Mumbai Court June 2004 Judgments

Kapilansh Dhatu Udyog (P) Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The instant appeal is directed against the order-in-original passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur, whereunder the goods valued at Rs. 5,05,645/- which were found in excess of the stock recorded in the RG-1 records were confiscated under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules 1944, with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 1,25,000/-. Besides, the demand of duty of Rs. 1,849/- in respect of finished goods found short has been confirmed and reversal/recovery of credit of Rs. 1,80,935/- under Rule 57I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, in respect of shortages of the inputs has been ordered. Penalty of Rs. 25 000/- has also been imposed.2. Through this appeal the appellants have challenged the impugned order. So far as the demand of Rs. 1,849/- is concerned, the appellants concede that they had no case. Hence this part of the impugned order has to be confirmed.3. So far as confiscation of the excess stock is concerned it is pleaded that, it takes a period o...

Jagdish Brothers Agrawal and ors. Vs. GayasuddIn Abdul Kadar Konkani a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(4)ALLMR306; 2005(2)BomCR409; 2005(1)MhLj434

D.G. Karnik, J.1. The petitioners in writ petition No. 3786 of 1990 are the tenants and petitioners in writ petition No. 5456 of 1990 are the landlords, and they would be hereinafter referred to as the tenants and landlords respectively. The landlords purchased the suit property on 13th December, 1979 and thereafter filed Regular Civil Suit No. 202 of 1980 for possession inter alia on the ground the reasonable and bona fide requirement for their own use and occupation and that the conduct of the tenants amounted to nuisance and annoyance. The suit premises consist of three rooms used as shops on the ground floor and residential premises on the first floor. On one side of the three rooms on the ground floor there is a staircase which leads to the first floor. On the first floor, the premises on the western side of the staircase are in possession of the tenants and premises on the eastern side are in possession of the landlords. At the end of the staircase there is a common landing on th...

Vardhman Cables and Conductors Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(96)ECC177

1. Prayer in the application is for decision on merits based on written submission. Accordingly, we have heard Shri R.K. Chandan, Ld. JDR appearing for the revenue.2. We have gone through the impugned order passed by the Commissioner.As per the facts of the case on record, the Central Excise Officers intercepted one vehicle loaded with insulated wires on 10.09.1994 during the course of transit checks. It was ascertained that the consignment was cleared from the factory under the cover of Commercial invoice No. 33 dated 28.7.1994 as also other invoice No. 33 dated 8.9.94 and was consigned to M/s. Karamyog Electricals. Driver and cleaner of the truck deposed in their statement the goods have been loaded from the premises of the appellant's factory.3. As a follow up action, appellant's factory premises was visited and it was found that the last clearance was effected on 8.9.1994 under invoice No. 6 in: the name of M/s Karnataka State Electricity Board.Inasmuch as no document showing paym...

Sealink NavigatIn S.A., Shri S.A. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeals are directed against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereunder the appellant's appeal against the order-in-original passed by the adjudicating authority was rejected.2. The appellants No. 1 M/s. Sealink Navigation S.A are the owners of M.T. Ascot, the Appellant No. 2 Mr. S.A. Alekidis was at all relevant times the Master of M.T. Ascot and the Appellant No. 3, Interocean Shipping India Pvt. Ltd., were at all times the agents of the Vessel. "During the course of rummaging of M.T.ASCOT anchored at Vadinar on 5.12.98 by the Custom Officers, the following items were found undeclared in the arrival papers filed at the time of arrival of the vessel at Vadinar anchorage on 28.11.1998 and as ascertained by the panchas vide panchnama dated 6.12.98 drawn at Customs Division, Jamnagar. The value of the articles has been determined as shown against each items._______________________________________________________________________S.No Description of items N...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. the Great Oasis Enterprises (P)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The respondents herein, who are registered for manufacture and clearance of biscuits falling under Chapter 19 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985 on behalf of M/s. Britannia Industries Ltd., availed of credit paid on inputs under the modvat scheme. During the course of visit of Central Excise officers to their factory on 10/02/1996, excess of finished goods in BSR as compared to RG1 balance was detected.Shortage on stock of inputs was also detected. It was also found that the respondents were clearing burnt/broken biscuits called "floor sweepings" and "dirty dough" without payment of duty/reversal of proportionate modvat credit. Unaccounted excess stock of finished goods lying in BSR, floor sweepings and dirty dough were seized under panchnama. Statements of employees of the assessee as well as M/s.Britannia Industries Limited were recorded. Show cause notice dated 17/05/1996 was issued proposing recovery of Rs. 46,64,476/- (Rs. 45,23,917/- in respect of floor sweepings and dirty dou...

