Mumbai Court September 2003 Judgments

Nirma Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT177Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This case was heard on 28-10-2002 and the appeal was allowed and the order was pronounced to that effect. Detailed reasons for the order already pronounced are as follows : - The applicants manufacture Soda Ash in their Bhavnagar factory and clear the same on payment of duty. The credit thereon is taken by another factory of the same manufacturer being the recipient factory. Prior to 1-7-2000, they were paying duty as per the market price and after 1-7-2000, they started paying duty as per cost of production plus 15% thereon. The learned Counsel submits that there was dispute regarding whether the element of interest on term loan can be included in the assessable value or not.However, on the insistence of the department they have paid the duty including the interest element on the term loan in the cost of production. The learned Counsel submits that there was no suppression on the part of the applicants nor any such finding has been given by the Adjudicating Commissioner. He, there...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Avis Machine Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT438Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is an appeal filed on the Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat-I against the order-in-appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Surat. M/s. Avis Machine Pvt. Ltd., (the respondents) were denied Mod-vat credit to the extent of Rs. 40,001.40 in respect of certain items of inputs. The Modvat declaration under Rule 57G was furnished on 21-9-1994 while the credit was availed on 18-9-1994 i.e.before filing the declaration. Against the order-in-original, the matter was carried out in appeal to Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) in his order noted that there was 2 days' delay in filing the declaration. There was also an application dated 26-12-1994 addressed to the Assistant Collector for condoning the delay. Taking of credit before filing the declaration according to the Assistant Collector is not permissible. The Commissioner (Appeals) in his order, however has overruled this objection and allowed the credit and set aside the order-in-original. In o...

Television and Components Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC13

1. The appellants are manufacturers of Colour Television sets of various sizes and models. They claimed benefit of Notification No.67/89-C.E., dated 1-3-89 Sl. No. 18 thereof, which reads as under :- "18. 8528.00 Television receivers (other than mono- Rupees chrome) of screen size exceeding 36 2,250/- per centimeters - (i) without remote control set" on the classification list filed by them and discharged duty at the rates as prescribed by this exemption after the classification lists were approved by the proper officers.2. A show cause notice dated 11-7-94 was issued pursuant to a visit by the Central Excise Officer (Preventive) to their factory and certain enquiries conducted by them. The show cause notice demanded duty of Rs. 65,15,362.50 in respect of 24,481 Television sets cleared by them during, the period 17-6-92 to 10-12-92. The demand was made by invoking to proviso to Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules and also proposed...

Sanjeev Wollen Mills Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT54Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. The case of the department is mainly based on the allegation that the yarn sought to be exported on Shipping Bill No.007264 dated 04.01.1984 has been made out of acrylic waste and not from first quality acrylic fibre. The case has been argued at length by Shri S.P. Goyal, partner of the appellant firm who states that the appellants have been maintaining both excise and export registers and that the customs laboratory had given a finding that the impugned yarn was dyed acrylic yarn but it was not possible to states whether the yarn was spun out of virgin fibre. He states that earlier and latter consignments were allowed to be exported by customs without any objection. In respect of the impugned consignment, the opinion of the Textile Committee which was taken by the department and relied upon is not a valid opinion. He states that the Textile Committee's opinion was not based on the opinion of any textile experts but were merely the opinion of Chemical/Physical exa...

Meera Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT1127Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The learned Consultant has produced a copy of the certificate from the office of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Surat No. Nil dated 20-5-2003. In the said certificate, it has been intimated that M/s.Meera Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. have claimed the depreciation after deduction of total Mod-vat of Rs. 5,02,033/-. In terms of this certificate, it is pleaded that, they have a prima facie case to claim Modvat of the said amount on the capital goods in question and hence their request for waiver of pre-deposit and grant of stay may be considered favourably. The learned D.R. pleads that the matter be decided on merits.2. Heard both the sides. In terms of certificate from Income-Tax Officer, a prima facie case has been made out by the appellants to waive the pre-deposit and grant of stay. The Stay petition is accordingly allowed, pre-deposit waived and the matter is posted for regular hearing on 22-10-2003....

