Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Sharda Ispat Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner, Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT259Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant manufacture M.S. Angles on job work conversion basis for M/s Tisco. During the month of December 1994, they had issued duly paying invoices showing M/s Tisco name as customer and consignee as M/s Sharda Ispat Ltd. Kamptee (the appellants themselves). They on the same day availed credit under Rule 57A on basis of their invoices without even removing the goods from the factory on filling any D3 intimations.Credit of Rs. 24,35,759/- as availed of duty paid on their own invoices was denied was disallowed and a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed under the provision of Rule 173Q (1) bb. Hence this appeal.2. After hearing both sides and considering the material on record it is found :- i) It is on admitted position that the goods did not leave the factory premises of the appellant. However why removal from the place of manufacture of M.S. Angles to the place where they were captively consumed for manufacture of further down stream products like bars/rods by the appellants s...

Nav Bharat Steel Rolling Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(169)ELT340Tri(Mum.)bai

1. No representation for the appellants despite notice. We have examined the records and heard the DR.2. The short question which arises for consideration is whether exemption from payment of duty (amounting to Rs. 71,510.40) on the specified excisable goods cleared by the appellants during the period 1.3.1992 to 10.3.1992 was admissible to them under the SSI scheme. Till 29.2.1992, they were clearing the goods without payment of duty under notification 202/88-CE. That notification was amended by notification 33/92 dated 1.3.1992, consequent to which the goods in question stood excluded from the benefit of exemption. Another notification 53/92 dated 10.3.1992 was issued by the Central Government restoring the benefit of exemption to the subject goods. That was an independent notification, which had no retrospective effect. In the result, the goods were dutiable during the brief spell 1.3.1992 to 10.3.1992. It was on this basis that the lower authorities denied the benefit of exemption...

Commissioner Of Central Excise Vs. L'Oreal India Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT417Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal of the Revenue challenges the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the activity of relabelling of the goods imported by the respondents during the material period did not amount to manufacture, within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The respondents had imported certain cosmetics in fully packed form and had cleared the same for home consumption after pasting stickers to the containers, in terms of Rule 33(4) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodity) Rules, 1977, during the period of dispute. They had not paid duty on such clearances, claiming that the activity of relabelling did not amount to manufacture. This claim of the party was made in their classification declaration No. 6/2000, dated 18-7-2000. The department refused to accept the claim and insisted that Central Excise duty be paid on the relabelled goods at tariff rate. The show cause notice issued in this connection was contested by the party. In adju...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Stylo Pack

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT102Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Revenue is in appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) having held that after availing Modvat credit the goods do not loose their duty paid character, therefore the waste would be arising from such inputs are not intermediate goods and the contents of Notification No. 14/92, dated 1-3-92 are satisfied. (i) Waste arises during manufacture process from lay flat tubes which were except under Notification No. 217/86, which are intermediate goods and not inputs. (ii) Inputs loose the duty paid character ones the credit has been availed.3. The Commissioner has relied upon Tribunal decision in the case of Metrosyl, Jesidih Industrial Area [1991 (53) E.L.T. 93] to arrive at his conclusion that inputs do not loose duty paid character after availment of Modvat credit and had the intention be otherwise, the notification would have stipulated 'no credit availed on inputs' and valued has to be interpreted strictly. No contrary decision has been shown to us. There...

Cms Computers Ltd., Shri A.V. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These appellants are aggrieved by imposition of penalties on them by the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) Mumbai as per Order No, CCP/MGV/ADJN./19/97 dated 08/04/1997. Under the impugned order, penalties were imposed on some oilier persons also. The relevant portion of the operative part of the Commissioner's order is extracted below:- "1 impose the following amounts of penalties on the persons firms mentioned below under Section 112(a) & (b) of the Customs Act, 1962;8. Shri A.V. Gopalkrishnan : Rs. 1.5 lakhs (Rupees One lakhFifty thousand)10. Shri Ashok Wahi : Rs. 2.5 lakhs (Rupees Two lakhsFifty thousand)11. Shri S.A. Kulkarni . : Rs. 1.5 lakhs (Rs.One lakhFifty thousand)." 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that M/s Advance Technology Devices had settled their disputes with the department under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 and accordingly their appeal against the above order of the Commissioner was dismissed by the Tribunal as per Order No. C-I/600-604/WZB...