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Nazarath Metals

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(176)ELT545Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is a revenue appeal against the order-in-original passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The dispute in this case relates to availability of modvat credit on imported metal brass scraps. The respondents, M/s. Nazareth Metals, are the manufacturer of excisable goods, namely, brass alloys, bronze alloys, other copper alloys, copper castings falling under Chapter 74 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the course of inspection of modvatable documents, it was revealed that, the respondents were showing the receipt of imported goods i.e. "metal scraps" at their manufacturing premises at Ghatkopar whereas the goods were received at their Bhiwandi godown directly from the port of import. The modvat credit was availed at the Ghatkopar factory on the strength of the bill of entry.Annexure-II challans under Rule 57F(4) (of Central Excise Rule 1944) were prepared, as if to show that, the goods were moving from the Ghatkopar factory to Bhiwandi godown for ...

Macleods Pharmaceuticals Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT411Tri(Mum.)bai

1. As per the facts on record, appellants are engaged in the manufacture of P and P medicaments falling under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1995. The medicaments are cleared on payment of duty. As per the provisions of D.P.C.O. (Drugs Price Control Order), the medicaments are required to be affixed with the M.R.P. In some of the cases after the goods are cleared, the M.R.P. is either brought down or enhanced in terms of the D.P.C.O. in which case the medicament in the market are brought back to the factory for changing the labels and stickers showing the M.R.P. In terms of the provisions of Rule 16(4) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 when the duty paid goods are brought back to the factory after their removal for being remade, refined, reconditioned or for any other reasons, the assessee is entitled to take Cenvat credit of the duty paid as if such goods are received as inputs. If the process to which the goods are subjected before being removed does not amount to manufact...

Khurana Exports Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(177)ELT431Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants herein imported from Singapore a consignment of second hand diesel engines and have filed a bill of entry on 4.12.1997, in which they declared the value of Rs. 16, 03,236/-. The importers are trader and not actual users. As per para 5.3 and 5.4 of the Exim Policy 1997-2002 w.e.f. 1.4.1997, import of second hand capital goods are allowed to only actual user, and second hand goods, other than capital goods may be imported in accordance with a public notice or a licence issued in this behalf. Since the goods imported by the party are not capital goods nor are these covered by any public notice or a valid import licence, therefore the import appeared to be in contravention of the Import Trade Control Regulations. The Commissioner of Customs confiscated the goods i.e. 266 pcs. Diesel Engines but allowed redemption of the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 25,76,000/- on the value as loaded on the basis of contemporaneous import cleared from Pune Customs and imposed a penalt...

Astra Diamond Tools Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The present case pertains to under-valuation of Natural graphite imported by the appellants in the year 1988. The appellants have declared the value of the said goods as US $ 7462.70. However, on investigation conducted by the Customs, it was found that another invoice having the same invoice number was raised for a value of US $ 21322. The invoice recovered from the premises of the indentors also mentioned that the differential amount of US $ 13859.30 had been drawn by the exporter in Japan from the deposit of importers/indentors.2. On the above basis proceedings were initiated against the appellant which culminated into impugned order passed by the Commissioner on 1.11.1988 vide which he enhanced the value and confirmed the duty by adopting the second invoice value as the assessable value. He also confiscated the goods with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 3 lakhs. Penalty of Rs. 75,000/- was also imposed.3. We have heard Shri F. ...

Gaurav Sales Corporation, Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Export)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) has ordered confiscation of goods viz. Electrolytic Tinplate Waste/Waste in coils imported by the appellants herein in January, 1999 on the ground that the price for the goods Viz. US$ 475/MT was below the price of US$ 545/MT fixed by the DGFT and therefore the import being restricted, the appellants were required to produce a valid import licence for the same which they did not possess. He imposed a fine of Rs. 4 lakhs in lieu of confiscation.2. It is pleaded before us that the prayer is confined to reduction in the quantum of fine, highlighting certain aspects warranting reduction such as (a) the fact that the DGFT restriction was imposed only after the Sales Confirmation and (b) that subsequently DGFT itself lowered the price from US$ 545/MT t6o US$475/MT.3. The prayer for leniency in the quantum of fine is opposed by the Ld.D.R. who submits that all factors have been already taken into account by the Commissioner who has already taken a len...