Mumbai Court April 2006 Judgments

Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(108)ECC60

1. After rejecting the request for adjournment, we proceed to decide the appeals, inasmuch as the matter is covered by the earlier decision of this Tribunal in appellant's own case. Accordingly, we have heard the Ld D.R. and have gone through the impugned order.2. As per facts on record, the appellants imported consignments of Crude Palm Oil, which arrived at the Port on 3.7.2004. Representative samples of imported Crude Petroleum Oil were drawn onboard and thereafter the goods were discharged from the vessel. After discharge of the goods, representative samples were again drawn on 7.7.2004 and sent for test.3. In terms of Serial No. 34 of Notification No. 21/02-Cus dated 11.3.2002, as amended vide Notification No. 120/03-Cus dated 1.8.2003, Crude Palm Oil attracted concessional rate of Basic Customs Duty of 65% if total carotenoid (as beta carotene) is in the range of 500-2500 mg/kg. If the above requirement is not met, the Crude Palm Oil would be classifiable under Heading 151190.90...

Kasat Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(105)ECC409

1. Heard both sides in these appeals. The appellants are an assessee under the Central Excise Act and their Directors. These appeals arising from a common order are being disposed of by this common order.2.1 The assessee cleared a product declared as Kasol and Solvent KG allegedly incorrectly claimed of exemption under Notification 179/77 by claiming the goods to be classified under T.I. 68 (of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff). They cleared the goods in the guise of chem.Liquid whereas the goods were actually 'copper complex' which is alleged by Revenue to be a Synthetic Organic Derivative classifiable under the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff Item 14D.2.2 The assessee was also alleged to have manufactured a product viz Kalogen Brill Blue 3K without intimation to the department and without filing classification and clearing the same in the guise of BL 3SL.2.3 A Show Cause Notice was therefore issued for violation of various provisions of the Central Excise Rules and demanding duty...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Sarang Springs P. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(108)ECC559

1. Hear both sides. After hearing both sides, I find that the Commissioner Appeal interalia has recorded as under: 2. In this case, it is admitted fact that the appellant has received Non-alloy Steel Wire, falling under Ch.Heading 7217.90 on payment of C.Ex.duty on regular and proper invoices and have taken Cenvat credit to the extent mentioned in the invoices as per the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules. There is no dispute on this point. However, the Adjudicating Authority under impugned order, confirmed the Cenvat credit demanded on the ground that the process of drawing wire from wire rod, does not amount to manufacture and therefore, any amount paid on the clearance of steel wire drawn from steel rod, as a C.Ex.duty does not represent the C.Ex.duty and Cenvat credit of duty paid on Steel Wire is inadmissible. However, I find that the finished goods cleared by the appellants are various types of Coil Springs. There is no dispute that the process of manufacture of coiled spring fro...

Starlite Corporation and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These are seven appeals arising out of common order-in-appeal in which since the issue involved in all appeals is one and the same they are being decided through a common order.2. The brief facts of the case are that pursuant to intelligence collected that manufacturing activities of two companies having common directors are being carried out together in one and the same premises, a visit was made to the premises of M/s Starlite Corporation and on inspection, it was observed that M/s Starlite Corporation is operating/conducting manufacturing activities in Gala No. 37, Evergreen Industrial Estate, Shakti Mill Lane, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai and in the same gala one more company viz. M/s Avdel Tools & Services is carrying out manufacturing activities too. While M/s Starlite Corporation is engaged in manufacture of Aluminium Blind Rivets, Steel Nails, Aluminium Rivets Shells etc. M/s Avdel Tools & Services is engaged in the manufacture of Avex Hand Tools, Hydro Pnuematic Blind Revetin...

S.T. Texturiser and Shri Aslam Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(110)ECC22

1. Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of texturized yarn falling under Chapter 54 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. Their factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 19.1.1995, who conducted various check and verification. During the course of search of the factory, one registers showing entries of production of 10026.393 kgs.of yarn was recovered. The said entries were not reflected in the statutory records. The statement of Shri A.K. Kapadia authorized signatory was recorded. During the course of further investigation statement of Smt. Sabina Kapadia and Smt. Tanvir Kapadia were also recorded.2. Based upon the above present proceedings were initiated against the appellant alleging clandestine removal of the yarn and proposing confirmation of demand of duty of Rs. 7,26,914/- (Rupees seven lakhs twenty six thousand nine hundred fourteen only) and imposition of penalty. The said show cause notice culminated into an order passed by Jt. Commissioner confirming the demand a...

