Mumbai Court April 2003 Judgments

Shri Swastik Steels (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Bom)409; [2003]264ITR447(Bom)

S.H. Kapadia, J.1. Being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal imposing a penalty under Section 271B of the IT Act, the assessee has come by way of appeals under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961. Appeal No. 238 of 2001 is in respect of not obtaining tax audit report under Section 44AB in time for asst. yr. 1993-94 whereas Appeal No. 257 of 2001 is in the matter of imposition of penalty under Section 271B of the IT Act for not obtaining tax audit report under Section 44AB in time for asst. yr. 1992-93. For the sake of convenience, we would refer to the facts in ITA No. 257 of 2001.Facts2. Shri Swastik Steels (P) Ltd. was incorporated in 1986. It manufactures steel ingots from steel scraps. The assessee filed its return of income for the year ending 31st March, 1992, relevant to the asst. yr. 1992-93 on 31st March, 1994, along with the accounts and the audit report dt, 29th March, 1994, under Section 44AB of the Act. The due date for obtaining the audit report was 21st Dec., 1992. Ho...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Traders (P) Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Bom)224

S.H. Kapadia, J. 1. The above three appeals deal with common question of facts and, therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment. WT Appeal No. 239 of 2001 is in respect of asst. yr. 1989-90, WT Appeal No. 242 of 2001 is in respect of asst, yr. 1992-93 and the WT Appeal No. 244 of 2001 is in respect of asst. yr. 1990-91.2. Being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal, the Department has filed this appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act.Facts 3. The assessee-company filed its return of wealth on 13th April, 1992, in response to notice under Section 17(1) of the WT Act declaring the net wealth of Rs. Nil. The AO calculated the net wealth of the assessee-company at Rs. 48,07,874. The AO came to the conclusion that the property was constructed on a leasehold land. He, therefore, worked out the annual rental value in the manner indicated on p. 10 of the paper book. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal to the CIT(A) who took the view that, in this matter,...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Traders Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2003]264ITR667(Bom)

S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The above three appeals deal with common question of facts and, therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment. Wealth-tax Appeal No. 239 of 2001 is in respect of the assessment year 1989-90, Wealth-tax Appeal No. 242 of 2001 is in respect of the assessment year 1992-93 and the Wealth-tax Appeal No. 244 of 2001 is in respect of the assessment year 1990-91.2. Being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal, the Department has filed this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Facts :3. The assessee-company filed its return of wealth on April 13, 1992, in response to a notice under section 17(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, declaring the net wealth of rupees nil, The Assessing Officer calculated the net wealth of the assessee-company at Rs. 48,07,874. The Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that the property was constructed on a lease hold land. He therefore worked out the annual rental value in the manner indicated on page 10 of the paper b...

Transport Corporation of India Vs. Maharashtra Rajya Mathadi Transport ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2003(96)FLR653]; (2004)ILLJ238Bom

A.P. Shah, J.1. This group of appeals arises out of the award of the Industrial Tribunal delivered on August 29, 1997 in Reference (IT) No. 225 of 1981 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred as 'the Act'.2. Briefly stated the facts arc that around 1980, the All India Transport Employees Association raised a dispute relating to the general demands, including wage scales, dearness allowance and transfer of employees etc. in relation to the employees employed with various transporters having establishments all over India. This dispute was referred for adjudication by the Appropriate Government on August 12, 1981 under Section 10(1)(d) of the Act. The reference was initially made in respect of Prakash Roadlines Pvt. Ltd. and 258 other employers. By a Corrigendum issued on February 25, 1982, 116 more employers were included in the reference. An award was made by the Industrial Tribunal on November 12, 1986. The award was challenged by 28 transporters...

insight Diagnostic and Oncological Research Institute (P) Ltd. Vs. Dy. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN510(Bom)

