Mumbai Court May 2003 Judgments

Viacom Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(88)ECC807

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the applicability of the exemption contained in Clause (i) of entry 225 of the table to notification 5/99. Clause (i) of the entry exempts from excise duty in excess of 16% colour television receivers classifiable in heading 85.25 of the Central Excise tariff, "where the retail sale price is declared on the package, at the time of clearance from the factory of production, and the retail sale price declared forms the sole consideration for sale to the ultimate consumer;" the other clauses of the entry prescribe varying rates of duty applicable to other clauses, depending upon screen size of the television receivers. The appellant imported these goods, and for purposes of determination of the additional duty of customs payable on them, it claimed benefit of the exemption contained in this clause of the entry. The Deputy Commissioner of Customs denied the exemption on the grounds contained in the following paragraph of his order:- "I al...

Spect Vision and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The order of the Commissioner passed in these two groups of appeals is in consequence of the Tribunal's order passed on 4.12.2001 remanding these matters to him. In that order, the Tribunal was concerned with the liability to duty of the parts of spectacle frames that Spect Vision and Specto Plast manufactured in their factory utilised in the manufacture of spectacle frames. The spectacle frames were specified in notification 1/93 and its successor notification. The contention of the appellant is that by applicability of the provisions of this notification (Explanation VI in notification 1/93 and corresponding explanation in the other notifications), the value of these parts should not be taken into account for calculating aggregate value of the clearance of the spectacles. It was this explanation on which the appellant relied and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for considering this claim.2. We are unable to find any cogent reasoning in the order of the Commissioner tha...

Shree Chalthan Vibhag Udyog Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(155)ELT518Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant is a sugar mill engaged in the manufacture of sugar, molasses and distillation of ethyl alcohol. It denatures the ethyl alcohol before clearance. The denatured alcohol is of two types, specially denatured and ordinary denatured. We are concerned with the value for assessment of specially denatured ethyl alcohol. The alcohol denatured by adding to it acetone, benzene or other substances. The appellant requires the buyers of this product to supply to it the quantity of denaturant substances that it requires. While clearing the denatured alcohol, it included, for purpose of assessment, the quantity and volume of denaturant i.e. the total of undenatured alcohol and the denaturant, but for the price to be paid by the buyer deducted the quantity and value of denaturant. One of the gate passes issued by the appellant, as an example, will illustrate this point. Less, denaturant Itrs. 400 provided by buyer Rs. 1,97,220/- Sales tax, etc. Rs. 39,444/-.2. The notice issued to the...

investment and Precision Casting Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Shri M.J. Tank, learned Manager, Administration appearing for the appellant company states that the impugned order in appeal dis-allows modvat credit in respect or original copies of invoices issued by the dealers. He states that prior to issue of notification No. 2/95-CE (NT) dated 19.1.1995, there was no provision for issue of duplicate copy of invoices by dealers and therefore, the modvat credit is allowable on original copy of the dealer's invoice prior to this date. In this regard, he cites the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Parikh Chemical Industries v. CCE, Kanpur-1997 (95) ELT 598 (Tri.) and states that all the invoices in question were for the period August to September, 1994. The learned J.D.R. states that the actual dates of invoice are required to be verified by the original adjudicating authority before allowing modvat credit in terms of the cited case law.2. After hearing both sides and perusal of case records, I find that the case of the appellants is cover...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Cosmos Decorative Equipments

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of plastic and aluminium grills, diffusers and dampers manufactured by Cosmos Decorative Equipment, the respondent to this appeal.2. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order of the Asst. Commissioner that these goods were to be classified in heading 8415.00 of the Central Excise Tariff as parts of air conditioning machine and hence not entitled to the exemption contained in notification 1/92.3. In his order, the Commissioner accepted the submission of the assessee that the goods have multiple uses and some of them are clearly not for air conditioning machine or equipment. He cites the example of grill, which may extend in length to 200 feet therefore cannot be used for an air conditioning system. He has classified these goods in accordance with the material from which they were made, iron and steel, plastic or aluminium. The appeal questions this classification and fo...

