Mumbai Court May 2003 Judgments

Star Industrial and Textile Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT418Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant was a manufacturer of jet dyeing machines, made in conformity with the specifications of the intending buyers. The components that form these machines comprise parts that the appellant manufacture in its factory and those it purchased from others, and until 1-11-1988, included items that were necessary for the erection and installation of these machines. It is stated by the Counsel for the appellant that these dyeing machines, after being assembled out of these components, were tested for proper performance and thereafter dismantled for ease of transportation to the customer's premises where they were again assembled and erected. These machines are stated to be more than 10 metres in length. By its letter of 1-11-1988, it informed the jurisdictional Superintendent as follows : "For Jet Dyeing Plant/equipment we have been paying excise duty for despatches up to 22-8-1988 on all items manufactured by us, bought out items in assembled condition and bought out items suppl...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Hatco Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT935Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Hatco Industries, the respondent to this appeal, imported a consignment consisting of two models of multimeters and four models of relays. The goods were imported from China and were declared to be a Chinese origin. The multimerter XY 360 TR was declared at unit price of US$ 1.25 and the other multimeter US$ 0.80. Relays MY-4 MY-2 declared at US$ 0.18, MK2P US$ 0.20 and MK3P US$ 0.23. The department considered that these prices are much lower than the price at which other similar goods were imported. Examination of the goods showed that the relays that they were made in Malaysia and to be Omron brand. The importer, on being asked to explain, could not give any satisfactory reason. Notice was therefore issued to the importer proposing enhancement of the value of the goods. The price of Relays MY4 and MY2 was enhanced under Rule 7 by applying the value from the sale price of such relays imported by another importer and sold in India and that of the remaining two types under Rule 8. T...

Amity Interlink Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. On certain imports the benefit of Notification No. 16/2000, Sr. No.163 of the Table was denied as it was found that the appellants failed to produce Manufacturers Test Certificate. They had declared the goods as MS Low Carbon defective/rejects/Rusty Hot Rolled Coils supplied by Trader in U.K. Sample from the imported goods were sent to verify carbon content. Pending the test report, goods were released under provisional assessment. The Chemical Examiner of the Custom House reported that the sample is cut piece of a Steel sheet having carbon content = 0.15%. On a further query made by the Group, the Joint Director of the Custom House Laboratory informed the appraising officer as follows:- "The query whether hot rolled or cold rolled is an academic one and can not be answered by Chemicals. However, hot rolled and cold rolled processes are manufacturing processes for reducing the thickness of steel plates by way of rolling at a very high temperature and low temperature respectively." ...

Plastvolta Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. By the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner has confirmed the correctness of the order of the Joint Commissioner, in which duty of Rs. 5,26,926/- has been demanded from the applicant, has been payable on the various processes that it has carried on PTFE tapes.2. The contention on behalf of the applicant is that it has settled the dues under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme 1998.3. By application of Sub-section 3 of Section 90 of the Finance (No. 2) Act 1998, order passed under Sub-section 1 shall be conclusive and no matters which are covered by that order shall be reopened in any other proceedings.4. The notice issued to the firm demands two sums of duty--Rs. 5,26,926/- for the period from 1-4-1992 to 31-3-1994 on the ground that the exemption contained in notification 175/86 and 1/93 would not be available, and also demanded duty of Rs. 58,050/- on goods which were seized on the ground that they had been cleared without payment of duty. The Deputy Commissioner, in his ord...

Sony Music Entertainment (i) Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 6.99 crores approximately and equal penalty, demanded and imposed on the ground that the activity undertaken by the applicant of packing in plastic cases (referred to as jewel boxes), containing labels on them indicating details of the product, the recorded audio and video compact disc that it imported in bulk, would amount to manufacture.2. Counsel for the applicant says that it imports these recorded compact disc in pancakes, consisting of a cylindrical box in a spindle centre on which 50 compact discs rest. Each disc is taken out by the applicant, packed in jewel boxes which contain details relating to the contents of the compact disc. A hologram is also affixed on the box. He contents of the compact disc. A hologram is also affixed on the box. He contents the finding of the Commissioner that packing of these discs is a process incidental or ancillary to completion of manufacture of the product by pointing out that in its j...

