air Cargo Complex, Sahar, narrating the facts and requesting for reassessment of the value. It further stated that the department has also asked the appell...

Vishesh Dhatu Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(161)ELT745Tri(Mum.)bai

1. After hearing the parties on the stay application, we have decided to take up the appeal.2. The appellant was a rerolling mill, and had an induct on furnace, and was required to pay duty every fortnight based on the capacity of its production as determined by the rules made in this behalf. The notice issued to it alleged that duty had not been paid for the period from April 1998 to August 1998 and also proposed penalty. The manufacturer contended in reply that it had sought abatement for considerable part of the period, admitted its liability to duty for the remaining period. The Deputy Commissioner found that the assessee had not com,plied with the conditions contained in Sub-rule 2(e) of Rule 96ZO with regard to various parts and held that the appellant was not available. He therefore confirmed the demand for entire duty and imposed penalty. The assessee appealed this order. The Commissioner (Appeals) was of the view that the entire information as prescribed in Sub-rule (2) of Ru...

Western Trading Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., (Adj.)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT678Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The above applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 28,53,237/- confirmed against M/s. Poonam Drums Containers Pvt. Ltd., and penalty of equal amount imposed thereupon, together with penalties of varying amounts imposed upon the remaining applicants who are registered dealers and penalty imposed upon the Director of M/s. Poonam Drums Containers Pvt. Ltd., arise out of the order of Commissioner of Central Excise. The ground for confirmation of duty is that M/s. Poonam Drums Containers Pvt. Ltd. took the credit on goods described as coils in the invoice while what was received by them was sheets. In other words the main charge is that there is no co-relation between the input supplied and the form in which the input reached factory of Poonam Drums Containers Pvt. Ltd. 2. On hearing both sides we note that in cases involving identical issue the Tribunal had, in the case of Dhimant Trading Co. and Ors. v.CCE granted unconditional waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty an...

National Institute of Education Vs. Nav Bharat Shikshan Mandal,

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)BomCR543

C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. Rule. Mr. V.B. Naik, learned counsel appearsand waives service of rule on behalf of respondentNos. 1 to 3. Mr. R.G. Ketkar, learned counsel,appears and waives service of rule on behalf ofrespondent No. 4. Mr. V.A. Gangal, learned SpecialCounsel, appears and waives service of rule onbehalf of respondent Nos. 5 and 6. In the facts andcircumstances, the matter has been taken up forfinal hearing.2. This petition is filed by the petitioner foran appropriate writ, direction or order, quashingand setting aside permission granted by the Stateof Maharashtra, respondent No. 6 herein, to NavaBharat Shikshan Mandal, Sangli, respondent No. 1herein, for starting a Senior College at Kurundwad,Taluka Shirol, District Kolhapur, being illegal andunlawful.3. The case of the petitioner is that it is asociety registered under the Societies RegistrationAct, 1860. Similarly, first respondent is also aSociety conducting Junior College at Sangli. Priorto 1985, first respondent was conducti...

Chandrakant Bajirao Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through the Secre ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR457; 2003(4)BomCR535; 2003(2)MhLj471

R.M. Lodha, J.1. The only argument that has impressed us is concerning the incompetence of Caste Scrutiny Committee in holding that though the petitioner belongs to 'Thakar', but being of Bhat category he does not belong to Scheduled Tribe.2. While considering the petitioner's tribe claim, the Scheduled Tribes Certificates Scrutiny Committee (for short, 'Scrutiny Committee') held thus:'After considering all the aforesaid documents and in exercise of the powers vested, the Scrutiny Committee has come to the conclusion that Shri Chandrakant Bajirao Shinde does not belong to Thakar Scheduled Tribe and as such his claim towards the same is held invalid. He belongs to caste Thakar of Bhat category and as such the caste certificate of his belonging to Thakar Scheduled Tribe granted by the Tahsildar of Purandar Vide No. MAG/WS/92/78, dated 17.7.1978 is hereby cancelled and confiscated.'3. It is apparent from the aforesaid finding recorded by the Scrutiny Committee that though the petitioner b...