S.H. Kapadia, J.The short question which arises for determination in this appeal is : whether the assessee was entitled to deduction of investment allowance on CT scan machine installed and used by the assessee during the accounting year ending on 31-3-1990 relevant to the assessment year 1990-91.Facts2. Assessee is a company incorporated on 31-1-1989. Its main object was to run a Diagnostic Centre in Mumbai. The assessee filed its return of income for the year ending 31-3-1990 returning a loss of Rs. 44.90 lakhs. During the year, the assessee had bought CT scan machine at the cost of Rs. 83.89 lakhs. In its computation of income, the assessee had claimed a deduction of investment allowance under section 32A of the Act at the rate of 20 per cent amounting to Rs. 16.77 lakhs on the aforestated machine after debiting the reserve as per section 32A(4) of the Act. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 24-4-1992 determining the loss on account of unab...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. thermoshell Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT673Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (A) who has held that Modvat credit of Rs. 1,18,088.70 is admissible to the respondents herein and set aside the penalty imposed upon by the Addl.Collector. According to the Revenue, credit was availed by the respondent on invoices which were not properly authenticated and also on the face of subsidiary gate pass issued on 1-4-94.2. 1 have heard both sides. As for the availment of credit on invoices which were not pre-authenticated, I find that these are manufacturer's invoices which do not require to be pre-authenticated and further there is no dispute regarding the duty paid nature of the goods. Therefore, credit availed on this document is admissible to the respondents.3. As for availment of the credit on the strength of the subsidiary gate pass, I find that the respondents have imported goods under Bills of Entry on which they were entitled to take credit and subsidiary gate passes issued by the department were supportin...

Nilesh Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT553Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Noting that the appeals are against the order dismissing for failure to deposit penalty, we take up the appeals with consent after waiving deposit.2. The penalty that was required to be deposited was imposed on the appellant by the Deputy Commissioner for the reason that the appellant had not entered in its statutory records details of polyester yarn that it had dyed, some undyed yarn that was its raw material and yarn on receipt of which was covered by an invoice issued to Metro Textiles and Jayendra Dodhia, who is the appellant's director.3. The goods have been confiscated under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001 and penalty imposed under Rule 26 of these rules. The alleged contravention took place in February, 2001, when these Rules have not been promulgated. The contravention therefore would be of the provisions of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 as it then existed.Although it is to be noted that the provisions of Rule 173Q and Rule 25 and 26, we do not find prima facie a...

Indian Smelting and Refining Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT880Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of articles of brass, both on its own account and on job work for Ordnance Factory at Katni.Goods supplied by it to the Ordnance Factory are exempted from duty in terms of Notification 70/92. It took Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs that it used in the manufacture of final product. The brass scrap which it used in the manufacture of articles of brass on payment of duty or without payment of duty to the Ordnance Factory is a major input. The notice issued to it demanded recovery, under the provisions of Rule 57CC(1) of 8% of a sum on the ground that the requirement contained in Rule 57CC(9), that the inputs used in the exempted and dutiable final products should be separately inventorized and accounted, had not been complied with. The assessee in reply contended that it had a separate inventory. The Commissioner did not accept this contention and demanded duty, based upon the cost of manufacture of the goods. Hence this appeal...

Commissioner of Customs and Central Vs. Mars Print-n-pack Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the respondents herein, who are manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Chapter 39 of the schedule to the CETA 1985, are eligible to modvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of their final products i.e., polyethylene bags falling under CETA sub-heading 3923.90 although they did not file a declaration showing polyethylene bags as their final products.2. I have heard the learned DR and perused the records. The lower appellate authority has extended the benefit of modvat credit after noting that initially polyethylene bags were being used as inputs for which a declaration had been filed and later on they started clearing polyethylene bags on payment of duty after taking modvat credit on the inputs going into the manufacture of such bags. In other words he has noted that the polyethylene bags have been declared, although there was no separate declaration that polyethylene bags became final pr...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Asian Chemical Works

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Commissioner (Appeals), against whose order the Revenue has filed the above appeal, has held that modvat credit is admissible to the respondents herein on the strength of invoices which did not bear pre-printed serial number.2. On hearing the learned DR and perusing the records, including the invoices which bear hand-written serial number, I hold that the ratio of the larger bench decision in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. Satyen Dyes 2001 (134) ELT 655 wherein it has been held that pre-printing of serial numbers on the invoices cannot be the roll ground for denial of the benefit of modvat credit is directly applicable. Following the ratio thereof I uphold the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and reject the appeal of the Revenue.3. The cross-objection filed by the respondents is also disposed off accordingly....