Mumbai Court September 2003 Judgments

Alembic Glass Industries Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(111)LC715Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These appeals are being disposed off by the common order since the issue is common. (i) EMKLO - 150: - It is used in various parts of machinery through Hydrolic pump. (iii) Cynder IC 680 (Steam Cylinder Oil): - It is used in P.T.U. Box which is attached with Shear Feeder mechanism which drives the shear. The function of the oil is to keep the mechanism in working. (iv) Nilev - 40 (Fire Polishing): - It is used to avoid over heating at the time of fire polish. (vi) Grease W. B.: - It is applied in all the bearing and spare parts to avoid friction. As it was found that the use of the items was mainly as lubricants for better operation of machinery and not in relation to manufacture of final product.3. The appellants rely upon - (i) Shree Rayalaseema Alkalies & Allied Chem. Ltd. 2002 (149) ELT 962 : 2002 (103) ECR 866 (T) (ii) Modi Rubber Ltd. 2000 (199) ELT 197 (LB) : 2000 (92) ECR 333 (T) (iii) A.K.Automatics , which hold the eligibility of Lubricating Oils, Greases and Cutting ...

Balaji Industries and S.J. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT759Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellants were permitted to withdraw these appeals to entitle them to make application to the Settlement Commission. "As suggested elsewhere, the Applicant was given number of opportunities to represent his case before the Settlement Commission. But for some reasons or the other the Applicant has Jailed to co-operate with the Settlement Commission. When the case was fixed for hearing on 7th May 2002 the applicant was not present. The action of the applicant is therefore to delay the proceedings by not cooperating with the Settlement Commission. The Settlement Commission is, therefore, of the opinion that since the Applicant who has made this application for settlement under Section 32E has not co-operated with the Settlement Commission in the proceedings before it, the case is sent back to the revenue having jurisdiction to decide this case in accordance with the provisions of Central Excise Act. The appropriate authority while deciding the case shall take into consideration all t...

Manik Machinery Mafs. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT439Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. In this case an appeal was filed by the appellants before the Commissioner (Appeals) against an order-in-original dated 23-10-97. While the appeal was pending, they were asked to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 2,33,526/-, out of which Rs. 33,526/- was paid on 19-3-98 and Rs. 2 Lakhs were paid on 25-3-98 both by debit in the PLA.The appellants succeeded in the appeal and the order was issued on 21-5-98 after which they filed a refund claim for consequential refund.The refund claim has been rejected on two grounds : firstly, though it was filed initially on 31st December, 1998, with complete papers it was filed afterwards on 11th February, 1999 and secondly, the protest letters in respect of the amounts paid were sent on 24-3-98 and 26-3-98 respectively for the two amounts, i.e. after the debits were made.2. It is a fact that the protest letters were submitted after payment of duty. However, this is a case of payment of the amounts while the appeal was pending. In vie...

Nandevi Foot Care Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT113Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The above two appeals are being taken up for disposal by this common order after hearing both sides.2. The appellants are manufacturers of Corn Caps also known as Collous Caps with a brand name of "Carnation" on the said caps. The said brand name, namely, 'Carnation', belongs to a foreign company i.e. M/s.Cuxson Gerrard & Co. Ltd., U.K., who vide their letter dated January 1997 had authorized, the appellants, as licensed user of the said trade mark in India to manufacture and distribute the said goods bearing the said brand name/trade mark.3. The Reserve Bank of India have allowed the appellants to enter into technical collaboration with this U.K. company and this permission was to pay not only a lumsum for the payment for the technical collaboration but also for payment of royalty to the U.K. company.Consequently, they were granted the permission to utilize the said brand name in India by the U.K. Company.4. The proceeding was initiated consequent to the investigation made by ...

Panchal and Panchal Mechanical Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT537Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The miscellaneous application for restoration of the appeal which stands dismissed after rejecting the appellant's application for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal vide order No. CII\734-36\WZB\2003 dated 09.04.2003 has considered the appellant's plea for condonation of delay but has not found the same sufficient for allowing the application. It was observed that the impugned order of the Commissioner was received by them after a period of two years from the date of passing. It was further observed that even if the date of receipt, as claimed by the appellant is considered to be correct, there was still a delay of four months in filing the present appeal.2. Shri. K.R. Tiwari, Ld. Advocate appearing for the applicant submitted that the said order of the Tribunal was passed ex-parte and the appellants could not explain the delay. As such, he prays that the appeal be restored to its original number.3. Countering the arguments, Shri K.L. Bablani, Ld. JCDR sub...

