Mumbai Court April 2004 Judgments

Gulabrao Dharma Pol Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(6)BomCR394; 2004(4)MhLj701

S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. By the above petition, the petitioner is challenging the orders of Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Branch, whereby the petitioner's Original Application was dismissed on 7th November, 2001 and even the review was declined by the Central Administrative Tribunal by its order dated 29th May, 2002. The petitioner by the aforesaid proceedings had prayed for appropriate seniority and the year of allotment in the Indian Police Service.2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was directly recruited as a Deputy Superintendent of Police under the Maharashtra State Police Services on 1st May, 1979. On 1st February, 1982, he was declared to have completed the probation period successfully. He was later promoted as Superintendent of Police with effect from 10th May, 1985 and was posted as Dy. Commissioner of Police at Pune City and was carrying out duties and having responsibilities like an Indian Police Service Officer.3. On 13th April, 1989 the Government of Mahar...

Stovec Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC290

1. Shri Hardik Modh, Ld. Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellant and he submitted that the appellants have availed the credit within six months from the date of issue of the duplicate copy of the Bill of Entry. He contended that the appellant have lost the Bill of Entry No.10659 dated 23.12.94, whereas they have paid counter veiling duty amount of Rs. 78,745/- on 17.1.1995. They have received a duplicate Bill of Entry in September 1996 and they have availed modvat credit in the month of October 96 and as such the appellant has fully complied with the requirements of Notification 28/95 which was effective from 30.06.95 and provided for availing of the credit within six months from the date of issue of the duplicate copy of the Bill of Entry. In support of his contention the Ld. Advocate relied on the decision in the casex of Nicholas Piramal (I) Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2001 (147) E.L.T.333 (Tri. Del) and CCE v. Tanuk Pharma (I) Ltd. reported in 2002 (150) E.L.T.652 (Tri.Del).2. Sh...

Yeast Alco Enzymes Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT41Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The issue raised in the instant appeal of the appellants relates to claim of modvat credit in respect of the containers which have been used in the manufacture of fully exempted final product. In terms of Notification No. 8/96-CE dated 23/07/96, only 'denatured' ethyl alcohol is subjected to excise duty while the ethyl alcohol of other category viz., 'undenatured' is fully exempted. The appellants took modvat credit in respect of duty paid on packing containers, which were used for packing 'undenatured' ethyl alcohol, which was exported. Applying the provisions of Rule 57C of the modvat rules, the lower authorities held that the appellants were not eligible to take credit of duty on inputs which are used in the fully exempted final products. The orders Passed by the lower authorities are under challenge in the instant appeal.2. The appeal claims that, Rule 57C docs not come into operation because the "ethyl alcohol" whether denatured or not, is covered under a single tariff heading...

Mrf Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal of the appellants is directed against the order-in-appeal Passed by the Commissioner Central Excise (Appeals) whereunder the modvat credit denied to them by the Deputy Commissioner was confirmed.2. It is revealed that the appellants were availing modvat credit on furnace oil as inputs in terms of Rule 57A. This credit is allowable whether the input is used directly or indirectly. Whether contained in the final product or not. The appellants had used the duty paid inputs (furnace oil) in the manufacture of tyres for Animal Drawn Vehicle (ADV tyres) which are fully exempt from Central Excise duty. They were asked to reverse the credit of duty paid on the furnace oil used in the manufacture of ADV tyres for the period from July 99 to March 2000. The appellants, on referring to the provisions contained in Rule 57CC (5) claimed that the requirement of credit reversal applies only to inputs, which are contained in the final product. Since furnace oil is not contained in the fi...

