Mumbai Court September 2003 Judgments

Carline Pressing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the liability to confiscation of quantity of ferrous scrap which had been removed from the premises of the appellant without payment of duty and consequent reduced the fine from Rs. 1.50 lacs to Rs. 1 lakh and penalty from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 25,000/-.3. The counsel for the appellant contends as follows. The appellant was a small unit engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts, in the course of which scrap emerges. The appellant could not install facilities in its factory for weighing this scrap and therefore sent it to weigh bridge for this purpose. The scrap was covered by delivery challans and a letter which showed the bona fides of the appellant.After it was weighed, it was returned to the factory where a proper invoice was issued after payment of duty for its clearance. He says that while there has been a failure to obtain prior permission from the departmental officers, procedure followed by ...

Bayer Abs Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT970Tri(Mum.)bai

The appellants are availing Modvat credit on imported items/goods, which were inputs, having been received on gate passes/delivery challans prepared and issued by their depot at Kandia and/or weighment slips issued by the surveyors at Kandia, the port of import being Kandia and also the lorry receipt issued by the various transporters for transportation of the inputs to the factory at Vadodara District.They were also maintaining quality records/reports issued by their own transporters from time to time. A show cause notice was issued proposing to deny the credit on certain quantities of inputs which were alleged to be not in conformity with the dip measurement of storage tank, differences between the initial dip and the final dip at the time of analysing the tanker lorry and tanker in the factory/storage tanks that was considered. Based on these differences in the dip measurement and the actual quantity, the credit taken, a demand was made to reverse Modvat credit on certain alleged q...

Hardcastle Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT223Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appeal taken up for disposal with the consent of the departmental representative, the appellant being absent and unrepresented despite notice, having filed written submission.2. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has classified "soft serve ice-cream" manufactured by the appellant which was dispensed through vending machines under heading 2105.00 of the tariff, demanded duty from July 1997 to February 2001 consequently payable, and imposed a penalty on the appellant under Section 11AC of the Act.3. In the written submission that is filed, the appellant produced a copy of the notification 16/2003-CE (NT) of 12-3-2003 waiving under the provisions of Section 11C, the duty payable on "soft serve ice cream" dispensed through vending machines during the period between 1st March 1997 and 20th February 2002. Accordingly, duty was not payable by the appellant for the period in question and hence it was not liable to penalty....

Purna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Vs. Cce and C

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT219Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed on the applicant under Rule 26.2. The applicant is a sugar mill and consequent upon sale by it to an exporter cleared a quantity of sugar without payment of duty in terms of a bond executed by the purchaser as provided in Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001. Notice issued to the applicant and to the exporter demanded duty from both on the ground that the sugar had not been exported and proposed penalty. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has confirmed duty to be payable by the exporter and imposed penalty on the applicant.4. Rule 26 makes liable to penalty any person who acquires possession or in any way concerned with transporting, removed or otherwise dealing with the manner specified in it. It is prima facie difficult to say that the provision of these rule will apply to a manufacturer of excisable goods. Prima facie it is intended to apply to persons who deals with excisable good...

Perfect Circle India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(163)ELT95Tri(Mum.)bai

1. After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of penalty amounting to Rs. 10 lakhs, we proceed to dispose of the appeal with the consent of both sides as the issue lies in a narrow compass.2. Shri T. Vishwanathan, ld. Advocate, appearing for the appellant does not dispute the confirmation of demand of duty of Rs. 1,77,884/- and of Rs. 35,534/- confirmed by the authorities below in respect of waste and scrap generated in the factory of job workers to whom the appellant had sent the goods under the provisions of Rule 57F(4) and fairly agree that it was the appellant's liability to pay the duty on such scraps but submits that the same was not paid either by the job workers or by the appellant under a bona fide belief that the same does not attract duty. He also points out that the some of the waste was invisible waste which according to them was to the tune of 30%, but the Revenue while determining the duty liability, has given the benefit on account of invisible scrap only to th...

