Mumbai Court September 2003 Judgments

Pooja Circular Saw and Rajesh P. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT466Tri(Mum.)bai

1. M/s. Pooja Circular Saw in their letter addressed to the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, pleaded seeking expeditious decision on their case quote "We have full faith as we believe you as our godfather.... Before taking any decision, please keep in mind that everyone of us has to answer the God's court, nobody can escape." One year after the receipt of this letter, a show cause notice was issued (7.2.2001) to the appellants and in the impugned order which followed (3.1.2002), the Commissioner confiscated the goods under Section 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, but allowed them to redeem them on payment of a fine of Rs. 10,00,000/-, redetermined the value of the new and serviceable blades as Rs. 2,035/- per kg. and that of old ones (scrap) as Rs. 90/- per kg., confirmed the duty of Rs. 64,90,057/- worked at the appropriate rates on a value of Rs. 76,74,181/- as determined by him to be the correct value of the goods, interest as applicable under Section 28AB of the said Act, and im...

Darshan Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT345Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the denial by the Asst. Commissioner of the modvat credit taken by the appellant on the ground that the invoice on which credit was taken were issued by the manufacturer of the inputs, not to the appellant but to other persons who in turn endorsed them to the appellant.2. The representative of the appellant contends that, while simultaneously in addition to endorsing the invoice of the manufacturer that they received, the dealers of the manufacturer who sent the goods to the appellant also issued separate invoice and credit is invalidly taken of these invoices.3. After considering the invoice in question I am unable to accept the submission. The five manufacturers invoice of Baroda Rayon Corporation Ltd., Surat were issued on different dates on 8^th, 16^th and 27^th April 1994 to dealers Shejanan Textiles, Dhanlaxmi Textiles and Shubhlaxmi Textiles all at Surat. These partners of these firms have endorsed the ...

Raptakos, Brett and Co. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)1SOT17(Mum.)

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of the learned CIT(A) dated 27-9-1996.With their letter dated 30-1-2003, the appellant assessee has filed concise grounds of appeal.Ground No. 1 relating to the disallowance of Rs. 35,000 under section 37(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and ground No. 11 relating to the disallowance of Rs. 15,000 out of misc. expenses were not pressed at the time of hearing. These two grounds are accordingly rejected.4. Ground No. III relates to the disallowance of Rs. 17,085 made under section 6D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The disallowance is directed to be made by considering each business trip separately. Both the parties before us agreed that the decision of the learned CIT(A) is in line with the decision of the Honble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Aorow India Ltd. (1998) 229 ITR 3251 (Bom). Respectfully following the said decision, we confirm the action of the learned CIT(A).Ground Nos. IV, V and VI relate to the inclusion...

Om Sai Hotels and Restaurants, a Partnership Firm Duly Registered Unde ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)ILLJ895Bom; 2004(2)MhLj547

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. The Petitioner challenge's the order dated 2nd May, 2000 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (I) for Maharashtra and Goa whereby the Authority has denied the infancy period to the petitioner's establishment on two counts, firstly, that applying the amended provision of Section 16(1) of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, hereinafter called as 'the said Act', and secondly, that the identity of the petitioner's Undertaking cannot be dissected from that of M/s. Copper Chimney, which was already covered under the provisions of the said Act.3. The few facts relevant for the decision are that the petitioner is a partnership firm duly registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act and engaged in the business of running a hotel in the premises at Saki Naka, Andheri, Mumbai. On completion of the said premises, the petitioner entered into a...

Procter and Gamble India Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bom ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR425; 2004(3)BomCR324; 2004(1)MhLj406

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. Since common questions of law and facts arise in all these petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. The short point which arises for consideration in all these petitions is whether the products like cough drops, cough tabs, cough tablets, cough syrup and cough lozenge, manufactured by the petitioners can be subjected to levy of octroi duty under the provisions of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, hereinafter called as 'the said Act'?4. Few facts relevant for the decision are that, in Writ Petition No. 2194 of 1993, the petitioners manufacture the products of cough drops, blue throat drops and vepa throat drops under the brand name of Vicks. In Writ Petition No. 932 of 1994, the petitioners manufacture the products of cough tablets under the trade name 'Solo Eucamenth Cough Tablets'. In Writ Petition No. 2216 of 1996, the petitioners man...

