Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Ramrao and ors. Vs. All India Backward Class Bank Employees Welfare As ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(4)BomCR162; (2004)106BOMLR791

S.B. Sinha, J.1. Civil Appeal Nos. 4593-4594 of 2002 and 4595-4596 of 2002 have been filed by the appellants thereof (hereinafter referred to as 'Promolees') upon obtaining permission to file the special leave applications against the judgment and order dated 10.8.2000 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petition No. 255/1990. Writ Petition No. 1551/1990 has been filed by All India Backward Class Bank Employees Welfare Association (hereinafter referred to as 'Association') which is the respondent No. 1 in the aforementioned appeals and the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 4597/2002.FACTS:2. The Promotees are employees of Marathwada Gramin Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'Bank').3. A circular bearing No. HO/ST/Cir No. 35/88 (159) dated 8.11.1988 was issued by the respondent. Bank notifying the eligibility criteria for internal promotion to the post of Officers and Field Supervisors. The Board of Directors of the Bank passed a resolution dated 10.1 ...

Hanil Era Textile Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(171)ELT33Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The above appeals arise out of a common order of the Commissioner of Central Excise Mumbai, by which has ordered as under:- (i) I confirm Customs duty amounting to Rs. 14,38,50,280/- on the capital goods and inputs i.e. 3 D.G. sets an the spare parts of D G sets, and the entire qty. of furnace Oil/Lubricating Oil on which exemption under provisions of Notification No. 13/81-Cus dt 9.2.81 as amended by Notification No. 53/97 Cus dated 3.6.1997. as detailed in Annexure I, II & C of the SCDN, have been wrongly availed, under proviso to Section 28(1) of Customs Act, 1962, R/W/ Sections, 12, 17, 68 and 72 of the said Act. (ii) I order that, interest should be charged at appropriate rate on the said amount of Customs duty as confirmed at Sr. No. (i) above under Section 28AB of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii) I impose penalty of Rs. 14,38,50,280/- (Rupees Fourteen Crores Thirty Eight Lakhs fifty Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Only) on M/s Hanil Era Textiles ltd. Under section 114 of the Cus...

Rajasthan Textile Mills Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(168)ELT127Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. The dispute in this case is whether the customs value of the impugned second-hand machines should be based on the invoice price as claimed by the appellants or it should be computed from the manufacturer's price for new machines applying the depreciation method. It is seen that the supplier is from Rotterdam and the impugned goods are of Korean origin and have been shipped from Korea as indicated in the Bill of Entry, The Chartered Engineer's certificate dated 1-9-1994 indicates the machines to be of German make and it states that the same are in excellent condition requiring no re-conditioning. The residual life has been estimated to be more than 20 years. In view of the fact that the impugned goods are second-hand used textile machinery and the appellants did not submit the manufacturer's invoice, the department has ascertained the price of new machineries from the manufacturer through its investigative agency and has allowed the maximum depreciation of 70% from...

themis Pharm. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(165)ELT414Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. The appellants manufacture 'Vistapen 400' & 'Vistapen 800'. They have claimed classification under sub-heading No.3003.11 whereas the Department claimed classification under sub-heading 3003.11. The disputed period is from April, 1986 to February, 1988.2. We have perused the Chemical Examiner's report dated 22-9-1986. This report does not indicate that the Chemical Examiner has conducted any test on the product. He has based his views on the information given on the printed label only. He has indicated the active ingredient of the impugned product to be Becampicillin Hydrochloride. In the report obtained from the Professor of Chemistry of I.I.T., Mumbai, dated 10-9-2001, it has been categorically stated that Becampicillin Hydrochloride is a derivative of Penicillin. Another letter from the same Professor of Chemistry dated 27-12-2001 again reiterates, after referring to the Chemical processes and scientific literature, that Becampicillin Hydrochloride is a der...