Konkan Synthetics Fibres Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)LC164Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. The miscellaneous application is for citing a specific case law. The same is allowed.2. The dispute in the case relates to coverage of the impugned goods under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus dtd.01/03/2001. List 18A annexed to the said notification at Sr. No. 8 specifies the following machine: - "High Speed Warping machine with yarn tensioning, pneumatic suction devices and accessories." The good imported by the appellants were declared as "Karl Mayer High Speed Draw Warping Machine with 1536 ends alongwith essential spare".The order-in-original notes that the catalogue produced from the manufacturer established that the imported machine was equipped with separate unit of drawing and warping. Two letters were produced from the office of the Textile Commissioner stating that the goods under import were High Speed Draw Warping machines and covered under the aforecited Sr. No. 8 of List 18A. The Adjudicating Dy. Commissioner also found that pneumatic suction devices wa...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Mac Laboratories Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. In this case, the Departmental appeal was allowed by Order No.C-III/29/WZB/2003 dtd. 03/01/2003 setting aside the impugned order-in-appeal following the ratio of the Tribunal decision in the case of Poddar Udyog Limited v. C.C.E. Calcutta-II - 1997 (95) E.L.T.438 (Tribunal). The Order-in-original was restored but the penalty imposed was reduced from Rs. 61,058/- to Rs. 5,000/-.2. The present ROM has been filed on the ground that the learned Counsel for the respondents being busy before another Bench of the Tribunal could not remain present at the time of hearing of the Department's appeal in the present case. The learned counsel submits that applying the ratio of the Apex Court decision in Escorts Ltd. v.C.C.E. New Delhi - 2001 (133) E.L.T. 530 (SC), ex-parte order passed by the Tribunal should be re-called and a fresh order should be passed after hearing the respondents.3. After hearing both sides and perusal of case records including the cited case laws, I am of the opinion that ...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. A.Q. Sayyed

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT584Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These appeals are being disposed of by this common order as the issues are the same.2. The Special Investigation and Intelligence Branch (SIIB for short), New Customs House, Mumbai, on the basis of an information made enquiries into the unauthorized import of Mitsubishi vehicles, shipped from Dubai and sought to be cleared on TR basis, learnt that 10 vehicles belonging to a Company at Dubai, who were doing vehicle business by taking loan from Standard & Chartered Bank there, have been imported in the name of various persons who have neither the money nor in possession of the vehicles for one year. It was also found by SIIB that there was a dispute between the company and the bank regarding the repayment of the loans and the bank at Dubai had disposed of the said vehicles, by an auction on 26-1-1995. The Show Cause Notices issued, as seen in the case of Appellant in Appeal No. 968/R/97-MUM alleged :- (i) The vehicle imported was auctioned by Standard & Chartered Bank on 21-1...

iqbal Hasan Shaikh Ibrahim Kaskar Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)3; 2003BomCR(Cri)1815

V.M. Kanade, J.P.C.1. The applicants in all these applications are challenging the order passed by the Special Judge under Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (hereinafter for short 'MCOCA') dated 2nd May 2003, in Misc. Application No. 54 of 2003 in Remand Application No. 4 of 2002 whereby the Special Court has remanded the applicants herein to police custody for three days. Though the special court has disposed of the applications by a common order, three separate applications have been preferred by these three applicants. After the said order was passed, the applicants moved the vacation bench of this Court when this Court passed the following order:-'Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for State. The matter requires detailed consideration. Therefore, it is posted before the regular court on 10th June 2003; Ad-interim reliefs in terms of prayer Clause (c) till then.'Thereafter the matter was finally heard on 7th July 2003. The brief facts which ar...

Shri Mahadeo Shriniwas Naik Vs. Ratnanchand Anandram Doshi, (Deceased ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR100; 2004(4)BomCR415; 2004(2)MhLj190

D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. A suit for eviction filed in 1980 by the petitioner was decreed on two grounds by the Small Causes Judge, Pune. The learned trial Judge in his judgment dated 30.7.1987 held that the ground that the premises had been unlawfully sub-let was established and that the landlord required the premises reasonably and bona fide for himself and the members of his family. The judgment of the trial Court has been reversed in appeal by the Additional District Judge, Pune, 22.3.1990. The landlord is before this Court in these proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The premises in this case consist of a property bearing Municipal house No. 233-A, situate at Shivajinagar, Pune. The landlord had been conducting the business of a hotel in the suit premises which consist of a shop. Under a rent note dated 17.7.1970, the business of the hotel came to be transferred to the tenant together with the tenancy in respect of the premises. The petitioner instituted th...