Mumbai Court September 2004 Judgments

Pudumjee Agro Inds Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Ce and Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides. the issue relates to reversal of the modvat credit taken on the inputs used in the manufacture of pulp and paper. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of pulp and paper. They were clearing Bagasse on payment of Central Excise duty at the rate of 10% to their sister units even though the Bagasse pulp is fully exempted from central excise duty under Notification 38/90 dated 20th March 1990. The appellants were issued show cause notices asking them to reverse the modvat credit taken on the inputs used in the manufacture of such Bagasse pulp as there were no option for the appellant to avail of the exemption or not as the exemption is mandatory and the levy of duty will be unconstitutional and these show cause notices were subsequently confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner.2. The ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the issue is well settled and squarely covered in favour of the appellant by the following decision:- 3. The ld. SDR appeari...

Sai Datta Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(98)ECC534

1. The Appellants herein imported 4400 kgs. of used/defective Tungsten Carbide Tips. Since the goods were second-hand, they required a specific import licence for their clearance in terms of para 5.3 of EXIM Policy, 1997-2002. Since the Importers could not produce import licence, the goods were confiscated under Section 111(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 11(5) of the Foreign Trade Development Regulation Act, 1992 and option to redeem the goods on payment of Redemption Fine of Rs. 1,86,480 was extended and a penalty of Rs. 15,000 was imposed upon the Appellants under Section 112(a) and Section 125 of the Customs Act.2. The value of the goods was enhanced from Rs. 153.30 per kg. to Rs. 210 per kg. GIF, on the basis of price contemporaneous import of similar goods noticed at Nhava Sheva Port. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confiscation, but reduced the fine to Rs. 42,000 and penalty to Rs. 4,700; hence this appeal.3. None appeared for the appellants in spite of noti...

Fifty Fifty Finance and Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)92TTJ(Mum.)310

1. This appeal is filed by the assessee having been aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), dt. 7th Jan., 2004, for the asst. yr. 2001-02 relating to the assessee.2. The assessee has raised the sole issue relating to the computation of the income of Rs. 1,27,42,880 as against the declared income of Rs. 46,73,220.3. Both parties were heard regarding the issue raised in the appeal by the assessee and its legal implications.4. The learned representative of the assessee has vehemently argued reiterating the contentions made before the Departmental authorities gaining the support of the citations that were mentioned in ground No.1(b)(iv) as follows :Workmen Associated Rubber Industry Ltd. v. Associated Rubber Industry Ltd. 5. Contrary to this, the learned Departmental Representative has argued supporting the orders of the Departmental authorities and sought for upholding the same by dismissing the appeal of the assessee.6. On careful consideration of the materials available with the Tribunal...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Venus Wire Industries Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)99TTJ(Mum.)561

1. This appeal by the assessee is for the asst. yr. 1996-97. The first ground of objection is regarding the addition of Rs. 13,41,512 in valuing the closing stock by including Modvat credit on purchase of raw materials to the extent it is referable to the said stock.2. The CIT(A) remanded the matter back to the file of the AO with the following observation : 1. The purchases would have to be debited at total cost inclusive of Modvat credit available in the P&L a/c. 2. The closing stock of raw materials at the end of the year should also be valued at total cost inclusive of Modvat credit available with reference to such stock. 3. Sales of finished goods would have to be credited to the P&L a/c at the figure of total consideration received including reimbursement of excise duty received from the customers. 4. Excise duty payable should be debited to the P&L a/c to the extent of the net amount i.e., the gross excise duty payable on goods manufactured during the previous year ...

Aleli and Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit, Circle 6(2)

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)7SOT639(Mum.)

The short issue falling for adjudication in this case is whether or not there was a sufficient cause for delay of four months in obtaining and filing the tax audit report by the assessee.The undisputed material facts are like this. During the relevant previous year, there was a change in management of the assessee-company. The new management took over the business with effect from 16-7-1996 but, according to the assessee, accounts for a period of 1-4-1996 to 16-7-1996 were not handed over to the new management in time. According to the assessee, it was because of this reason that finalisation of tax audit report was delayed. The assessee had further contended that since some issues in transfer of management necessitated expert advice from senior lawyers, and obtaining their expert advices took considerable time, the delay was further compounded. These explanations, however, did not impress the authorities below. The explanation was noted and rejected. The assessee is aggrieved and in ...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. All Russia Scientific Research

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)98ITD69(Mum.)