Nandevi Foot Care Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The above two appeals are being taken up for disposal by this common order after hearing both sides.2. The appellants are manufacturers of Corn Caps also known as Collous Caps with a brand name of "Carnation" on the said caps. The said brand name, namely, 'Carnation', belongs to a foreign company i.e. M/s.Cuxson Gerrad & Co. Ltd., U.K., who vide their letter dated January 1997 has authorized, the appellants, as licensed user of the said trade mark in India to manufacture and distribute the said goods bearing the said brand name/trade mark.3. The Reserve Bank of India have allowed the appellants to enter into technical collaboration with this U.K. company and this permission was to pay not only a lumsum for the payment for the technical collaboration but also for payment of royalty to the U.K. Company.Consequently, they were granted the permission to utilize the said brand name in India by the U.K. Company.4. The proceeding was initiated consequent to the investigation made by t...

Vinay Kumar Baid, Vinay Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(164)ELT33Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Uniflex Cable Ltd. was a manufacturer of insulated electric wire and cable and J. Prakash Jain, manager of this assessee. Vinay Enterprises, of which Vinay Kumar Baid was the proprietor, and Maganbhai H. Dodia was the manager was engaged in the cutting of shorter length the galvanised wire that Uniflex Cables Ltd. received as raw material. A visit by the officers to the factory of Uniflex Cables Ltd. and Vinay Enterprises showed that there was a shortage in the factory of the former of about 89000 kg. of galvanised wire and 12552 kg. of galvanised strips both inputs and the duty paid on which had been taken as modvat credit. The assessee's explanation was that the goods had been sent for cutting to shorter length to Vinay Enterprises.Verification of the stock at Vinay Enterprises showed the presence there of this quantities of galvanised iron wires and 11,075 kg. of galvanised strips resulting in the shortage of the latter of 477 kg. of strips (wrongly shown in the notice as 677 kg...

Avani Petrochem Ltd. and Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both sides for some times, we find that these appeals can be heard and disposed off at the stay stage itself. Accordingly, we waive pre-deposit of the duty and penalties and proceed to decide the appeals.2. Shri Prakash Shah, the learned advocate states that the impugned intermediate goods namely the fractional distillate has been sought to be classified under sub-heading No. 2710.13 though it has not been established that the same is suitable for use as fuel. In this context, he cites the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Silverchem Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E. Mumbai - 2003 (155) E.L.T. 204 (Tri.-Mumbai). He also states that the impugned goods are further processed for making industrial solvent which has been cleared by the appellants paying duty under sub-heading No.2710.90.3. On a query from the Bench, the learned advocate states that details of comparable goods on the basis of which the impugned goods have been classified under sub-heading 271.13 ...

P. Dineshkumar and Co. Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)1SOT144(Mum.)

These four cross appeals arising from the order dated 12-10-1992 of CIT (A)-X, Mumbai and relating to the assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91, are disposed of by this common order as the issues are common.As per the revised grounds of appeal, the following two common grounds have been raised by the assessee for the two assessment years under appeal : The learned CIT (A) ought to have held that the provisions of section 145(2) of the Act are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case and that the books of account were maintained regularly without any discrepancies and that there was no material whatsoever with the learned assessing officer for invoking the provisions of section 145(2) and hence, ought to have held that no additions could be made to trading results by applying the provisions of section 145(2) of the Act.The learned CIT (A) erred in setting aside the issue relating to the disallowance of labour charges without appreciating the fact that the labour charges...

Tanojkumar B. Chatterji Vs. Solapur Municipal Corporation Established ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR611; 2004(4)BomCR957

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. Naik waives service on behalf of the Respondent. By consent taken up for hearing and final disposal.2. The Labour Court at Solapur came to the conclusion on 1st June 2000 that the complaint filed by the Petitioner was not maintainable since he was not a workmen within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and, therefore, not an employee as defined in Section 3(5) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The order of the Labour Court has been affirmed in revision by the Industrial Court on 28th November 2002.3. The Petitioner was employed by the Solapur Municipal Corporation on 15th February 1980 as an Assistant Fire Brigade Superintendent and was promoted on 12th August 1992 as a Fire Brigade Superintendent. The services of the Petitioner came to be terminated after holding a departmental enquiry on the ground of misconduct. The Petitioner filed a...