Worldwide Cargo Movers Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1.1. The appellant is a CHA Licensee under the provisions of the Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 (CHALR for short). The said licence has been ordered to be revoked/cancelled vide impugned order dated 17.1.2006 and the security furnished by the licensee at the time of issue of the license has been ordered to be forfeited. Hence this appeal.1.2 The appellant, pursuant to the licence issued, was handling the export/import consignment of several clients at Mumbai, Nhava Sheva ports.1.3 The department find serious violations of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 allegedly against the licensee and an employee of the CHA namely Shri Rehman Iqbal Shaikh as follows: (i) import fraud case of undervaluation, mis-declaration and contravention of EXIM Policy, in import of one New Volkswagen Touareg Car imported vide B/E No. 252983 dated 11/05/05 at Air Cargo Complex, Sahar resulting in a personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) on Shri Rehman Iqbal Shaikh,...

Rajiv V. Kochhar and anr. Vs. Bank of Baroda and anr.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

Reported in: IV(2006)BC72

1. Mr. J.P. Sen for the appellants and Mr. Colabawala for the respondent Bank are present.2. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is about the right to cross-examine a witness in original application before the D.R.T.3. This appeal has been filed by the original defendant Nos. 2 and 3 against the order dated 8th February, 2006 passed by the D.R.T.-II, Mumbai rejecting the application made by the appellants/original defendant Nos. 2 and 3 in February, 2006 seeking permission to cross-examine one Mr. Anil Kumar Agrawal, Senior Branch Manager of the respondent Bank, who had filed the affidavit of evidence dated 27th December, 2004 on behalf of the respondent Bank.4. On behalf of the appellants, it is argued that when a discretion has been given to the D.R.T. to allow cross-examination of witnesses on an application made in that behalf, the Tribunal should be liberal in its approach in granting such permission. In my view, provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due...

D.D. Samudra, Judge, Court of Small Causes Vs. Vaziralli Pvt. Ltd. and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006CriLJ2628; 2006(4)MhLj139

V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. This is a reference made by the Small Causes Judge, Mumbai, (Shri D. D. Samudra) for alleged contempt of the Court. The reference is upshot of an application moved by original Plaintiff to initiate contempt proceedings against Defendants/Respondents. Acceding to the request made by the Plaintiff, the learned Small Causes Judge has made the reference to this Court under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 2. It is not necessary to elaborately set out the facts and circumstances under which the reference has been made. Suffice it to say that the Plaintiff moved Interim Notice No. 4601 of 1999 in their suit before the Small Causes Court. Thereupon, direction was issued to the Defendants to furnish certain particulars as prayed for in the Notice. The Plaintiff took out another Interim Notice No. 2771 of 2001 alleging that the Defendants failed to comply with the directions issued earlier. The trial Court gave further directions to furnish particulars to th...

Shripad Ganpat Ughade Vs. State of Maharashtra,

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)ALLMR301; 2006(4)BomCR216; 2006(3)MhLj786

V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. By this common judgment, we shall dispose of these three writ petitions which involve identical question of facts and law. 2. The Petitioners - Shripad and Ganpat are son and father respectively, and claimed to be members of Other Backward Class category being 'Kulwant Wani'. 3. The Petitioner - Ganpat contested election of Village Panchayat, Tandulwadi from reserved category on the basis of the caste certificate issued to him showing that he belongs to sub-caste 'Kulwant Wani' which is included in the category of Other Backward Class. He was elected as a Sarpanch. His caste certificate was subjected to scrutiny by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, Pune. By the impugned order dated 23rd December, 2002 the Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste certificate of the Petitioner Ganpat and held that he belongs to only 'Wani' caste and not to sub-caste 'Kulwant Wani'. He is, therefore, not a member of Other Backward Class. He seeks to assail said impugned decision th...

Shri Shishir Vasant Sindekar Vs. Gokhale Education Society, Through th ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR230; 2006(3)BomCR538; 2006(3)MhLj761

V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. By this petition, the Petitioner impugns Government Resolution dated 19th July 2003 and 2nd August, 2003 and seeks grant of approval as a permanent full time Lecturer in Economics with all consequential benefits including time sale of pay.2. There is no dispute about the fact that the Petitioner is well qualified for appointment of Lecturer in Economics since he is M.A. 1st Class in Economics and also has passed SET examination. He was appointed as a full time Lecturer in Economics by Respondent No.1 in its College - Respondent No.2 as per appointment order dated 10th August, 1994 for the academic year 1994-95. The initial appointment was on temporary basis. In the next year he was again interviewed for the post against leave vacancy in the open category and was appointed as such. He continued to be appointed as Lecturer in Economics for each educational year till 1999. In the year 1999-2000 he was selected by duly constituted Selection Committee for the post of f...