L'Oreal India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This appeal of the Revenue challenges the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the activity of relabelling of the goods imported by the respondents during the material period did not amount to manufacturer, within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The respondents had imported certain cosmetics in fully packed form and had cleared the same for home consumption after pasting stickers to the containers, in terms of Rule 33(4) of the Standards of Weights & Measures (Packed Commodity) Rules, 1977, during the period of dispute. They had not paid duty on such clearances, claiming that the activity of relabelling did not amount to manufacturer. This claim of the party was made in their classification declaration No. 6/2000 dated 18.7.2000. The department refused to accept the claim and insisted that Central Excise duty be paid on the relabeled goods at tariff rate. The show-cause notice issued in this connection was contested by the party. In adju...

Chanbasappa Dhanappa Konale Vs. High Court of Judicature and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)ALLMR874; 2004(2)BomCR30; 2004(2)MhLj157

R.M. Lodha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 2nd November, 1996 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the order of compulsory retirement.2. For the sake of convenience we shall refer the appellant as the petitioner. The petitioner was appointed on 8th March, 1976 as Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate, First Class by the Governor of Maharashtra. On 29-12-1986, he was promoted to the post of Chief Judicial Magistrate. Thereafter, on 26-12-1988, the petitioner was promoted as an Additional District and Sessions Judge. He was posted on deputation to the ex-cadre post of Member, Industrial Court at Bombay by order dated 1-12-1993. By order dated 13th September, 1995, the State Government passed the order retiring the petitioner compulsorily in the public interest from the date of receipt of the said order. This order was challenged by the petitioner in the writ petition under Article 226 of...

Shrikrishna S. Bhagwat Vs. S.N. Soni, Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(4)BomCR157; (2004)188CTR(Bom)396; [2004]270ITR186(Bom)

V.C. DAGA, J.1. These petitions involving a short question of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.Background facts :2. The admitted facts giving rise to both these petitions in nutshell are that Shri S.S. Bhagwat became Karta of the joint Hindu family on the death of his father late Shri S.K. Bhagwat, who left for heavenly abode on 23rd Nov., 1980. The joint family had been assessed to income-tax right from the asst. yr. 1961-62 till the asst. yr. 1980-81. All the tax matters having been attended by the late father of the petitioner, who was Karta of the family, and the petitioner being abroad in USA was not familiar with any of the affairs of the family, consequently, the returns of the income of the family for the asst. yrs. 1981-82 to 1987-88 remained to be filed on due dates after the death of father of the petitioner. Even returns in the status of individual were filed by the petitioner belatedly.3. According to the pet...

Bhogwati Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Inco ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)188CTR(Bom)393; [2004]269ITR186(Bom)

V.C. Daga, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the notices issued under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 ('Act' for short), seeking to reopen assessments for the asst. yrs. 1982-83 and 1983-84. The basic challenge to the notices impugned in the petition incorporated at Annexs. A-1 and A-2 are that the notices are without jurisdiction.2. On being noticed, the respondents appeared and filed their counter-affidavit and disclosed the reasons recorded by the AO for entertaining his belief that the income has escaped assessment for the assessment years in question, i.e., 1982-83 and 1983-84. According to the reasons recorded, prima facie deductions made on account of refundable and non-refundable deposits from the sugarcane price payable by the assessee to the farmers ought to have been shown as trading receipts being in the course of its trading operations. According to the AO full purchase price was debited to the purchases account and as such they were part of the assessee's tradin...

Mohan Chhaturmal Daryani Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)MhLj637

V.K. Tahilramani, J.1. The petitioner who is the uncle of detenu, has challenged in this writ petition the order of detention passed against the detenu Sushil Kumar Purshottamdas Daryani. The said order of detention dated 5th April, 2003 has been issued under Section 3(1) of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'COFEPOSA Act) by the Principal Secretary (Preventive Detention) to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department, Mumbai and detaining authority.2. The facts leading to the detention of the detenu are that:On 6th January, 2003 the detenu was proceeding to Dubai by Air India Flight No. AI-729. On account of suspicion, the detenu was questioned by the Customs authorities whether he was carrying any contraband items to which he replied in the negative. Thereafter, the detenu was brought back to the Customs Enclosure at the departure area for personal search and examination of his checked in baggage. Two ...