Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Vikram Ispat Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Appellants are an assessee under the Central Excise Act 1944 and discharge duty on Iron & Steel made from DR Grade Iron Ore Pellets imported from time to time. Custom Authorities recovered Cess on such imports @ Rs. I per M. Ton under the Iron Ore Mines and Manganese Mines Labour Welfare Cess Act 1976 (herein after referred to as (Cess Act).On 12.12.94, the appellant submitted a letter intimating that Welfare Cess Act is not applicable on Iron Ore Pellets imported by them & claimed refund of Cess paid, on BE'S dated 5.10.94 to 3.04.95 amounts to Rs. 4,67,590.2. Department issued a Show Cause Notice dated 28.6.95, proposing to reject the term refund claims so filed on the grounds- Whereas cess is leviable on imported goods under provisions of Section 3 (1) (b) of the Iron ore mines and manganese Ore Mines labour welfare cess Act, 1976 (Act No. 55 of 1976) being levied as Excise duty on imported iron ore pellets read with Section 3 (1) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 countervaili...

Rajputana Steel Castings (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC41

1. The instant two appeals, one from the manufacturer (Appellant No. 1) and the other from the Director (Appellant No. 2) are directed against a common order in appeal.the duty of Rs. 2,55,254/- was confirmed against the manufactures, alongwith imposition of equivalent amount of penalty. Modvat credit of Rs. 1,56,668/- was denied and alongwith imposition of equivalent amount of penalty was ordered. Further penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rs. One Lakh) was imposed on the manufacturer under Rule 173Q and Rs. 50,000/- on the Director, besides ordering recovery of interest. The order imposing the penalties and demanding duty/disallowing credit was confirmed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the instant appeals. The appellant No. 1 are engaged in the manufacture of Rolled products of steel. On a surprise visit to their factory on 09/01/1998, the physical stock in respect of some finished goods was found to be short as compared to the stock recorded in the excise records maintained by ...

Shri Bimal Kumar JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC345

1. Shri S.S. Mani, Consultant appeared on behalf of the appellant and Shri A. Chopra, Ld. JDR appeared on behalf of the Revenue.2. The Ld. Consultant submitted that a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs has been imposed on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act 1962 on the allegation that the appellant has introduced Shri. Rajesh Aggarwal to a known CHA for the fraudulent availment of draw back and that the appellant is the real owner of M/s. SEPL; that the appellant has mis-declared the value of the exported goods for the fraudulent availment of draw back. The ld. Consultant, however, submitted that this is factually incorrect and the appellant is not concerned with the fraudulent availment of draw back. He also submitted that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Om Prakash Bhatia reported in 2003 (135) ELT 423 (SC), Further he also submitted that the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Prayag Exporters Pvt....

The Commissioner of Customs Vs. Shri Maganlal R. Shah and Varsha

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The instant appeal is filed by the revenue against the impugned order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeal). Vide the impugned order the learned Commissioner (Appeal) rejected the departmental appeal and confirmed the order-in-original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. In the said order though the imported goods were ordered to be confiscated and were allowed to be redeemed on payment of appropriate fine, no orders were passed directing the owner to pay duty due thereon. Hence the revenue claimed that the Commissioner (Appeal) ought to have accepted the revenue appeal and corrected the deficiency in the order-in-original. The Id. Commissioner (Appeals) while rejecting the appeal of the revenue held that since the show cause notice issued to the respondents did not contain any proposal to demand duty the adjudicating authority could not go beyond the scope of show cause notice and demand duty due on the goods. The said contentions are challenged by the revenue...

Avik Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Air

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT97Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The instant appeal of the appellant /is directed against the order-in-appeal passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), whereunder the confiscation of import consignment of Betamethasone sodium phosphate was confirmed alongwith redemption fine of Rs. 75,000/-and penalty of Rs. 15,000/- The original authority held that since the imported goods failed chemical test for I.P. standards 10 (b) of the Drugs are Cosmetics Act 1940, read with Customs Act 1962.2. It is the case of the appellants that, though the goods did not confirm to the I.P. standards in some particulars, the same can be reprocessed in the appellant's factory so as to make them conform to the said specification. This prayer was addressed to the drugs control authorities and the necessary permission was obtained. Notwithstanding the said permission, the adjudicating authority subjected the goods to confiscation and redemption fine, but also, imposed penalty on the appellants.4. I note that the form in which the goods ...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Shantinath Silk Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT343Tri(Mum.)bai

