Mumbai Court May 2005 Judgments

Mohammed Aslam Kapadia Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(192)ELT451Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal arises out of the order of Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication). In the impugned order the Commissioner Confiscated the seized car under Section 111(d) and Section 111(m) of the Customs Act.1962 as the real owner and real importer has not come forward to claim the car. He also imposed a penalty of Rs.50.000/- under Section 112 on one Shri Mohammed Aslam Kapadia.2. The DRI who originally investigated the case verified whether the Present appeal was filed by Shri M A Kapadia. The DRI got the signature of the appellant in the stay application verified with the signature of Kapadia available in their record. It was found by the Examiner of Questioned Documents. directorate of Forensic Sciences. (Ministry of Home Affairs). government of India. Hyderabad. That the signature of the applicant in the stay application does not tally with the one available on record. One Shri V K Tolani. Intelligence Officer working in the DRI who investigated the case filed an affidavit to this...

Fiat India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(193)ELT126Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These appeals relating to refunds/return of excess amount discharged as duty when Motor vehicles cleared on tariff rates after clearance are registered as Taxi and are thus entitled to a lower notification rate are being disposed by this common order.1.2 Appeal no. E/3862 to E/3864/02 The vehicles cleared were registered as taxi with the prescribed authority however the claims made by the manufacturer is rejected on the grounds that the excise invoice mentioned the vehicle as "Station Wagon whereas the registration certificate shows the model description as Siena Weekend Car.1.3 Appeal No. E/3081/02 is as the claim was rejected as the excise invoice mentioned the vehicles is "Siena" whereas the registration certificate mentions the model description as "UNO".1.4 Appeal no. E/48/02 is for rejection of the claim on the ground that engine no. of the car shown on Excise Invoice is "PAU 2230176" while it is shown as "PAU 2232176" on the registration certificate.1.5 Appeal E/3076/02, the...

industrial Adhesive Tapes Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(203)ELT607Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order.2. The appellant's factory was visited by the Central Excise Officers, who on search recovered three delivery challans dated 17.01.97, 20/01/97 and 24/01/97, showing removal of coated/laminated main made fabrics and giving details, such as, date, time, name of the consignee as "self Mumbai", Serial No., variety of goods, quantity and number of bundles, grade and quality, etc. As per the other details, the quantity of the goods removed under the said invoice was to the extent of 14470 L. Mtrs totally valued at Rs. 8,79,776/-. The appellants could not produce any Central Excise invoice in respect of the said quantity.3. Shri Nasirbhai Ahmed Daudi, Manager of the company, in his statement dated 12/02/97 has admitted that the delivery challans were showing removal of finished goods without payment of duty. They also agreed to pay duty. Shri Jagdish Chandra K. Agarwal, partner of the ap...

Sajjankumar M. Harlalka Vs. Joint Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)100ITD418(Mum.)

1. These are two appeals filed by the assessee relating to the assessment year 1996-97 against the order of the learned CIT(A) XVIII, Mumbai dated 22-9-2000. The proceedings arise out of the assessments completed under Section 143(3).2. The assessee had co-ownership in flat No. 9, 2nd floor, Laxmi Bhavan, D-Road, Churchgate, Mumbai and this property was sold for Rs. 3,25,00,000 to Smt. Veena Vasant on 29-11-1995. The property was constructed in 1961 and assessee opted to adopt the value as on 1 -4-1981 for computation of capital gain. The assessee filed the report of registered valuer Barve Suresh R. & Associates dated 1-3-1996 who worked out the value at Rs. 24,36,400 as on 1-4-1981. The Assessing Officer however, referred the matter to the valuation cell of the Income-tax Department who worked out the value at Rs. 15.74 lakhs as on 1-4-1981. One appeal has been filed against the report of the departmental valuer Sub-section 55 A of the Income-tax Act read with provisions of Weal...

Warren Laboratories (P.) Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)3SOT638(Mum.)

