Mumbai Court August 2004 Judgments

Sunrise Structurals and Engg. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(117)LC307Tri(Mum.)bai

1. M/s. Sunrise Structural and Engg. Ltd. E/3284/02 (herein after referred to as Sunrise) M/s. KEC International Ltd. E/3185/02 (herein after referred to as KEC) M/s. Ramson Alloys (P) Ltd. E/3269/02 (herein after referred to as RAP) Shri Sanjay Agrawal E/3188/02 (Director of M/s. Sanvijay Re-rolling & Engg. Works Ltd) Shri Puranlal Agrawal E/3189/02 (Managing Director of M/s. Sanvijay Re-rolling & Engg. Works Ltd.) Shri K. Ramkumar E/3190/02 (Vice President of M/s. KEC Ltd.) Shri Tushar Deshpande E/3191/02 (Manager of M/s. KEC Ltd.) M/s. Maharashtra Steel Rolling Mills E/3188/02 (herein after referred to as M/s. MSRM) Shri Janki Shah E/3183/02 (Director of M/s. Maharashtra Steel Rolling Mills) 2. Pursuant to a information that M/s. KEC Ltd. and M/s. Sunrise Ltd. were availing 'unlawful' (SIC) deemed export benefits, and had indulged in availment/passing on of irregular MODVAT CREDIT were visited by the officers and enquiries launched which resulted in the notice. The impugned ...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Psl Pipe Coates Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(98)ECC302

1. M/s. PSL Pipe Coates Pvt. Ltd. hereafter referred to as (PSL for brevity sake) filed Bills of Entry filed on behalf of M/s. Oil & Natural Gas Commission of India (hereinafter referred to as ONGC for brevity sake) and cleared. Pips declaring benefit of Notfn. 13/S1 read with notification 93/93 as amended and also 208/99 - Cus. to their branded warehouse. PSL have a licence to operate and Manufacture under Bond vide Section 65 of the Customs Act, 1962.2. The BES were assessed provisionally under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962. At the time of finalisation of the assessments on observing the following points-- (i) PSL is not the actual importer, as ONGC is the actual importer/owner. (ii) PSL merely coating the pipes on behalf of ONGC and after coating the same return them to ONGC for use in S.B.H.T. project, i.e, PSL was merely during job work of coating and goods were not sold to ONGC. (iii) The essentiality certificate granted by Oil Industry Development Board refers to Notf...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Kalyani Seamless Tubes Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(176)ELT899Tri(Mum.)bai

a) Revenue is in appeal against the respondents an assessee be denied on storage tanks based on eligibility and on filing of declaration. b) Commissioner granted the credit as nitrogen was exclusively captively consumed & not marketed outside & the description given broadly covered most of the goods alleged to be not declared. He held eligibility could not be denied as goods were received and installed & he condoned the absence of pre printed serial number on invoices on grounds of error. The assessee was imposed a penalty of Rs. 1000/- only for the violation. i) Nitrogen is not intermediate product, is excisable at nil rate of duty, on its own & grant of credit to plant manufacturing that gas was not permissible. This was so as the lease agreement was not with a Financial Company as per Rule 57R(3). ii) Storage tank's under Rule 57Q was not as specifying heading. Therefore grant of credit on the same not called. iii) Declaration were mandatory & details were requi...

Gujarat Carbon and Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(174)ELT78Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-revision passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Vadodara, under Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994. The matter pertains to demand for service tax.2. The brief facts are that the appellants are engaged the services of transport operators during the period 16.11.1997 to 1.6.1998. They were, in other words, availers of service and not service providers.They were issued with a show cause notice asking them to explain as to why a penalty should not be imposed upon them under the provisions of Sections 76 and 77 of Chapter v. of the Finance Act, 1994 for contravention of the provisions of Sections 70, 76 and 81 of the said chapter and interest should not be recovered from them for delayed payment of service tax as provided under the Act. Such a show cause notice was not issued under Section 73 as is evident. The show cause notice was dropped by the Deputy Commissioner following the decision of the Supreme Court in the cas...

Paramount Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These appeals arose out of a common order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-V, wherein he disposed of three appeals against three orders-in-original passed by the lower authority.2. Briefly the facts are that the appellants are independent processors of textile fabrics and were paying central excise duty under compounded levy scheme. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V, determined the annual production capacity based upon the declaration filed by the appellants. The appellants did not agree to the said determination order since galleries/cooling zone of the stenter were also included in stenter dimensions. However, they paid the differential duty with effect from 16.12.1998 onwards under protest. The appellants filed three different claims of refund of duty paid by them under protest, on the galleries portion of the stenter. The Deputy Commissioner rejected the claims inter alia on the ground that the appellants did not challenge the order of t...

