Mumbai Court December 2004 Judgments

Voltas Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(100)ECC200

1. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the availability of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus- Serial No. 181 to the goods imported by the appellants.2. As per the facts on record, the appellants filed a bill of entry dated 27/02/2001 for clearance of "Rigo make Inline Thermo Forming Machine (Upper Balloon Bell)" classifying it under sub heading 8477.40 along with spare parts and claiming the benefit of Notification No.16/2000-Cus-Serial No. 181, attracting nil rate of duty. The provisional assessment originally adhered to by the Customs authorities was subsequently finalized by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs granting the benefit of the said Notification based upon the certificate dated 28/06/2001 issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest certifying that the goods stated therein are required for the project for substitution of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) with Non-ODS technology and are designed exclusively for Non-ODS technology as explained in the notification.3. B...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Milestone Organic Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(182)ELT204Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The application for stay of operation of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by which he has set aside a demand of Rs. 3,43,944/- and Rs. 1,60,000/-, holding that the evidence on record for confirmation of duty of the above amounts is not sufficient to establish clandestine clearance, is rejected as the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order gives sufficient reasons for holding that the above demands are not sustainable and the correctness or otherwise of his order can be considered only when the appeal is finally heard and not at this stage.2. The prayer for stay on the ground that unless stay is granted, the amount set aside will have to be returned to the assessees is not sufficient to justify grant of stay, in the absence of any averment that the Revenue would not be able to recover the amounts in the event of their success in the appeal before the Tribunal....

Vidarbha Distillers Vs. Vidarbha Bottlers Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(3)BomCR282; 2005(2)MhLj753; 2005(31)PTC427(Bom)

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Original plaintiff has filed this appeal against Order under Section 104 read with Order 43, Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging order dated 27th January, 2003 passed in Trade Mark Suit No. 3 of 2002 below Exh. 5 by learned Second Additional District Judge, Nagpur. The learned Judge has rejected the application for grant of temporary injunction in favour of the applicant in the pending trade mark suit. Relief sought was for restraining the present respondent/defendant from imitating label of product 'Santra5000' and other similar labels.2. The appellant filed suit against the present respondent stating that it is carrying on business of manufacturing and sale of country liquor since 1975 and since then it is using Tiger head as its monogram. It is the case of the appellant that the said monogram is printed not only on its product but on its stationery, printing material, calendars etc. In 1992 appellant manufactured country liquor under the nam...

Shree Extrusions Ltd. and Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application is for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty imposed on the appellants, including on the Director, by staying the operation of the impugned order passed by both the authorities, i.e.Jt. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Rajkot, and Commissioner (Appeals).2. M/s. Shree Extrusions Ltd. and its Director, Shri Dinesh R. Lahoti, have filed the present appeals against the Order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and simultaneously stay application.3. The Central Excise Officers of Preventive Section, HQ, Rajkot, visited the factory premises of the appellants on 04.07.2000. During the physical verification of stock, they detected shortages of 27,190.500 kgs. of raw materials i.e. Billets. It was alleged that the appellants had used Billets in the manufacture of their excisable final products and subsequently cleared the same without payment of Central Excise duty and therefore, demands were confirmed and penalties were imposed.4. The issue involved in the...

Pcl Oil and Solvents Ltd. and Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(191)ELT353Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides. This is an application for granting Stay Order from implementing the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter No. 29. During April 2000 to October 2000, the appellants cleared inputs valued at Rs. 92,50,085/- on reversal of equivalent credit taken based on Rule 57AB(1)(b) of Central Excise Rules. The Dy. Commissioner by his Order dated 13.03.2002 confirmed the duty demand amounting to Rs. 1,33,340/- levied on the inputs cleared under the said rule and equivalent amount of penalty was also imposed.3. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn has dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of the pre-deposit order.4. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel for the appellant that on the similar issue involved, the same Commissioner has decided the appeal in favour of the appellant for the different perio...

