Mumbai Court July 2004 Judgments

Commissioner of Customs (import) Vs. Shri Mohammed Rahiman

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The revenue has interalia submitted that the fine and penalty imposed by the Commissioner is not commensurate with the gravity of the mis-declaration and the duty involved. It is seen that the Commissioner imposed redemption fine of Rs. 2 lakhs and a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on Shri Mohamed Rahiman, the importer and further penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on Shri Altaf Kadar Shaikh. Whereas value of the car imported has been mentioned as Rs. 11,21,257/- in para 15 of the impugned order. The department has relied on various decisions of the Tribunal as under:-------------------------------------------------------------------Sl. No. Party Remarks------------------------------------------------------------------(a) Commissioner v. Tamil Nadu Held that penalty and Petro Products Ltd. (1999 redemption fine fixed (106) ELT 462 (Tribunal) should be commensurate with(b) Silfer Enterprises v. Upheld imposition of Commissioner (1999 (112) penalty which is about ELT 1044 (Tribunal) 123% of the value o...

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Raymond Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The revenue appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) had agreed with the respondents that the respondents are entitled to take full credit in respect of fuel, which is used in the manufacture of steam, a part of which (steam) is cleared outside the factory without being used within the respondents' factory for manufacture of final goods. The respondents had sought refund of Rs. 2,90,973/- being an amount of credit that was reversed in respect of fuel used for generation of steam which was cleared outside the factory. Steam is exempted from duty. The issue involves interpretation of provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001. The respondents succeeded in obtaining a favourable order from the Commissioner (Appeals) and the said order of the Commissioner is under challenge in the instant appeal from the revenue.3. On going through the show cause notice issued to the respondents, it is seen that, the re...

ingersoll Rand (i) Ltd. Vs. C.C.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(179)ELT347Tri(Mum.)bai

1. All these appeals are being disposed off by their common order as both sides agree that the issue involved is the same that is classification of components for use in Air Compressors which were imported. a) that entities imported by the appellant from their suppliers in USA to be used in manufacture of the Air Compressor are spring & channels. These "Channel and Springs sets" are specifically designed for each model of Air Compressor manufactured by the importer in India. It consists of a set of channel with a spring, as a composite unit, to be fitted inside the compressor. Neither the spring nor the channel has any independent function but must be used in conjunction as per the functions of the compressor. These specific part of the air compressor comprises an arched spring used in conjunction with the channel valve which in turn comprise an inlet and a discharge valve, requiring no mechanical linkages to operate but is opened and closed by the difference in air pressure acros...

Navjivan Synthetics Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides. This is an application under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for waiver of the pre-deposit and amount of penalty and to grant stay against the recovery of the same during the pendency of appeal, filed by the appellant. The Dy. Commissioner, Central Excise, Division-11, Surat-1, imposed penalty of Rs. 1,20,000/- and Rs. 7,99,311/- of central excise duty on the appellant, by Order-in-Original No. SRT-I/DIV-II/ADJ-138-139/2001-MP-II dated 28.05.2001, which is modified in Order-in-Appeal No. YPP/998 to 1005/SRT/2002 dated 23.10.2002, to Rs. 4,60,000/- towards penalty.Therefore, the appellant has preferred this appeal.2. The appellant is a textile processing house, inter alia, engaged in the business of carrying out processes like bleaching, dyeing, printing, etc., on textile fabrics. The annual production capacity of a textile processor is to be determined under the Hot Air Stenter (Independent Textile Processors' Annual Capacity Determination) Rules, 1998...

M.P. Veneers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This appeal arose out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who in the impugned order upheld the order of the lower authority.2. The issue involved relates to modvat credit. The appellant purchases veneers which were duty paid and had taken credit of duty paid on such veneers. They carried out certain processes on the veneers and cleared them on payment of duty after availing of the credit. The department contends that there is no manufacture involved, as the input and the final product are one and the same, i.e. veneers. The appellant contends that he obtained sheets of veneer and splits the same so as to manufacture what they called 'layon sheets' mostly for export. The process of manufacture involves drying of raw veneers; matching their grain size, annual rings etc. so as to gel the proper design; micro cutting the veneers so that when they are jointed, check whether there are any visible gaps and then splicing them which means jointing of veneers together to create a shee...

