Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Weizmann Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT25Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is revenue's appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The refund claim of the respondents was rejected by the adjudicating authority. On appeal the same was allowed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal by the revenue. The respondents exported certain consignments of fabrics under the D.E.P.B. Scheme. On completion of exports, they filed refund claim with the jurisdictional Central Excise Deputy Commissioner, in terms of procedure contained in Rule 57 F (13) of the Central Excise Rules 1944, read with Notification No. 85/87- CE dated 1/3/87. (1) The respondents have taken deemed credit, both in the deemed credit register as well as in the RG 23 A and as a result it has not been possible to ascertain accurately whether the deemed credit accumulated with respect of the relevant AR 4s had been utilised by the respondents or not. (2) T.N. No. 84/98 dated 16/9/98, stipulates requirements for columns for opening balan...

Shree Bansi Metal and Alloys Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (import)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

The appellants imported a consignment declared to be S.S.Melting Scrap and filed a Bill of Entry No. 812046 dt. 20.1.03 for its clearance. The goods are described as S.S. Melting scrap 304 grade. The declared value is 700 US $ PMT. The appeal arose out of the order of Commissioner of Customs Nhava Sheva who in the impugned order confiscated the consignment declared to be S.S. melting scrap in the Bill of Entry but was found to contain defective/secondary S.S. Sheets. The Commissioner ordered assessment of S.S. Sheets under an appropriate heading determining the value thereof at US $ 1100 PMT. Amongst other contentions raised before him the appellants pleaded that the value of US $1100 PMT. for S.S. Plates is not in confirmity with the provisions of Rule 5(3) of Valuation Rules. In support of their contention that during the period 1.10.2002 to 31.12.2002, defective S.S. plates were assessed at values ranging from US $ 825 to 875 PMT and in support of this contention they have furnishe...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. N.G. Thakkar and Sons

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT115Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Respondents are manufacturers of 'Asafoetida' and were paying duty under protest and were issuing the Central Excise Invoice as per the law i.e. showing the duty element separately. However, the commercial invoice issued did not show the duty element separately. The CCE (Appeals) after recording a finding to the effect - "..... The appellants had started paying the duty effective from 25.03.199. Prior to the said dated when they started paying duty in their composite sale price was Rs. 90/- per kg. Similarly they have also contended that with effect from 1.3.2000 the rate of C. Excise duty on their products had gone up from 8% to 16%, however, even after the amount of the duty paid by them had doubled, their composite sale price had remained the same. They have submitted that their composite sale price prior to 1.3.2000 and after 1.3.2000 had remained @ Rs. l30/- per kg. With effect from 4.5.2000 the appellant's goods were granted exemption from whole of the duty and the appellants...

Ujala Dyeing and Printing Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. We dispense with pre-deposit of duty and penalty and take up the appeal for disposal.2. This appeal has been (lied by M/s. Ujala Dyeing and Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants are registered with the department under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 since 1.4.1996. According to the averments in the appeal, they had taken over the factory with the appurtenant land from M/s Ranuka Silk Mills (P) Ltd. prior to registration with the department. In respect of alleged clandestine removal of goods from the factory for some period prior to such take-over of the property by the appellants, the department issued a show-cause notice seeking to recover the duty on the goods and proposing to confiscate land, building, plant, machinery etc. and to impose penalty for alleged contravention of law with intent to evade payment of duty. The noticee viz. Ranuka Silk Mills (P) Ltd. did not respond. The adjudicating authority passed a...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Tuton Pharma

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT70Tri(Mum.)bai

2. The revenue appeal is directed against the impugned order-in-appeal whereby the respondents claim of refund of Rs. 4,00,185/- was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals). In the impugned order-in-appeal, the learned Commissioner has proceeded to accept the appeal by holding as under:- "amended provisions of Section 11B can not be applied to the refund claims, which have been adjudicated upon by the lower authorities well before the amendment of the Act. The Higher Authority has also held that the refund arising out of any orders or decision of the Appellate Authority, the adjudicating authority is under an obligation to give effect of the appellate order and refund the amount to the appellants. The order deciding the refundability has been decided much earlier than the law was amended." 2. Countering these findings appellants claim that the refund claim was undoubtedly pending for sanction and at the point of time of sanction of the refund claim, the provisions of unjust enrichment w...