Dada Associates, Deep Jyoti Dyg. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT971Tri(Mum.)bai

1. After hearing both sides on the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty (as per details given in the Annexure-A to this order) imposed on the appellants units on the ground of short payment of duty/delay in payment of duty, we find that it was possible to decide the appeals themselves as the issue in dispute stands settled by the Madras High Court judgment in the case of Beauty Dyers v. Union of India and Ors. 2002 (52) RLT 636.2. The duty demand and penalties arise under the compounded levy scheme under the Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 and Rule 96ZQ(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. We find that the High Court has struck down Rule 3 of the Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 and the notification issued thereunder as ultra vires of Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore the demand and penalties in the present case are not sustainable as ...

Overseas Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(165)ELT439Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appeal taken up for disposal, with the consent of both sides, after waiving deposit.2. The appellant was a texturiser of yarn. Consequent upon the applicability of the rates of duty made with effect from 1.3.2000 as a result of substitution of ad valoram duty of processed fabrics by specific rate of duty, manufacturers of textile including texturisers of yarn such as the appellant, who were required to pay back so much of credit taken by them under Rule 57AG (3)(a) of the duty paid on so much of inputs for use by such texturisers to pay back so much of duty as contained in partially required to pay amount equivalent to credit taken in respect of inputs lying in stock used in the manufacture of texturised yarn, polyester which is lying in stock as on 1.3.2000 or thereafter. The appellant was therefore required to pay around Rs 13 lakhs and this is not disputed by the representative of the appellant.The appellant however paid only Rs 5.25 lakhs towards this amount, left the remaining...

Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Union of India, Joint Secreta ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR594; 2004(175)ELT72(Bom); 2004(1)MhLj813

V.C. Daga, J.1. Rule returnable forthwith. Shri Rana waives services for the respondents. By consent of parties petition is taken up for final hearing.2. This petition raises an important question, that whether or not the use of fully built imported car, during the course of study and research, amounts to use of a car after importation thereof into India as contemplated under Section 74(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 ('Act' for short)Contextual facts: 3. For the resolution of the above question, it is necessary to consider contextual facts.The contextual facts depict that the petitioners are engaged, in the manufacture of passenger cars having their factory at Pune. The cars are manufactured from the completely knocked down kits and parts imported by the petitioners.4. Petitioners wanted to increase the indigenisation of the components used in the manufacture of car rather than depending on the imported components. Therefore, for conducting study and also for development of the component ...

Bussa Overseas and Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)BomCR123; 2003LC821(Bombay); 2003(158)ELT135(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.1. At the outset, it must be stated that the Petitioners have fairly conceded before us that the refund of the amount claimed in the petition has already been recovered by the Petitioners from their customers. However, it is the case of the Petitioners that where refund arises on finalisation of the provisional assessment, the Customs authorities are obliged to refund the excess amount under Section 18(2) of the Customs Act even though the Petitioners have recovered that amount from the customers. In other words,the submission is that for refund arising under Section 18(2) of the Customs Actneither the limitation nor the principles of unjust enrichment incorporated in Section 27 of the Customs Act are applicable. 2. Petitioners are engaged in the business of importing various alcoholic preparations into India. During the period from February to July, 1986, the Petitioners had imported 7 consignments of compound alcoholic preparations on (concentrated extracts) for the ...

Dilip S/O Narayan Lelekar and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)MhLj221

P.S. Brahme, J.1. Heard Shri Mardikar, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Sonare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant - State.2. This Revision Application is preferred by the applicant (original accused Nos. 2 and 3 in Regular Criminal Case No. 318 of 1997) challenging the judgment of conviction recorded by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akot, in Regular Criminal Case No. 318 of 1997 as also the judgment passed by the third Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, in Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 1998 whereunder conviction of the applicants for the offence under Section 325 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code as also sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/-, and in default of payment of fine to suffer further Rigorous Imprisonment for one month to each of them came to be confirmed.3. The prosecution against the applicants and their father Narayan Mahadeo Lelekar (original Accused No. 1) was initiated on the basis of a compla...