Mumbai Court September 2004 Judgments

Warren Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(174)ELT210Tri(Mum.)bai

M/S WARREN LABORATORIES Pvt. Ltd. Tarapur (hereinafter referred to as "the appellants") manufacture the following three products: (i) Rexidin, (ii) Remedin & (iii) Dentogel.1. The short point to be decided is whether the above products are classifiable as P or P medicaments under chapter Sub-heading 3003.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 as contended by the appellants or under chapter Sub-heading 3306.90 as decided by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the order in appeal.2. The appellants were classifying the above products under chapter Sub-heading 3003.10 which was accepted by the department. However three show cause notices were issued in the year 1996 proposing to classify the goods as "Preparation for oral or dental hygiene" falling under chapter Sub-heading 3306.00 and chargeable to Central Excise duty @ 20% advance as BED. The rate of duty under classification 3003.10 was only 15%. The adjudicating authority after making a thorough study of the issue and the also submis...

Cce Vs. Mahavir Castings Ltd. and anr.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(118)LC78Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of prior intelligence that M/s. Mahavir Castings Ltd. manufactures of SQ iron/CI castings were indulging in evasion of Central Excise duty by way of illicit removal of castings under cover of fake invoices issued in the name of Shah Enterprises as well as in their own name, the officers of Central Excise raided their factory premises on 2/3.9.1997. Simultaneous searches were also conducted at the premises of Shah Enterprises and residence of the Director of Mahavir Castings Ltd. The Manager of M/s.Vijay Transport Company Ltd., Ahmedabad was summoned to produce the copies of lorry receipts in respect of castings despatched by M/s.Mahavir Castings Ltd. and M/s. Shah Enterprises through them during the period 1994-1995 to 2.9.1997. Subsequently, the investigations were extended to various buyers of Mahavir Castings Ltd as well as their associates and the persons connected with their business activity which has resulted in evidence that the...

Dr. Vidyut K. Shroff Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(184)ELT177Tri(Mum.)bai

2. The issue involved in this appeal is that the imported drug does not tally with that of exempted drug under notification No. 12, at S.N.50 & item 39 in list 2 and require licence. Hence redemption fine Rs. 8000/- and penalty Rs. 3000/- and also payment of duty on merits ordered by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Courier Cell, CSI Airport, Sahara, Andheri(E), Mumbai.3. On appeal redemption fine is reduced to Rs. 2000/-and personal penalty from Rs. 3000/- to Rs. 500/- by the Commissioner of Customs(Appeals) Airport, Mumbai.4. Dr Vidyut K. Shroff 1-C, Mahavir Building, Lajpatrai Road, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai, had imported Edetate Disodium along with ascorbic acid and pyridoxine under one consignment under import licence No T-969/99 dated 24.12.1999. They were cleared under Bill of Entry dated 27.10.2004/- on payment of duty Rs. 20359.00, redemption line of Rs 8000/- and penalty of Rs. 3000/-.5. The exempted medicine under notification is described as Calcium Disodium Edetate. T...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Rekhaben S. Shah

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT48Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of prior intelligence that M/s. Mahavir Castings Ltd. manufacturers of SQ iron/CI castings were indulging in evasion of Central Excise duty by way of illicit removal of castings under cover of fake invoices issued in the name of Shah Enterprises as well as in their own name, the officers of Central Excise raided their factory premises on 2/3-9-97. Simultaneous searches were also conducted at the premises of Shah Enterprises and residence of the Director of Mahavir Castings Ltd. The Manager of M/s. Vijay Transport Company Ltd., Ahmedabad was summoned to produce the copies of lorry receipts in respect of castings despatched by M/s. Mahavir Castings Ltd. and M/s. Shah Enterprises through them during the period 1994-95 to 2-9-97. Subsequently, the investigations were extended to various buyers of Mahavir Castings Ltd. as well as their associates and the persons connected with their business activity which has resulted in evidence that they ...

Chandrakant Shankarrao Marne Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(2)SLJ104CAT

1. The present O.A. is filed for quashing and setting aside the removal order dated 11.10.2000 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the appellate order dated 1.3.2002 confirming the order of the Disciplinary Authority and directing the respondents to reinstate the applicant with effect from 11.10.2000 with full pay and allowances etc.2. The applicant's case is that he was appointed in the office of Inspectorate of Armaments, Khadki as an orderly on 5.3.1983. He was transferred and posted at Ammunition Factory, Khadki on merger on 22.10.1984. He was removed from service without any enquiry or chargesheet or departmental enquiry on 7.7.1987. The applicant had preferred an appeal against the removal order. The appeal was not disposed of and he filed an O.A.No. 386/1988 against the removal order.The said O.A. was disposed of on 25.2.1991 with direction to dispose of the appeal within two months. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal by its order dated 16.4.1991. The applicant fi...