The Indian Smelting and Refining Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of copper and copper articles, aluminium, zinc, nickel, tin etc. It is alleged that the appellants did not include the cost of silver and also the cost of certain other inputs while working out the assessable value of goods manufactured on job work basis. Therefore their price declaration in respect of job work goods is not true and correct. Extended period of limitation was invoked as the appellants suppressed the fact of such non-inclusion. The period involved is November, 1995 --June, 2000. The show cause notice was issued, demanding differential duly of Rs. 45,95,117/-, proposing penalties, interest etc. after working out the cost of raw material alleged to have not been included.2. While replying to the show cause notice, the appellants contended that in the price declarations filed by them in the case of articles manufactured on job work basis, they included the following items of cost to arrive at the assessable value - (a) raw m...

Saw Pipes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT128Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. The issue relates to grant of Modvat credit in respect of loud-speakers used by the appellants in their factory. The learned Consultant states that these are eligible for Modvat credit as capital goods since these are used for issuing instructions to the supervisor and operators. He, however, admits that the plant is automatic. Shri S.S. Bhagat, learned S.D.R. states that the period in question is May, 1995 and that at the material time credit on capital goods was available to machinery, etc., used for producing/processing of any goods or for bringing about change in any substance in the manufacture of the final product. It is his contention that the loud-speakers in question do not play any role in producing or processing the goods or bringing about any change in any substance for the manufacture of final product.2. I find substance in the arguments made by the learned SDR in support of the impugned orders passed by the lower authorities. As such, the appeal is r...

Sang Fasteners P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT524Tri(Mum.)bai

2. Appeal of the appellants is without any merits as the credit of duty paid on the reprocessed goods received in the factory as inputs cannot be permitted to be taken in the PLA, as correctly observed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order....

Sudarshan Chemical Industries Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT214Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The issue involved in all these appeals is a common one and, hence, the appeals disposed of by this common order.2. The issue is dispute is whether the process of the conversion of technical grade pesticides and insecticides (concentrated grande, usually manufactured at 70% or above concentration) to formulation grade pesticides and insecticides of 1% concentration by addition of suitable diluents, such as solvents, emulsifiers, surface active, dispersing and stabilising agents and inert carriers/solvents amount to manufacture. The authorities below have held that such process results in manufacture of new distinct products having "different properties viz., composite for direct use and hence, confirmed demand of Rs. 55,82,203/- confirmed in order dated 24/04/96 for the period 03/05/95 to 31/08/95, Rs. 56,72,110/- confirmed in order dated 24/04/96/ for the period 01/09/95 to 31/12/95, Rs. 56,76,695/- for the period January 96 to May 96 and Rs. 45,56,839/- for the months of June 96 ...

Johnson and Johnson Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC321

1. The appellants herein imported a consignment of self-adhesive reflective film, classified the goods under Customs Tariff Heading 3919.90 and sought clearance under OGL. The department was of the view that the goods which were reflective film ingrained with metallic pieces, were appropriately classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 3926.90 and that the import could be allowed only against a special import licence as per the provisions of ITC (HS) Exim Code 39269009.20.The goods were confiscated, as the appellants could not produce licence for their clearance, with option to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 75,000/- and a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was also imposed upon the importers, by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. The Commissioner (Appeals) having upheld the order of adjudication, the above appeal has come to be preferred to the Tribunal.2. The appellants have asked for a decision on merits; hence we heard the learned SDR and perused the records.3. There is no disp...

Mrs. Sima Khatib Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(113)LC895Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. The appellant had purchased a Mercede Benz Car of Model 190D from M/s Gargash Enterprises, Dubai at a price of Dirhams 83.100/- on 23/06/1993. Subsequently, she imported the said car to India in the year 1996 and filed a Bill of Entry bearing No. 11473 dt.29/03/1996 for its clearance. After first examination, the customs assessed the value of the car as DM 42,545/- and the value of other optional items such as metallic paint, central locking system, tinted glass, air-conditioner, Audio system etc. as DM 11/040/- on the basis of the price list of Mercedez Benz, Germany released on 2nd January, 1993. Accordingly, the car inclusive of the optional items was assessed as Rs. 9,07,300/- and the fair value of the car cover was taken as Rs. 700/- and the appellant was asked to pay custom duty of Rs. 10,00,507/- in foreign currency and clear the car.2. The appellant claimed assessment on a lower price of DM 32,964/- (F.O.B.) stating that the purchase price of the car was o...