1. None appeared on behalf of the respondents but written submission filed has been taken on record. Heard Shri M.H. Sheikh, learned J.D.R., for the Revenue. I find that the impugned order-in-appeal has been passed relying on a letter from the then Chairman of the Board addressed to the then Commissioner. The content of this letter and its implication as interpreted by the Commissioner (Appeals) has, however, been challenged in the Department's appeal.2. After hearing the learned J.D.R. and perusal of the case records, I am of the view that the Commissioner (Appeals) should not have taken into account the internal correspondence between the Board and the Collector and should have decided the appeal in accordance with law. As such, the impugned order-in-appeal is set aside and the matter remanded to the successor Commissioner (Appeals) to re-decide the appeal in accordance with law after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the respondents....

Bimal Kumar JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Shri S.S. Mani, Consultant appeared on behalf of the appellant and Shri A. Chopra, Ld. JDR appeared on behalf of the Revenue.2. The Ld. Consultant submitted that a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs has been imposed on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act 1962 on the allegation that the appellant has introduced Shri Rajesh Aggarwal to a known CHA for the fraudulent availment of draw back and that the appellant is the real owner of M/s. SEPL; that the appellant has mis-declared the value of the exported goods for the fraudulent availment of draw back. The Ld. Consultant, however, submitted that this is factually incorrect and the appellant is not concerned with the fraudulent availment of draw back. He also submitted that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Om Parkash Bhatia . Further he also submitted that the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Prayag Exporters Pvt. ltd have held that when the goods a...

Aspaif Textile Laminations Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants in this case had received certain duty paid inputs from their dealers after 1.4.1994, under the cover of manufacturer's invoice issued after 1.4.1994, which were endorsed in their favour by the dealer. The lower authorities held that the manufacturer's invoices issued and endorsed after 1.4.1994 are not valid duty paying documents.Hence the credit taken on the basis of such duty paying document was irregular and inadmissible. The appellants also claimed before the lower authorities that, besides the manufacturer's invoices, they also had produced the dealer's invoice corresponding to the manufacturer's invoice. The lower authorities did not accept the said documents either, stating that the said document (dealer's invoice) does not contain critical details such as rate, amount of duty as well as payment of particulars. The grounds pleaded before the lower authorities are more or less reiterated in the instant appeal.2. Heard both sides. The appellants placed reliance...

Vijay Tank and Vessels Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT241Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are challenging the orders of the lower authority.Vide the impugned order-in-appeal, whereby the order of the adjudicating authority was confirmed, the goods found in the premises of the appellants valued at Rs. 4,75,000/- were confiscated and ordered to be released on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Besides excise duty of Rs. 1,23,750/- on the goods allegedly removed clandestinely was also confirmed, mandatory penalty of Rs. 1,23,750/- was imposed besides imposition of penalty of Rs. 25,000/-. "The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Metal Container falling under chapter 73 of C. Ex. Tariff Act, 1985, and clearing the same on payment of duty. On 4.10.97, the Preventive Officers of C.Ex. visited the factory premises of the appellants and found that the appellants in their maintenance work shop were assembling various components/parts which were further used in the manufacture of various mechanical appliances such as power sources (welding rect...

Federal Bank Ltd. Vs. Western Paques (India) Ltd. and

Court: DRAT Mumbai

Reported in: III(2005)BC163

1. This Misc. Appeal is filed by the appellants/original applicants The Federal Bank Ltd., being aggrieved by the order dated 5.9.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal-1, Mumbai on Exhibit No. 14 in Original Application No. 1415/2000. By the impugned order, the learned Presiding Officer allowed the application Exhibit No. 14 moved by the defendant Ho. 4/respondent No, 4 herein Sangamner Bhag Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana (for the sake of brevity hereinafter to be referred to as "Karkhana") for modification/varying order dated 4.5.1998 passed by the High Court in Notice of Motion No.958/98 in Suit No. 961/98 directing defendant No, 4/Karkhana to pay Rs. 4 lacs per month to the applicants for a period of 25 months, effective from 1.8.2002.2. Background of the case and facts giving rise to the application Exhibit No. 14 made by the defendant No. 4/respondent No. 4 herein are as follows : The applicant Bank namely The Federal Bank Ltd. had filed Suit No.961/19...