Mc Dermott Etpm Inc. Vs. the Dcit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

"1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Bombay, erred in law and don facts in holding that the services rendered by your appellant are covered by the provisions of the Notification GSR 304 (E), dated 31^st March, 1983. 2.1 The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in holding that the entire activity for which consideration was received was performed in India and was taxable at the deemed profit rate of 10% under Section 44BB. 2.2 Without prejudice to above, only part of mobilization / de-mobilization work which is attributable to the operations carried out in India is taxable in India." 2. The assessee is a Company, incorporated under the laws of Panama. It is engaged in the business of designing, fabrication, construction and installation of platforms, decks, pipelines, jackets and various other similar activities. A part of the said work consists of mobilization / de-mobilization and transportation of marine spread to off-shore India (this work is done by the assess...

Reliance Share and Stock Brokers (P) Vs. Addl. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)1SOT44(Mum.)

The assessee has filed this appeal on 3-3-2004 against the order of the learned CIT (A), IV for the assessment year 2000-01.2. In this appeal the assessee has disputed the addition of Rs. 3,59,93,740 to the income declared in relation to SEBI registration fees. Facts leading to this around of appeal, briefly, are that the assessee is a member of Mumbai and Other Stock Exchanges in India. The assessee derives income from the business of share broking. During the course of assessment proceedings the learned assessing officer noted that the assessee had debited to profit and loss account a sum of Rs. 3.59 crores as SEBI turnover tax that had not been actually paid. The assessee explained that it had collected from its clients apart from brokerage the amount of registration fees payable to SEBI. The assessee argued that this amount had been collected as a trustee on behalf of the clients. The assessee also argued that the provisions of section 43B were not applicable because the amount pa...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Santogen Textile Mills Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)94TTJ(Mum.)637

1. These are cross-appeals. They are directed against a common Order of the CIT(A), Central-I, Mumbai, dt. 13th Feb., 2002, passed in the context of block assessment Order dt. 31st Aug., 2000, passed under Section 158BC of the IT Act, 1961, for the block period from 1st April, 1988 to 23rd June, 1998.2. Search and seizure actions have .been carried out in the residential and business premises of the assessee on 23rd June, 1998, besides on the premises of other companies of the assessee's group. In response to notice under Section 158BC, the assessee filed return of income on 7th Dec., 1998 declaring undisclosed income of Rs. 1,00,000. As against this, the AO completed the impugned assessment under Section 158BC, by his Order dt. 31st Aug., 2000, on an undisclosed income of Rs. 1,38,73,032, which comprised of the following items :(a) Excess production due to oil gain Rs. 1,32,48,032(b) Sale of scrap outside the books Rs. 1,00,000(c) Transactions of certain payments to brokers, Rs. 5,25...

Mcdermott Etpm Inc. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)92ITD385(Mum.)

"1. The learned CIT(A), Bombay, erred in law and on facts in holding that the services rendered by your appellant are covered by the provisions of the Notification GSR 304 (E), dt. 31st March, 1983. 2.1 The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in holding that the entire activity for which consideration was received was performed in India and was taxable at the deemed profit rate of 10 per cent under Section 44BB. mobilisation/de-mobilisation work which is attributable to the operations carried out in India is taxable in India.2. The assessee is a company, incorporated under the laws of Panama. It is engaged in the business of designing, fabrication, construction and installation of platforms, decks, pipelines, jackets and various other similar activities. A part of the said work consists of mobilisation/demobilisation and transportation of marine, spread to offshore India (this work is done by the assessee outside India) and the installation of structures and pipelines at Bombay H...

Sarva Shramik Sangh and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(2)ALLMR81; 2004(6)BomCR706; [2009(105)FLR353]; (2005)ILLJ809Bom; 2004(4)MhLj1073; 2005(3)SLJ331(Bombay)

Nishita Mhatre, J.1. By this petition, the Union Sarva Shramik Sangh and two workmen who are members of this Union, have sought to challenge the Award dated 21st May, 1992 passed by the Labour Court, Sangli rejecting the Reference for reinstatement with continuity of service and full backwages and granting only retrenchment compensation to the workmen. The petition has been filed on behalf of 163 workmen whose services had been terminated by respondent Nos. 1 and 2. All the 163 workmen had raised individual disputes and References had been made under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for adjudication before the same Labour Court. By a common Award, the Labour Court has held that all the workmen are entitled to retrenchment compensation.2. The 163 workmen concerned were all working with the State Government on different posts. They were employed to man 25 Lift Irrigation Schemes at Sangli. The State of Maharashtra i.e. respondent No...