Kriplon Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides. This is an application for granting stay of the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on 28.05.2004 and to waive the pre-deposit of duty Under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and to stay recovery thereof.2. The appellant is engaged in the processing of grey fabrics falling under Chapter 52, 54, 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 on job work basis. The appellant opted for compounded levy scheme Under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with effect from 16.12.1998 and had filed declaration as required under the head Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III Commissionerate, vide his provisional Order No. 49/98 dated 29.12.98 had provisionally determined the annual capacity of production as five chambers pending verification of the declaration. Subsequently, on completion of verification, the Commissioner of Central Excise passed a fi...

Canara Bank Staff Union Registered Under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)IILLJ1000Bom

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith. An application for relief under Section 33(c)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for computation of the amounts due in terms of the Award of the Industrial Tribunal has generated litigation which the Petitioners nos. 2 to 8 can illafford, considering the amounts which they are entitled to. Respondent no. 1 a Nationalised Bank, State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India is bent on contending that even if the applicants are entitled for any amount the procedure followed by them in moving under Section 33(c)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was not an appropriate remedy and an application under Section 33(c)(2) would be the appropriate remedy, even inspite of the earlier order by this Court dated 15th March, 2004 in Writ Petition No. 2960 of 2003. Having said so a few facts may now be set out as under : 2. Workmen of respondent no. 1 represented by the petitioner no. 1 had raised an industrial dispute, that dis...

Mohanabai Wd/O Ramratan Rathi and anr. Vs. Khairatilal Khadakram Panja ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(3)BomCR236; 2005(2)MhLj84

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, the petitioners - Landlords challenge the Order dated 19-11-1991 passed bythe Resident Deputy Collector, Akola, in appeal and also the original Order dated9-5-1989 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Akot, rejecting them permissionto terminate the tenancy of present respondents. The petitioners filed applicationon 7-6-1983 for permission to terminate said tenancy on the ground that therespondent is habitually irregular in payment of rent, that he has sub-let thepremises and that there is change of user. The suit premises are located at KasbeAkot, To. Akot, District - Akola, a portion in the South-West Corner on theground floor with a Hall and Varhanda which was let out to the presentrespondent No. 1 vide Rent Note dated 31-3-1950 in the name of Kundanlal. Thepremises were let out for running a Khanawal (Eating House) which was startedin the name and style of Punjab Mutton Khanawal but thereafter ...

Madhukar S/O Nathusao Bijwar Vs. Motiramji Nagoji Ashtikar and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(3)BomCR218; 2005(2)MhLj659

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the original landlord challenges the order passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, below Ex. 11 in Special Civil Suit No. 685 of 1994. The Suit was instituted by present revision applicant for possession, recovery of arrears and for damages.2. It is the case of the applicant landlord that he is the owner of Plot No. 8 situated at Khankhoje Nagar, Manewada Road, Nagpur and said block was let out to the respondents on monthly rent of Rs. 700/- on 1-1-1992 for locating a shop. The defendants accordingly started a Metal and crockery shop in that block. They paid the rent from January, 1992 to April, 1992 and did not pay the rent thereafter. He, therefore, issued a registered A.D. Notice to the defendants on 30-11-1992 and demanded arrears of rent. The notice was replied to by the defendants in which they denied the relationship of landlord and tenant and stated Civil Rev. Applicati...

Vakharia Dyg. and Fin. Works Vs. Ccex

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. This is the application for granting stay of the implementation of impugned order made by the Commissioner (Appeals) Under Section 35C of Central Excise Act, 1944 and recovery of duty amount of Rs. 2,59,160/- from the Company as well as the appellant. The appellant is engaged in the manufacturing/processing of Grey Fabrics and the appellant's unit was surprised by the Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise on the basis of reports and officers have taken physical stock of fabric lying in different sections of Mill and also conducted search in presence of the Panchas. They have noticed 770 pcs. Admeasuring 64642.06 L.Mts valued at Rs. 10,66,593.99 which did not tally with the details mentioned in Lot Register/Grey challans. It has not been explained properly. The officers found that goods were removed without cover of CE invoice and without payments of CE duty. After due enquiry, the amount of duty of Rs. 2,59,160/- was confirmed out of which sum of Rs. 1,78,664/- was paid on the same ...