Mumbai Court October 2006 Judgments

P.N. Writer and Co. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XLX, Mumbai, 17-11-2004 passed for assessment year 2001-02. The grounds of are not in consonance to rule 8of ITAT Rules, they are argumentative and descriptive in nature. The sale grievance of assessee relates to denial of deduction under Section 80-O of the Act.2. The learned first appellate authority has noticed the facts in a very lucid and exhaustive manner from para 5 of the order, thus the facts leading to the litigation read as under: 5. The appellant assessee is engaged in the business of relocation of personal and household effects. It is stated by the appellant that it is engaged in the business of specialized relocation solutions in India and in foreign countries involving handling, packing, moving and relocation of personal and household effects of foreign clients like multinational companies, diplomatic missions, Government agencies and private non-resident clients etc. It is explai...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Devanshi Impex P. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Revenue seeks stay of operation of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who has accepted the contention of the respondent/importers for classification of Thiourea 99% minimum' under CTH 29039010 setting aside the adjudication order by which the goods were classified as insecticide under CTH 3808.2. We have heard both sides. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has noted that Thiourea 99%' is specifically covered by the tariff entry under Chapter 29 under heading 290390301. The judgment of the apex Court in the case of Union of India v. Pesticides Mfg. Formulators Association of India which is relied upon by the Revenue in the present appeal and application does not cover, prima fade, "Thiourea 99%, an item which is specifically covered under the tariff entry and therefore, prima facie, there is no ground to interfere with the Commissioner (Appeals) order of classification which is to be determined when the appeal is taken up for regular hearing and not at this stage in vi...

Nirvip Dyes and Chemicals Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants M/s. Nirvip Dyes & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., are engaged in the manufacture of vat paste in different colours from vat power, besides other pigments, chemicals etc. They were issued a Show Cause Notice alleging that they have manufactured vat paste in different colours by mixing two or more dyes (powder) to get the required shade thoroughly mixing with glycerine, dispersing agent and water etc. as per formula in Ball Mill, for a total process involving 80-90 hours, thereby converting vat dyes (powder) into liquid/paste form reducing the powder/strength/concentration) of vat dyes (powder) as per required particle size of fineness for use in textile industries for printing purpose. It was alleged that the vat paste is manufactured by way of secret formula which is not divulged to any one being their trade secret and that vat paste coming into existence as above is therefore formulated/prepared/standardized and ready to use in textile industries and is appropriately clas...

Commissioner of Cus. Vs. Mono Acri Glass Inds. Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is revenue's appeal. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents M/s Mono Acri Glass Industries Pvt. Ltd. imported extrusion production line under EPCG licence issued to them allowing clearance of goods at the rate of 10% of the duty. The condition of the licence was that the importers shall in addition to the legal undertaking given by them to the licencing authority shall also execute bond supported by 100% bank guarantee with custom authority in the manner prescribed by the department of revenue, Ministry of Finance from time to time. The respondents were a subsidiary of Geo Logging Industries Ltd. who held 99.9% of equity share of the respondent's company. The respondents got their name in the licence amended so ns to read as M/s. Mono Acri Glass Industries Pvt. Ltd. (subsidiary of M/s. Geo Logging Indutries Ltd...) instead of Mono Acri Glass Industries Pvt. Ltd. 2. The respondent requested Customs department to allow then to execute bank guarantee for 25% of duty...

Vst Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(207)ELT513Tri(Mum.)bai

2. The issue relates to refund of Rs. 54,861/- paid in excess on account of freight. After perusal of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the adjudicating authority it becomes clear that the appellant has filed the Bill of Entry No. 246189 dated 24-2-2005 on the basis of FOB value declared by him instead of C & F value. Thus, declaration of C&F value has resulted in addition of freight twice in the assessable value. The appellant has claimed refund of duty paid on excess freight. However, the lower authorities appeared to have rejected the claim of the appellant inter alia following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Flock India and Priya Blue Industries . Though they have admitted in the order that the excess payment has resulted due to clerical error for which the appellant should have filed an application under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. 154. Correction, clerical errors, etc. - Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in any decision o...