Smt. Pramilabai V. Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2004Bom125; 2004(1)ALLMR867

S.T. Kharche, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner impugning the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagpur, on 29th March, 1989, imposing fine of Rs. 45,800/- on the petitioner and directing the confiscation of the trees felled.3. The petitioner had purchased the field in the year 1981 bearing Survey Nos. 75/1-G and 75/1-D admeasuring 6.31 hectares of Mouza Zilpi, Tahsil Hingna, District Nagpur, for tree farming. Some teak trees were already in the said land at the time of purchase, and in the year 1981-82, the petitioner planted 20,000 teak plants and bamboo trees in this field for tree farming. It is contended by the petitioner that some of the trees were required to be cut down for the purpose of thinning and there was no restriction whatsoever about the felling of the trees, which constitutes the damage to the person or property or for abetting any nuisance on one's own land. After the expiry of a period of ...

Wyeth Holdings Corp. and anr. Vs. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(28)PTC423(Bom)

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Plaintiff No. 1 is the registered proprietor in India of the trade mark 'Pacitane' bearing registration No. 144173 in respect of 'Trihexylphenidyl, Anti Spasmodic Preparations' under Clause 45 of the schedule to the trade mark rules 1959 as on 27.6.1950. Prior to 3.4.2003 name of the first Plaintiff was American Cynamid Company. On 30.4.1986 Proper Registered User Agreement was entered into between the 1st Plaintiff and Cynamid India Limited. On 12.9.1997 name of Cynamid India Limited was changed to Wyeth Ledarie Limited. On 1.4.2003 name of American Cynamid Company was changed to Wyeth Holdings Corporation i.e. the second Plaintiff. Annual Sales for the year 1981-82 are set out in Paragraph 7 Exh. G to the plaint. Similarly annual promotional expenses for the years 1986-2000 are set out in Exh. H to the plaint. It is the contention of the Plaintiff's that in the year 2000 it was brought to the notice of the 2nd Plaintiff that the defendants had started manufacturing...

Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(177)ELT342Tri(Mum.)bai

1. After hearing both sides for some time on the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 24,87,473/- which represents disallowed Cenvat credit on capital goods and penalty of equal amount imposed upon the firm and penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed upon its Director, we found that it was possible to decide the appeals themselves at this stage and hence after waiving duty and penalties, we hear and decide the appeals with the consent of both sides.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various iron and steel products such as M.S.Rods, Bars, Channels, Angles etc. falling under Chapter Heading 72 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The period of dispute is January 1998 to February 2000. According to the department modvat credit was not admissible to manufacturers of hot re-rolled products on any of the inputs or on the capital goods in terms of CBEC Circular No. 326/42/97-C.X. dated 25.7.1997 and CBEC circular No. 522/18/2000.C.X. dated 3...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Deogiri Textile Mills Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This appeal filed by Revenue is against the following finding of the Commissioner - "Further as per Rule 57R(1) credit of specified duty on the capital goods shall not be allowed if such capital goods are used exclusively for production of a final product which is exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, The goods in question are a warping machine. "In relation to products of heading Nos. 52.03 and 52.04, sizing, beaming, warping, wrapping, winding or reeling, or any one or more of these processes, or the conversion of any form of the said products into another form of such products shall amount to 'manufacture'. The duty on sized yam shall be charged on the basis of its weight before sizing." This has been relied upon by the appellants, but has not entered into the discussion recorded by the original authority. I have examined the matter, I find that in the face of the chapter note 1 mentioned herein above, which has been incorporated in the Tariff, there is n...

The Indian Seamless Metal Tubes Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of ferrous tubes. It is stated that, after the tubes are extruded and before they are cooled, their external diameter is maintained by passing them through a piercing die. The internal surface of the piecing die is in contact with the external surface of the tubes which had been heated for being extruded and suffers from pitting as a result. Welding electrodes are used to repair the pitting and restore the surface to its original state. The appellant took credit of the duty paid on these electrodes in terms of a declaration that it filed under Rule 57T. Following issue of notice, the Assistant Commissioner, whose order has been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals), held that electrodes were not capital goods, because they were used for repairing piercing dies and therefore were not used for producing or processing any goods or for bringing about any change in any substance in the manufacture of the final product. Hence this appeal.2. T...