Mumbai Court May 2004 Judgments

Savill Pharma Labs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC351

1. Three appeals arise from the common order of CCE (Appeals) and are being disposed by this order. 2. (a) Appellants are an assessee under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for manufacturers of P & P medicaments under heading 3003.10. They availed input credit under the Modvat Scheme and had manufactured and cleared the products manufactured from such inputs for export. The impugned products were manufactured on loan licence basis for M/s. Lyka Laminations Ltd. Declarations and labels of the medicines were duly filed and declaration made that the end products are meant for export under generic names, classification was claimed under 3003.10 since the exported entities were bearing monogram of Lyka Laboratories. They were issued notices challenging the classification under 3003.10 and proposing the same to be effected under 3003.10 subsequent to the dates of clearance. Separate notices earlier to this notice and one subsequent were issued for denial of input credit eligibility on gener...

Reliance Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(174)ELT344Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are importers of iron ore pallets/iron ore lumps falling under Chapter 26 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 at Revdanda port. Ocean going 'foreign mother vessel' carrying the import cargo anchors in the sea, at Revdanda Anchorage about 16 to 20 Nautical miles, away from the Revdanda port jetties on account of low water draught. The Mini Bulk Carriers (hereinafter referred to as 'Barges') come alongside the foreign mother vessel and with the aid of a 'Folating Crane' the imported cargo is water borne from the "mother vessel" in to the barges, the barges bring the imported cargo of Vikram Jetty at Revdanda Port. At the jetty, there is no stock yard for storage. There is however an arrangement of Continuous Barge Unloader (hereinafter referred to as 'CBU'), Figee Crane, H.B.L. Loader System and Conveyor Belt System installed with the help of CBU, & other instruments the cargo in the barges is loaded on to the convey belt system which moves the cargo from the jetty to ...

Manila Processors (P) Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants, feeling aggrieved by the order-in-appeal of the Commissioner (Appeals) has filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. The amount involved is Rs. 25,806/-. The appeal is admitted keeping in view the fact that an important question of law is involved.2. The issue relates to denial of refund claim of Rs. 25,806/-. The appellants were working under the scheme of compounded levy. They requested the departmental authorities to seal the stenter.Accordingly, the stenter was sealed on 01/07/2000 and it was re-opened on 02/11/2000. The appellants having operated the stenter for part of the month of November 2000 i.e. from 02/11/2000, as per the procedure for payment of compounded levy they had to pay the entire duty liability of Rs. 8.00 lakhs for the month of November 2000. However, they claimed the abatement of duty for one day's closure. The issue was decided by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise and he decided the abatement claim against the appellants by deducti...

Rajkumar Forge Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT178Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellants are engaged in manufacture of 'forgings' to be used in the manufacture of shafts, gear, pinions, lever, couplings etc. They claimed exemption notification 223/88 dated 23.6.1988. They classified the products under 7226.90 and not under Chapter 84.2. The admitted process of manufacture of forging is by means of open die castings the emerging entity has excess material as exact shape and specification desired is not obtained in open die castings. The entity emerging from the open die casting stage is subjected to further profess. For this purpose they use the services of job workers. The process undertaken at the job workers' premises have been alleged and found to be as it appears from para of the impugned order after noting the process covered by notification 223/88 as follows: "5.2 A perusal of these processes will reveal that nowhere the notification provides that the process of trimming, milling, step trimming, etc could be carried out and even then the benefit of con...

Mechano Graphic Machines Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC92

1. Appellants filed a BE 1143 dt 24.4.87 for clearance of "Staple Pins No. 10" imported from a supplier in UK vide B.L. No. 12.03.87 on an Invoice dt 26.2.87 and sought clearance under REP licence for product group 'O' of Appendix 17 against Entry at S. No. (IX) para 188 of EXIM Policy 1985-88. Serial No. (IX) of product group 'O' of Appendix 17 reads as under - "(IX). Pearl/headed pins/stapling pings and Industrial Sapling Machines." The clearance was not allowed on REP licence as the Custom House Bombay had a clarification dt 11.3.1987 from Deputy Chief Controller of Imports & Exports. The letter read as follows: "Please refer to your letter No. 7111/G(h)56/80-Appg/144 dated 4.1.1987, on the subject mentioned above. 2. In this connection, it is clarified that against REP licences issued for export product Group 'O' of App-17 of the Import & Export Policy, 1985-88 (Vol.1), only those staple pins are allowed import which are used as an item of embellishment & trimmings in ...