In this appeal, the assessee has raised following issues in the grounds of appeal : (i) The confirmation of addition of Rs. 9,53,019 on account of free samples of toothpaste and medicines shortage/wastage.(iii) Addition of Rs. 10,000 being professional fees for valuing the fixed assets.(v) Not granting deduction under section 80-IA on Rs. 6,04,962 presuming it to be income from other sources.Regarding first ground, the assessing officer found that the assessee had distributed free samples of toothpaste and medicines, but details of parties to whom such samples have been given have not been furnished. There is no reconciliation of details of free samples filed before the assessing officer and the details as given in the Tax Audit Report. There is also no evidence how these samples are utilised for the purposes of business. Further, the Marketing agent of the assessee-company is M/s. Warrant Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., a sister concern. Hence, it was not required for the assessee-company...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Raymond Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants were not paying service tax on receipt of transporters service in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of M/s. Laghu Udyog Bharti Ltd. J. However, the effect of said judgment was nullified by enactment of 2000 with retrospective effect. Thereafter, penal proceedings were initiated against the appellants for non-payment of duty during the relevant period. The original adjudicating authority confirmed the penalties @ Rs.200/- per day under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 and @ Rs.200/- per week under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1944. On appeal against the above, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalties; the Revenue has filed appeal against the above order.2. It is seen that as per the explanation of Section 117 of the Finance Act, 2000, no omission on the part of the assessee shall be punishable as an offence, which would not have been so punishable, if this section had not come into force. Inasmuch as the service tax was not being ...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Oboi Laboratories

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Revenue is in appeal. Issue is classification of medicaments assesed as patent and proprietory on basis of a Russian Language Label Zymicin which is patent medicine in Russia & the Gentamycin drops also assessed as generic medicine when not being exported as Zymicin to Russia.2. Revenue contends that there is no provision to accept the Russian Language Label for product Zymicin which bears the English inserptic 'Gentamycin Injection I.P' on it to be Patent and Proprietary medicine.3. We find no infirmity in accepting Zymicin to be a brand name to bring in the classification as Patent and Proprietary medicine, even if label is not printed in English and is in Russian...goods are exclusively meant for export. The definition of Mark in Chapter note 2(ii) of Chapter 30 does not restrict the 'invented words' to be only in a particular script. That goods cannot have two classification i.e.Patent and Proprietary and generic medicine as taken by Revenue, in violation of the Central Exc...

Saurer India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)STR105

1. After hearing both sides and considering that the appellants are performing an agency function of supervision of erection, commissioning & installation of the plant for the principal in Germany, prima facie they do not appear to be covered by the Service Tax provisions on consulting engineers when Board's Order No. 79/9/2004 ST, dated 13-5-2004 is read with the nature of activity/service covered by Service Tax under the definition at 39(a). Erection, commissioning or installation means any service provided by a company or agency in relation to erection, commissioning or installation of plant machinery & equipment inbounded under Service Tax net with effect from 1-7-2003 & 10-9-2004. The service provided during March 1999 to January 2003 cannot be covered, prima facie under the Service of consulting engineer.2. Consequently this appellant an Agency more appropriately covered under 39(a) Service, have to be granted full waiver of pre-deposit requirement to hear this appea...

Amitabh Bachchan Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)97TTJ(Mum.)516

1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Central-VII, Mumbai, dt. 30th July, 2004 for the asst. yr.2001-02. "(I) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the entire amount of Rs. 23 crores from M/s EEL was taxable as appellant's income for asst. yr. 2001-02, without appreciating that-- (a) the appellant was bound under agreements dt. 10th Jan., 1995 and 11th Feb., 1995 between him and M/s ABCL to handover to M/s ABCL entire income from 'engagements' as defined in the said agreements except those under Clause 1.7 thereof and M/s ABCL could enforce the terms thereunder as per Clauses 11 and 20 thereof. Further, he was also legally bound by his assurance given in information memorandum of M/s ABCL issued in 1996 for placing shares thereof at a premium of Rs. 70 per share. (b) the said agreements were genuine and bona fide as found by Hon'ble Tribunal vide its order No. 4453/Mum/2000 for asst. yr. 1996-97...

i.C. Textiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both sides and on considering that the issue involved in this case is the determination of the clearances made under Notification No. 8/97 to the DTA by this EOU to be within the quota cleared by adding the deemed exports and physical actual exports is settled in the assessees favour vide this Tribunal's decision in case of Shabnam Synthetics Ltd. v. CCE & C, Surat I and Pasupati Spg & Wvg Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Delhi III 2004 (178) ELT 644 (Tri-Del). The contra decision relied upon by the Ld DR in case of Sanju Silk Mills Pvt Ltd v. CCE, Surat 2003 (163) ELT 217 (Tri-Mum) does not enthuse us to order a pre-deposit requirement as prima facie the decision of Sanju Slik Mills has held that Notification 8/97, relevant in this case, is not para materia Notification 2/985 (sic) 2/95 and the decision was on 2/95.2. Since a prima facie case has been made out on merits, full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery is granted.3. Both sides are liberty to file early hear...