Deco Mica Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(99)ECC363

1. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of decorative laminates falling under Chapter 48 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department's contention is that the appellant has availed of incorrect modvat credit amounting to Rs. 39,602/- on the strength of invalid documents/invoices covering inputs received from the dealers and manufacturers.2. The appellant contends that in respect of three invoices which were issued prior to 4.7.1994, credit should not have been disallowed. The amount of credit involved is Rs. 39,602/-. The lower appellate authority denied the credit of Rs. 39,602/- on the ground that the invoices covering the inputs were invalid as these were neither issued in the name of the company nor issued by the registered dealer/manufacturer. According to notification 15/94-CE (NT) dated 30.3.1994 the Central Government prescribed that invoices issued by a dealer of a manufacturer who has bought the excisable goods either from the factory of the manufacturer or ...

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Balkrishna Textile Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(178)ELT984Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is revenue appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs who set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner and allowed the appeal filed by the respondents. In the order-in-original, the Assistant Commissioner confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 5,22,118/- and imposed a penalty of Rs. 51,500/-. The grounds for demanding the duty are that the respondents, who are the manufacturer of cotton fabrics, sent partly processed fabrics from their units to outside premises for undertaking the job work. The respondents carried out process like bleaching, dyeing, printing in their factory and thereafter, removed such semi finished fabrics for further processes like carbonising, heat settings, etc. on full payment of duty. The job worker on receipt of the fabrics took credit of duty paid by the respondents in his RG 23A Part-II account and that of fabrics in RG23 Part-I account. The job worker, after doing the required processes, sent back the fabrics to t...

Bombay Drugs and Pharmas Ltd. (Now Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This appeal arose out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who in the impugned order upheld the order of the lower authority.2. Briefly the facts are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of drugs falling under falling under Chapters 28 and 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the course of stock taking of finished excisable goods manufactured by the appellant it was found that several quantities of goods as mentioned in the show cause notice were found in excess of the balance shown in the statutory records, i.e. RG-1 register. The explanation given for such non-accountal of the goods was that it is due to mistake on the part of staff employed by the appellant. The appellant admitted the mistake. The said goods were seized by the department. The lower adjudicating authority ordered confiscation of the goods not so accounted, imposed personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Rule 173Q(i) and Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules and also imposed a penalty ...

Marutirao Vishwanath Bagal and ors. Vs. Dinkar Kashinath More and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2005Bom52; 2005(1)ALLMR266; 2005(1)BomCR779; 2004(4)MhLj982

Abhay S. Oka, J.1. This Court issued notice before admission on 31st July 2004. Notice is served on all the parties. On 13th July 2004, this Appeal was heard and the Counsel appearing for the parties agreed that the Appeal should be decided finally at the admission stage. Accordingly this Appeal was finally heard on 13th July 2004 and 19th July 2004.2. This Appeal arises from an order passed under Section 22 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act of 1950') by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner, Solapur. The Judgment and Order dated 25th September 2000 passed by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner was confirmed in an appeal under Section 70 of the said Act of 1950 by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune. Thereafter an application under Section 72(1) of the said Act of 1950 was filed in the District Court. The said application has been rejected. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgments and Orders, this Appeal has been pref...

Fulkumar Suratsingh Sigrahwa Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004CriLJ4726

D.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard Mr. Keswani for the appellant and Mr. More learned APP for the State. This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused challenging order of conviction passed by the Special Judge under N.D.P.S. Act for Greater Mumbai vide his judgment dated ; 2nd August 1999 by which the accused came to be convicted under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for a period of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. One lac in default R.I. for three months.2. It was the case of the prosecution that Sr.P.I. at Bhandup Police Station received information from their informant on 6.4.1999 at about 9.00 a.m. that one person aged about 32 to 36 years was likely to carry charas concealed in biscuit tin box for selling it to the customers and, the said person was expected at 14.00 hours at Tank Road, Shivmandir, Bhandup. This information was reduced into writing. Copies of the same were sent to the superior officers viz. ACP and DCP Zone VI. As per the direct...