1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue and is directed against the order dt. 26th April, 2000, passed by the CIT(A)-IV, Mumbai, in the matter of assessment under Section. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the asst. yr. 1995-96. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the payment received by the assessee for supply of technical documentation is not liable to treated as taxable income in its hands and thereby erred in deleting a sum of Rs. 7,88,000 as the income of the assessee from royalty as held by the AO." The short issue requiring our adjudication in this appeal, therefore, is whether or not the payment in consideration of supply of technical documentation, on the facts of this case, is to be treated as 'royalty' or not.3. The aforesaid neatly identified legal issue is set out in a narrow compass of undisputed material facts. The assessee, a Russian company, possessing knowle...

Kidland and ors. Vs. Indusland Bank Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2005Bom159; 2005(2)ALLMR512; II(2005)BC30; 2005(1)BomCR572; (2005)107BOMLR908; 2005(1)MhLj531

S.U. Kamdar, J.1. In these two writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging a common order passed by the D.R.A.T. Mumbai in Misc. Application No. 414 of 2003 in Appeal No. 150 of 2003 and Misc. Application No. 415 of 2003 in Appeal No. 174 of 2003. By the said common order dated 12th January, 2004 the D.R.A.T. Mumbai has directed the petitioners to deposit 40% of the decretal amount as and by way of pre-deposit under Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. It is this order dated 12th January, 2004 which is challenged by filing the present two writ petitions.2. A short point of law which has been raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that the provisions of Section 21 of the Act insofar as it provides for pre-deposit is ultra vires, arbitrary and the same is liable to be struck down. In support of the aforesaid contention, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Cour...

Devidas Jairam Somase and Manoj Devidas Somase Vs. Indian Oil Corporat ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(2)ALLMR389; 2005(2)BomCR866

H.L. Gokhale, J.1. The 1st respondent to both these petitions is a Public Corporation dealing in petroleum products. It acquired certain lands in village Dhotane-Budruk Panda situated near Manmad in Taluka Nandgaon, District Nasik for the purposes of setting up LPG Bottling Plant. In all such projects, the agriculturists in the particular area are the sufferers and, therefore, it appears that the Ministry of Industry, Bureau of Public Enterprises laid down certain guidelines to be followed by such Corporations. As far as these acquisitions are concerned, the relevant guidelines were recorded in a letter addressed on behalf of the 1st respondent Corporation to the District Collector, Nashik dated 15th December 1995. These guidelines were essentially for providing preference in employment to those whose lands were to be acquired.2. Devidas and Sahebrao, both sons of Jairam Somase, are two such persons whose lands came to be acquired for this project. It is material to note that their lan...

Nagesh Dharma Godke and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2005)DMC731; 2005(1)MhLj1157

Anoop V. Mohta, J. 1. This is again a case of physical, mental harassment of the wife by the husband and in-laws and further committing murder by pouring kerosene and setting her ablaze.2. The appellant No. 1, husband, appellant No. 2 father-in-law, appellant No. 3 mother-in-law are convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune for committing the murder of wife/daughter-in-law, Anita, (deceased), on the evening of 25-1-1998, at about 6.30 p.m. in their house, intentionally and knowingly causing her death by pouring kerosene on her person and setting her on fire. They were accordingly convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default to rigorous imprisonment for six months, under Section 302 read with Section 34 and under Section 4984-A of Indian Penal Code respectively.3. The decea...

Fundacio Privada Intervida Vs. Additional Commissioner, Pune Division ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(2)ALLMR48; 2005(2)BomCR231; 2005(2)MhLj769

Daga V.C., J.1. Rule returnable forthwith by consent of parties. Respondent No. 1 is a formal party, whereas Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 waives service.2. Heard Counsels for the rival parties. Perused record of the petition.3. This petition is directed against the order dated 7th November, 2003 whereby the revision filed by the applicant licensor (respondent No. 2) seeking directions against the Competent Authority to decide his claim for compensation and damages on merits after due inquiry came to be allowed.4. The challenge set up in the petition is that the Competent Authority appointed under the provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') has no jurisdiction to determined the financial liability of the licensee and direct payment thereof under Section 42 of the said Act.Contextual facts :5. The contextual facts depict that the petitioner, a registered charitable trust, was a licensee of the premises owned by the re...