Ravi Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT443Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The instant appeal of the appellants is directed against the order-in-original passed by the commissioner of Central Excise, whereunder 40,168.790 kgs of partially oriented yarn (Poy) was confiscated under Rule 25 of the Central Excise 2002, with an option of redemption, on payment of fine of Rs.7,50,000/-. Besides a penalty of Rs.2,50,000/- was imposed on Shri J.V. Mistry, the proprietor.2. It was alleged that the said stock of P.O.Y. was procured from indigenous sources by the appellants in their 100% EOU, which was not accounted for in their Bond register. The bond register indicated that, the said stock was issued for utilisation in the plant for further manufacture, whereas the stock was actually present in the factory's store room. It was contended by the appellants that, though the entry was made in the stores register showing issue for internal consumption, the yam was not actually shifted from the store room to the production site. In the adjudication order, the Commission...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Accuprint Systems (P) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Shri M.H. Sheikh, Ld. JDR appeared on behalf of the Revenue and he submitted that re-engraving on used cylinders amounts to manufacture.The duty has been paid by the appellant without protest. The goods in question are dutiable as per sub Heading Tariff 8442 of Schedule of Central Excise Tariff Act. The Superintendent rightly refused to issue certificate under Rule 57E(5).2. Shri P.K. Shetty, Ld. Advocate appeared on behalf of the respondent and he submitted that the appeal filed by the revenue is infructous inasmuch as the certificate has already been issued by the Superintendent on 30.03.2000. The certificate has not been questioned by the department nor any appeal has been filed against the same. The Order-in-Original was passed on 06.11.1998 and the Order-in-Appeal was passed on 28.9.2000 whereas the appeal has been filed by the department on January 2001 and as such the department was well within the knowledge of the issue of the certificate still they have chosen not to chall...

Pilot Industries, Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(173)ELT402Tri(Mum.)bai

1. M/s. Pilot Industries (main appellant) are the manufacturer of various plastic moulded parts of mixers and grinders, on which they are required to pay excise duly. However, in terms of provision of the exemption available to small-scale industries, they were clearing the said goods without payment of Central Excise duty. On the basis of enquires made by the departmental authorities it was alleged that the appellants indulged in clandestine activity of clearance of the said excisable goods surreptionsly and the said production and clearance was not reflected by them in their Central Excise records. It was alleged that the appellants maintained the record of their clandestine clearance in the kachha records, which was recovered during the search of factory premises. Based on the turnover as projected from the details figuring in kachha records and other seized documents the duty demand of Rs. 47,593/- was confirmed in respect of alleged past clearance. Besides demand of Rs. 1,039.50 ...

Nirmal Metal Fabricators Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(169)ELT168Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Tribunal vide its order NO.C-I/4526-28/WZB/2002 dtd.27/12/2002 set aside the penalties imposed upon all the three appellants by observing that there was no proposal to impose penalties upon the two companies and the proposal was only for imposition of penalties upon the directors. As regards penalty on Shri S.P. Sheth, same was set aside on the ground that he was not shown any evidence against him and was not asked to clarify his position.2. Subsequently, Revenue filed three miscellaneous applications for modification of the said order, which were disposed off by the Tribunal vide its order dtd. 09/03/2004. It was seen that the observations as regards the non proposal for imposition of penalties in the show cause notice was factually incorrect. Accordingly, the said order was recalled.3. Shri D.H. Shah, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant fairly admits that the show cause notice in question proposed penalties upon the companies as also upon the directors individually, ...

Dupen Laboratories P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT458Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The short point involved in the present appeal relates to the refund of duty of Rs. 22,416/-, which the appellants excess paid on physician's sample sold to their customers, which are further meant for free distribution to the doctors. The said duty was paid in excess by wrongly adopting the assessable value of the said physician samples as Rs. 25.35 per strip instead of Rs. 20.68 per strip. The said claim was accepted by the Deputy Commissioner on merits but he rejected the same on the basis of unjust enrichment. The said order was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The appellants, in support of their plea that the excess duty paid has not been recovered from their customers, produced the commercial invoices raised against their customers at the lower assessable value to the effect that they have paid lesser assessable value and less duty amount than to the appellants what has been paid by them to the Revenue. The above documentary evidence has not been accepted by the Commis...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Span Heat Transfer Equip. Mfg. P.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These are 5 revenue appeals against a common order. Hence taken together. The respondents are absent. Heard the D.R.In this case, the respondents M/s Span Heat Transfer equipment were charged with the allegation that they had failed to account for in the RG1. record, 10 radiators and 85.500 kgs of brass scrap. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order accepted the claim of the respondents. That the radiators were not in a fully manufactured condition. The stage for accounting had not reached, as the radiators were still in the gunning bags and were yet to be transferred to the store room. In the revenue appeal except for claiming that non-accountal can lead to penalty and confiscation, no contrary facts have been submitted to demolish the findings arrived at by the Commissioner (Appeals) to the effect that the goods had not reached the stage of accounting. Hence this appeal is rejected. Cross objection also stands disposed off.In this case M/s Sky Chem Industries Pvt Ltd. ar...