Zenith Processing Mills and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT286Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The issue involved in these two appeals being common, they are being disposed off by this common order. After hearing both sides and considering the material, it is found - a) The issue is what happens to the credit balances in the Modvat Registers as on 16.12.1998 when MMF processor manufacture moved over to the levy scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and also if this credit balance would be eligible for transfer on 01.04.2001 when the very same processors shift to levy under Section b) The issue of no lapse of credit in balance, on Modvat Registers has been settled by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Eicher Motors Ltd. {1999 (106) ELT 3 (SC)}. Subsequent to mat the law was amended and powers to frame rules as regards lapse of credit were granted by the legislature to the Central Government to retrospectively frame rules for lapse of credit. This power has been exercised by inserting Rule 57F(17) providing for lapse of credit in case of tracto...

Star Forging Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT316Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are challenging the order-in-appeal passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) whereby their refund claim has been rejected. The claim was rejected on the ground that the duty was not paid under protest. It is noted that the refundable amount of Rs. 70,194/- was paid vide TR-6 Challan on 29-12-1993. The refund of this amount was claimed on 11-11-1997, consequent to finalization of the classification dispute by the Assistant Commissioner on 19-3-1996. The appellants claim that they have paid the said amount by affixing "under protest" remark on TR-6 Challan. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that neither the procedure prescribed under Rule 233B was followed nor the claim was lodged within 6 months from the date of finalization i.e. within 6 months from 19-3-1996.3. I find that, in this case only a single payment under protest is involved. The said payment has been on TR-6 Challan. The TR-6 Challan does bear the endorsement of protest payment there are no furth...

Vishwanath Shipping Agency Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT159Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are Custom House Agents holding CHA Licence No.11/216. The licence was initially suspended by the appellate authority on 19.8.2002. The allegation was that the appellant violated Regulation 14(a), (b),(d) and (i) of CHALR, 1984. After six month of suspension the appellant was given a hearing i.e. on 27^th February 2003 and an order confirming the suspension of the appellants licence was passed on under Regulation 21(2) of CHALR on 30.4.2003.2. It is the appellant's contention that suspension under Regulation 21(2) is a measure adopted when there is an urgency to stop the CHA from functioning in that capacity. In his case no such urgency was ever shown by the lower authority as is evident from the fact that he passed the impugned order two months after the hearing was concluded. The incident which caused the suspension initially took place on 1.6.2002.The initial suspension order without hearing took place in August. The appellant relied upon the order of Calcutta Hig...

Ravi Exports Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Commissioner (Appeals) has sustained penalty on the appellants to the extent of Rs. 80,000/-. This penalty is for a delay of two days in the payment of duty under the Compounded Levy Scheme of Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Interest on duty, amounting to Rs. 1,052/-, charged by the original authority has also been affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is submitted today on behalf of the appellants that this amount of interest will be paid by them. After hearing both sides, we are inclined to dispose of the appeal itself finally. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, we take up the appeal.2. It is not in dispute that the delay involved in deposit of duty under Rule 96ZQ is only of two days. It is, again, not in dispute that the demand of interest on duty is on account of such delay. The party is willing to pay the interest, also. There is no material on record to show that any mens rea was involved in the delayed payment of duty. We are of the view t...

Ujala Dyeing and Printing Mills Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(191)ELT493Tri(Mum.)bai

1. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we think, the appeal itself can be disposed of finally at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing with the requirement of pre-deposit, we take up the appeal.2. Officers of Central Excise found, on inspection of the appellants' factory, that a certain quantity of excisable goods had not been entered in RG-I. On this basis, a demand of duty was raised on them and a penalty was also proposed to be imposed on them. The original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the party under Rule 173Q, after noting that the amount of duty (Rs. 78,324/-) on the above quantity of goods had already been paid by them. The first appellate authority upheld that decision. In the present appeal, the challenge is only against the penalty.3. Ld. Consultant for the appellants submits that the goods in question were about to be accounted in RG 1 when the officers visited the factory and that there was no intent not to do so, nor to evade payment ...