Commissioner of Cen. Excise Vs. Crompton Greaves Ltd. and ors.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(174)ELT231Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The respondents herein are engaged in the manufacture of electrical stampings and laminations falling under CET sub-heading 8312.00, availing modvat credit of duty paid on silicon electrical sheets/hot rolled sheets/cold rolled sheets received by them for the manufacture of their final products. They cleared cut sheets arising during the course of manufacture of their final product, as waste and scrap under CET sub-heading 7204.00 on payment of duty as applicable to waste and scrap for the period November, 1991 to March, 1994. In view of the fact that the cut sheets were sold to manufacturers of similar final products (although of smaller sizes) and that they were being sold at the prices much higher than the prevailing market price for ferrous waste and scrap, the department alleged that the cut sheets were required to be cleared on payment of duty applicable under Chapter Heading 7208, 7209 and 7211. On this basis, duty demand of Rs. 91,24,646 being short payment of duty on 4876....

Automatic Electric Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT524Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellant, an assessee under Central Excise Act, 1964, claimed exemption under notification 108/95-CE dated 28.08.95 supplied to M/s.BHEL who had placed the orders. M/s. BHEL in tern had to supply goods to National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC) project guaranteed by IBRD, International Monitoring Organisation. This claim was rejected on the grounds - that certificate required to be produced as per the notification from Nodal Ministry in the Government of India that goods are to be supplied to a project financed by the prescribed agency / organisation and the internal correspondence produced do not contain the required certificate. "I find that the assessee's claim is unsubstantiated and therefore the exemption claimed vide notification No. 108/95 CE dated 28.08.95 is not admissible. The said notification stipulated that before clearance of the "said" goods, the manufacturer shall produce before the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, a certificate from the Nodal Minis...

Moraya Global Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT172Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal arose out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), who in the impugned order confirmed the order of the lower authority.2. Briefly the facts are that the appellants is a manufacturer of Aromatic Chemicals falling under Chapter 29 and 33 of CETA, 1985. The Central Excise officers conducted stock challenge of the raw material and finished goods lying in the factory. Certain shortages were noticed in the actual stock of the raw materials and the finished goods as compared to those shown in the excise records. A Panchanama was drawn incorporating the differences in the stock position. A statement of the Director v/as recorded in which he admitted that there was a difference in the actual stock of raw materials and finished goods lying in the factory on 23.8.99 as compared to that shown in the corresponding excise records. Amongst other things it was found that there was a difference in quantity in the raw materials namely Sulphuric Acid, Caustic Potash, Formic Acid, Pseu...

Seven Seas Corpn. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard, both sides. The appellant have given the following reasons in their application seeking restoration of the stay petition: - 1) Despite the fact that this is a third round of litigation before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for considering the issue twice directed by this Hon'ble Tribunal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has once again sought to side-track the same and has passed the order confirming the duty in clear violation of the above second identical direction of this Hon'ble Tribunal on this very issue. It is in such circumstances that the appellants are filing the present appeal. 2) M/s Seven Seas Corporation is in the business of manufacturing and selling of M.S. Wool. Alongwith the same, they also sell remnants of M.S. Scrap and dust. The unit is an SSI unit inasmuch as the turn over for the relevant period was less than Rs. 30 Lakhs. The relevant declarations were hence filed with the department. Copies of the said declarations for the years 1006-987 and 19...

Apollo Vikas Steel (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(173)ELT444Tri(Mum.)bai

1. A vessel M.V. Some of 7160.127LDT(Light Displacement Tonnage) was assessed to duty under 89.09 as it was brought for breaking. The relevant rules for duty under notification applicable was No. 87/90 CUS dated 20.3.1990 were on LDT basis.2. The appellant had filed taking 7160.127 LDT as per Ship Survey Report Duty of Rs. 92,75,625 was assessed being duty 1232.230 LDT said to be permanent ballast. On 2.4.1992, Superintendent informed about the direction of Collector of Customs & Central Excise, Rajkot who had ordered the charging of duty on the said permanent ballast in MV Some & the Bank Guarantee was encashed.3. In appeal, against the said decision, Tribunal on 23.7.1998 ordered the appeal to be filed before Commissioner (Appeal) with application for condonation of delay. The Commissioner (Appeal) disposed off the appeal by dismissing as not maintainable expressing doubts as under the statute he had no power to condone the delay of more than 3 months, Hence this appeal.4. B...