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Shri K.T. Nagar

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(176)ELT893Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is a revenue appeal challenging the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order of the adjudicating authority.2. Briefly stated, on the basis of the investigation, it was revealed that the respondent Shri K. Kanhaiyalal T. Nagar (Proprietor) of M/s.Vikram Metal Syndicate who are a registered dealer, dealing in scrap of brass and copper had contravened the provisions applicable to the registered dealer. In the RG23D register though a balance of 2308.450 Kgs of brass/copper scrap was shown, the physical balance was nil. In the adjudication, it was held that, the dealer had issued invoices to the customers indicating the despatch of duty paid materials from their premises to the customer's factory enabling the customers to take modvat credit without actually having received any material. The transport documents on verification (sic) based on the vehicle registration Nos. shown therein revealed that the transpor...

Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

(a) Appellants have a plant erected to manufacture HDPE granules etc. Somewhere in 1992, prior to the said plant's commissioning, they obtained 32 MTs of imported duty paid HDPE for the purpose of a trial run of the automatic bagging plant and working thereof before the actual manufacturing operation could be conducted. The trials were completed using the 32 MTs of imported HDPE in the bagging plant and extruder section of the plant. (b) The officers on 2.8.1992 on a revisit, earlier having taken cognisance on 1.8.92 of the abovesaid trial activity detained the following goods: (i) various grades/qualities of HDPE in 436 bags (approx 6540 kgs.) in mixed condition filled with HDPE granules, chips, flakes, and fines etc. (ii) Relene HDPE granules of a produce of Reliance (Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. Hazira) packed in standard pack of 25 kgs. (iii) HDPE granules/chips mixed not stored in 500 kgs. bag in loose condition.Out of these 635 kgs. (15875 kgs.) correlate to imported HDPE used f...

Tooltronics Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal, whereby modvat credit to the extent of Rs. 69,562.50 was denied and a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- was imposed on the appellants.3. I note that the modvat credit was denied to the appellants on the ground that the duty paying documents viz., invoices were issued in the name of their Andheri plant, whereas the said goods were actually used in the Ghatkoper plant. In the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), it has been reported that the Andheri unit is not holding any registration and there is no provision under Central Excise Rules to permit combined registration for units situated at different location.4. The appellants have pleaded that, there is no denial of the fact that, the inputs were received in their Ghatkoper plant and used in the fabrication/manufacture of finished excisable goods by doing part process in Andheri and remaining process in their Ghatkoper unit.Therefore even if the inputs are treated to have been used at Ghatkop...

Hemani Intermediates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(172)ELT48Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant exported a consignment of Chloro Benzene Compound falling under Chapter Sub-heading 29.21 of CETA manufactured by them.The buyer abroad rejected the consignments. The appellant sought permission to reimport the consignment and to take the goods into their registered premises for remaking, repairing etc. Such permission was granted subject to the condition that the appellant shall not take credit of CVD paid. Thereupon the appellant imported and cleared the said goods under two Bills of Entry. At the time of import they paid CVD applicable. The total CVD paid is Rs. 2,32,401/-. The appellant took credit of CVD paid in their RG 23 A Pt.II on the strength of the Bills of Entry under which CVD was paid. Reprocessed the said goods and cleared them again on payment of appropriate duty.2. The Department denied the credit so taken on two grounds, (a) Permission to reprocess the goods was given on the specific condition that the appellant shall not take credit of CVD paid and ...

S.C. Shah and Co. (India) Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT904Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant imported goods declared as hot rolled stainless steel coils of 304 grade at US$ 1485 PMT CIF from Spain and filed a bill of entry for clearance. The department found that the unit price as declared is low compared to contemporaneous prices declared for similar goods. The appellants produced a contract entered into with the supplier for the supply of the said goods at the price mentioned above.The contemporaneous prices for the same or similar goods was US$ 1800 to 1850 PMT CIF from the same and other suppliers. The appellant, during the course of proceedings before the original authority was shown two invoices for similar goods imported during the time when the appellant's consignment was sought to be cleared. However the goods under import were not identical to the goods imported under the invoice referred to above. The lower authority accordingly enhanced the value of the goods to US 1700 PMT CIF in terms of Section 14(1)A of the Customs Act read with the valuation ...