Emco Lenze Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT905Tri(Mum.)bai

1 The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of parts of friction disc which are of electronic magnetic clutches and brakes imported by the appellant. It is not in dispute that the friction disc is made out of composite of synthetic rubber, carbon and mineral fibre etc. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the classification determined by the Assistant Commissioner in Heading 68.13 of the Customs Tariff as friction materials and articles thereof not imported.2. The representative of the appellant contends that the goods form clearly identifiable parts of electronic magnetic clutches and brakes.They are therefore parts of these goods, which are themselves classifiable in Heading 8505.90. There being nothing in the tariff to make against the classification, they should be classified as parts.3. We agree that the notes to Section XVI of the tariff, in which includes Chapter 85 does not specifically exclude classification ...

Ashima Dyecot Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(161)ELT760Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants were discharging their duty liability under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for the period 16/12/1998 to 28/02/2001 w.e.f. 01/03/2001 they reverted to paying duty on value, determined on levy under Section 3; since levy of duty under Section 3A, was no longer applicable to a manufacture of processed fabrics, which the appellants was engaged in.2. At the time of switch over the appellants had declared stock on 28/02/2001 of fully finished fabric and also separately the production as required. They however, inadvertently cleared same processed fabrication which were liable to advalorem duty, without payment of duty, assuming the same to be the stock of processed fabrics which had discharged the duty under Section 3A upto 28/02/2001. This lapse occurred due to a mix up in their packing section and when they found it out, they voluntarily deposited the Central Excise duty leviable on such goods alongwith interest. They were issued a Show Cause Notice proposing...

Niwas Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 6.48 lakhs and penalty of Rs. 1.5 lakhs demanded and imposed on the applicant on the ground that the terry towelling fabrics that it manufactured were classifiable in heading 63.02 of the tariff and not, as claimed by the applicant, in heading 58.02.2. A request for adjournment is made on the ground that the applicant's counsel has to attend a hearing before the Tribunal at Bangalore. There is however no indication as to who this counsel is and no vakalatnama has been filed. We therefore decline to adjourn and, having read the stay application and other papers and heard the departmental representative, proceed to dictate our order.3. The stay application does not contain any specific ground either on merits or on limitation. While it is contended in the appeal that the goods are classifiable in heading 58.02, there is no basis indicated for this claim. The contention in the appeal that the entire industry at Sholapur has claim...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Manmade Spinners (i) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT884Tri(Mum.)bai

1. By its order passed on stay application filed by the respondent to this application and others, the Tribunal ordered deposit by it of Rs. 40 lakhs. On 30-9-2002, it accepted compliance.2. This application by the Commissioner seeks to contend that the applicant has not complied with the Tribunal's order because the deposit ought to have been made in cash or from the personal ledger account, and the deposit made by debit to the Modvat account is not acceptable.3. We must emphasise that it is not the business of the Commissioner to sit in judgment upon the order of the Tribunal accepting the compliance shown by the applicant. The Tribunal would not have blindly accepted compliance; but has done so after noting the deposit made by debit to the RG 23A account.4. Even otherwise the Commissioner's application is entirely devoid of merit. The order of the Tribunal in Fibre Glass Insulation v. CCE, which the application relies upon, found that, on the facts before it, the assessee was requi...

Hindustan Conductors Ltd. Vs. the Dcit, Spl. Rg. 1

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)82TTJ(Mum.)821

1. As there was a difference of opinion between the Accountant Member and the Judicial Member, following question was referred to a Third Member. "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, deduction on account of depreciation and investment allowances should be allowed for the year under consideration only to the extent it was necessary to reduce the income to the level of the income computed Under Section 115J and consequently whether the order of the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT (A) on interpretation of the provision of Section 115J(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 should be set aside." 2. The Hon'ble Vice President, Shri M.K.Chaturvedi, sitting as a Third Member by his opinion dated 31/1/2003 has concurred with the view of ld. Accountant Member in conformity with the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Karnataka Small Scale Industries Development Corporation Ltd., 258 ITR770. Resultently, Ground No. 1 of the assessee is hereby rejected....