Favourite Industries, Afzal Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 7,66,516/- and penalty of amount equal of duty imposed upon M/s. Favourite Industries and penalties of Rs. 38,000/- each on the partners, who are applicants, before me arise out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The case of the department as brought out in the show cause notice and in the order is that the manufacturing unit, which is engaged in the processing of grey man-made fabrics, clandestinely cleared processed man-made fabrics of a total of 592079.25 L.Mtrs., without payment of duty as brought from the private records in the form of purchase of grey fabrics, loose leaf delivery challans and delivery challan books as well as incriminating statements of the partners of the applicant unit.3. In spite of notice of today's hearing issued on the 3^rd March, 2003 none appears for the applicant and hence I heard the learned DR and perused the records.4. On hearing the learned DR I find that the case of the department ...

Koron Business Systems Ltd., G.R. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Acc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The above appeals arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) who has dismissed the appeals filed before him against the common order of the Additional Commissioner, who has absolutely confiscated the ball bearings imported by M/s. Koron Business Systems Limited and imposed penalties of Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 30,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively on the importers, its Manager and its Assistant Manager; on the ground of non-compliance with his pre-deposit order.2. On hearing both sides and nothing that at the time of stay applications before the Tribunal, the Tribunal had directed M/s. Koron Business Systems Limited to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000/- and such deposit has been made and that there is no finding on the merits of the matter regarding validity or otherwise of the import, I set aside the impugned order and remand the case for fresh decision by the lower appellate authority, who shall pass fresh orders after extending a reasonable opportunity to the appellant...

Commissioner of Customs and Central Vs. Saraswati Steel Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal of the Revenue arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who has held that the respondents herein are entitled to deemed modvat credit even after crossing the ceiling limit of Rs. 75 lakhs prescribed in Notification 1/93 dated 28/02/1993 in respect of re-rollable material received by them for the manufacture of MS CTD bars/round bars/MS plains. In coming to his conclusion he relied upon the Tribunal decision in the case of CCE v. Shri Venkateshwara Steel Industries 3. The issue in dispute now stands squarely covered in favour of the Revenue by the larger bench decision in the case of Digambar Foundary v. CCE, Allahabad 2000 9118) ELT 85. Therefore the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the assessees are eligible to deemed credit even after crossing the exemption limit of Rs. 75 lakhs as long as their specified clearances were within the limit of Rs. 2 crores cannot be sustained. Accordingly I set aside the same.4. However, while doin...

Samarth Knitters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. In this case the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal filed before him on the ground that the delay in filing the appeal before him exceeds the period which he was empowered to condone. In other words the Commissioner (Appeals) is empowered to condone a delay of up to 30 days beyond the statutory period of 60 days while the appeal was filed even beyond 60 days. In such a situation the decision of the larger bench of the Tribunal in the case of Maithan Ceramic Limited v. CCE, Jamshedpur 2002 (51) RLT 583 is directly applicable. In this judgment the Tribunal has held that when the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal filed before him on the ground that it was filed beyond the period which he was empowered to condone, the Tribunal cannot go into the merits of the case. Therefore there is no merit in the present appeal. Hence after dismissing the application for condonation and the stay application, I dismiss the appeal itself in the light of the larger bench deci...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ballarpur Inds. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Revenue has filed this apeal against the order of Commissioner is has allowed modvat credit under Rule 57Q on the following items:- (a) Electrical items installation spares equipment used within the factory : The items include cables, wires, switches, circuit breakers, control panels, contractors and relays, that carry manipulate, store or control the voltage and flow of electricity going into various production machinery. Duty amounting to Rs. 40,01,218/- was allowed the assessee. (i) Aluminium sheets are used as insulating material for pipeline that carry steam for paper manufacture. These items are part of the pipeline, which in turn is nothing but part of the manufacturing plant. Hence, credit of Rs. 62,899/- was allowed. (ii) Ring Hammer is used for crushing of the coal, which is ultimately fed for generation of steam. The hammer even if not considered a part of the whole plant, squarely falls under the definition of "accessory" of a plant. Hence, the credit of Rs. 4,758/- was...