Rajarambapu Patil Ssk Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of sugar and molasses which were being cleared on payment of duty. They have entered into two agreements with M/s. S.S. Engineers for purchase of machines and equipments required for the sugar plant and for erection and commissioning of the said machines and equipments. Accordingly M/s.S.S. Engineers supplied various equipments and machines from time to time. The said equipments/machines were either manufactured by M/s.S.S. Engineers in their factory or were get manufactured by them from other manufacturers on job work basis or sale basis. As per appellants say all the said equipments/machines were directly supplied at their factory site either from the factory of M/s. S.S. Engineers or from the factory of M/s. S.S. Engineers job workers or suppliers under cover of Central Excise invoices on which their factories name and address was specifically mentioned as consignee. These equipments/machines were subsequently erected and commissione...

JaIn Trading Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee on 5-11 -2002 against the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XIII, Mumbai dated 13-9-2002 in the case of the assessee in relation to assessment order under Section 143(3) for assessment year 1999-2000.2. In this appeal the assessee has disputed assessment of a sum of Rs. 25lakhs on the ground that it was an additional income declared by the assessee himself during the survey proceedings under Section 133 A of the Act conducted on 30-3-1999.3. Facts of the case leading to this dispute briefly are that there was a survey under Section 133A at the premises of the assessee on 30-3-1999.During the course of survey an inventory of stock as found was physically taken. Based on that inventory relying upon the f act that in the case of the assessee average rate of gross profit was 7.26 per cent the survey authorities concluded that there was under-statement of closing stock. Confronted by this question the assessee offered an additional in...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. JaIn Irrigation Systems Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The amount involved in the present appeal is Rs. 22,844/- which has been refunded to the assessee on account of reduction in the basic Custom duty on the imported inputs i.e. Polyethylene. The revenue is in appeal on the ground that test of unjust enrichment has not been applied on the said sum. On this aspect, the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Nashik has discussed well and passed reasoned order which does not call for any interference. It has been observed that during the material period the price of final product i.e. Irrigation component has considerably gone down. The respondent herein has paid Rs. 3.05 crores per annum on the imported inputs. The amount of Rs. 22,844/- is too small to have any impact on the price of the exempted final product. In spite of the same the value of the final product has gone down (may be, because of other market forces). The respondent has not passed on burden to its customers to purchase the final product.3. In view of the aforesaid obse...

Mehta Trading House Pvt. Ltd., Vs. the Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(119)ECC62

1. All the appeals filed by the appellants as well as by the revenue against the same impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs are being dealt together and a common order is being passed in respect of all.2. Shri V.S. Nankani, Ld. Advocate appears for the appellants and Shri K.M. Mandal, Ld. Consultant appears for the revenue.3. As per facts on record, M/s. Mehta Trading House Pvt. Ltd., is engaged in the business of import of Glass Beads and Chatons from M/s.Swarovski, Austria, who are the manufacturer of the said goods. It is seen that during the period April 91 to September 95, the said appellants imported sixteen consignments of the goods in question, filed Bills of Entry for the same along with relevant documents like invoices and packing list issued by M/s. Swarovski. All these goods, after proper examination, as is clear from the remarks made in the Bills of Entry, were finally assessed by the proper officer and cleared on payment of duty.4. At the time of import of...

Didanwala Abbas Akbarally Vs. Commissioner of Cus. (Prev.)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Vide his impugned order, the Commissioner of Customs has enhanced the declaration value of Mobile Batteries and Mobile Circuit Boards from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 15,90,000/- and Rs. 23,85,000/-. The goods have also been confiscated with an option to the appellants to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 8 lakhs. Penalty of Rs. 60 lakhs stands imposed in terms of provisions of Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962.2. As per facts on record, the appellant was detained at Airport for examination of the baggage, which consists of 265 Nos. of Panasonic Mobile Batteries and 265 Nos. of Mobile Circuit Boards. The said goods were declared by him to the Customs for the purpose of payment of duty.The invoice covering the goods in question was also presented. However, the officers entertained a view that the appellants had only declared Mobile Batteries and have not made any declaration about the Mobile Circuit Boards. They also doubted the correctness of the value declared by t...