Mumbai Court May 2006 Judgments

Stone and Webster International Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of Rs. 69,70,343/- and penalty of equal amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and penalty of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 and penally of Rs. 100/- per day under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Vadodara. The demand has been confirmed on the ground that the applicants herein were rendering "consulting engineer's services" to IOCL, Gujarat.2. We have heard both sides and perused the records. Perusing the agreement between the applicant and IOCL, we find that a strong prima facie case for waiver has been made out in the light of the precedent decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai v. Reichie De Massari AG Switzerland 2006 (3) S.T.R. 590 (Tribunal) : and Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad , which have held that royalty payments for tra...

Gurera Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(108)ECC550

1. Demand of duty of Rs. 11,53,136/- (Rupees eleven lakhs fifty three thousand one hundred thirty six only) stands confirmed against M/s.Gurera Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., who are engaged in the processing of grey fabrics, received from merchant manufacturers. In addition penalties have been imposed upon both the appellants.2. The said demand stands confirmed against the appellant on the ground that the value of the grey fabrics received by them from merchant manufacturers was higher than the value declared by them in the grey bills. The proceedings were initiated as a result of search conducted at merchant manufacturer premises wherein the duplicate set of bills showing the higher value of the grey fabrics were recovered and seized.As a result of such recovery, statements of various merchant manufacturers were recorded. Statement of the appellants Managing Director Shri S.P. Arya as also of their Manager Shri M.K. Mishra were recorded.3. Based upon the above, proceedings were initiated aga...

Bombay Metal Works (P) Ltd. Vs. Tara Singh and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(33)PTC63(Bom)

Vijender Jain, A.C.J.1. The order challenged by the appellant in this appeal has been passed by a learned Single Judge on 29.03.2006 in CCP No. 122/2005. Vide impugned order the learned Single Judge has not only discharged the respondents from notice of contempt but has virtually reviewed the injunction order dated 12.02.2002.2. Vide impugned order dated 12.02.2002, the respondents were restrained from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in cycle parts under the impugned Ball Head Racers and Screw Head Racer or any other packaging which could be deceptively similar with or substantial reproduction of Ball Head Racers and Screw Head Racer of the appellant till the disposal of the suit being suit No. 127/2002. Despite said injunction order, respondent No. 1 continued manufacturing and selling goods packaged in injuncted cartons from 2002 onwards in flagrant violation of order dated 12.02.2002 as well as the orders dated 20.12.2002 and 21...

R.B.F. Ring Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These are three appeals since arise out of a common order they are being decided through a single order.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants have imported three consignments of the spares and stores for use on their jack-up drilling rig Central Excise Thornton while it was engaged in petroleum operation under contract with O.N.G.C. dated 25.03.2002. Under Sr. No.214 of Notification 21/2002-Cus, goods covered by List 12 imported for use in connection with such petroleum operations were completely exempted from customs duty subject to compliance with Condition No. 29 of the Notification. Condition No. 29 required the importer to produce, inter alia, an Essentiality Certificate (E.C.) FROM THE Director General of Hydrocarbons (D.G.H.) to the effect that the goods were required for the petroleum operations in question. The procedure followed by the D.G.H. was to issue E.C.s only if recommendatory letters were issued by the O.N.G.C. recommending their issuance. The spa...

Shantilal Ratanchand Lunkad and Vs. State Bank of India and ors.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

Reported in: IV(2006)BC175

1. Both these appeals can be disposed of by this common judgment as parties are common and issues arising for decision are also common. In both these appeals, an order dated 27.8.2003 passed by the Recovery Officer and confirmed by the DRT, Pune on 14.10.2003 allowing the application made under Section 25(b) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred as the RDB Act) are under challenge. By the impugned orders, the appellants have been ordered to be detained in civil prison for a period of six months, in the following circumstances.2. The respondent Bank had filed original applications against the appellants who are the borrowers and guarantors in respect of the loan granted by the respondent Bank. After the decree was passed against the appellants, the respondent Bank had made an application on 21.3.2003 under Section 25(b) of the RDB Act before the Recovery Officer for taking action against the appellants for nonpayment of the dec...

Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Sr-43

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)105ITD287(Mum.)

1. In these three appeals, one appeal in ITA No. 440/Bom/1991 is filed by the assessee. The other two appeals are filed by the Revenue. The common assessment year for all the three appeals is 1988-89. The appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.5523/Bom/1991 are cross appeals arising out of the assessment completed Under Section 143(3). These appeals are directed against the order of the CIT(A), Cent.II at Bombay dated 06-03-1991. The second appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No. ll45/Bom/1992 is directed against the order of rectification passed by the CIT(A) Under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. (i) The first ground raised by the assessee company is against the addition of Rs. 50,418 made by the assessing authority against the sundry credit balances written back in the accounts of the assessee. This issue was considered by ITAT, Mumbai Bench "D" in assessee's own case for the assessment year 1987-88 through their order dated 31-12-2002 pas...

Colorcraft Vs. the Ito

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)105ITD599(Mum.)

1. The assessee has preferred this appeal against the order of the Learned CIT Under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act).2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are these: The assessee filed its income tax return for the year under consideration disclosing total income at Rs. 7,45,780/- after claiming deduction Under Section 80HHC of the Act for Rs. 69,98,537/-. The original assessment Under Section 143(3) of the Act was made by the Assessing Officer on 31.3.2003, determining the total income at Rs. 7,88,376/-.Subsequently, the Learned CIT received a proposal from the Assessing Officer to the effect that the assessment was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue in as much as deduction Under Section 80HHC was allowed in excess. Further, no enquiry was carried out with reference to the genuineness of the loans as well as the transactions falling Under Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, the Learned CIT issued notice Under Section 263 on the following...

Priya Blue Industries Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus. (Appeals)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants herein had imported a Vessel M.V. Herbert for breaking up and filed Bill of Entry dated 17-7-96 for its clearance for home consumption. Provisional assessment was finalised by the Assistant Commissioner directing payment of duty on imports under appropriate heading of the Customs Tariff for ship's stores, fuel and oil on board the vessel, relying upon the CBE&C Circular No. 37/96-Cus., dated 3-7-96. This order was challenged by the importers, who sought classification of fuel and oil under Chapter Heading 89.08 of the Customs Tariff Act, on the ground that the fuel and oil were contained in the vessel's machinery and engine and hence, were required to be classified under Chapter Heading 89.08, as per paragraph (b) of the abovementioned circular, but challenge was unsuccessful. Hence this appeal.2. We have heard both sides. As per CBE&C Circular cited supra issued on the basis of the opinion of the World Customs Organisation at Brussels, only that fuel and oil...

Shabnam Synthetics and Shri Rafiq Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant is a 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of Texturised/Crimped Yarn & Knitted grey fabrics. Their factory (Unit No.3) was visited by the Central Excise (P) Officers on 24.6.03 stock of 20325.000 Kgs of imported Polyester Oriented Yarn (POY), in excess of the stock record in statutory records was found lying in Unit No. 3.Shri Rafiq Ibrahim Memon deposed that the said goods were purchased by him at the rate of Rs. 61 per kg. totally valued at Rs. 12,39,825/-, (Rupees twelve lakhs thirty nine thousand eight hundred twenty five only) through brokers, on cash basis, without any duty paying documents etc. The said goods were seized on the reasonable belief that the same were smuggled. Statement of Shri Memon were recorded wherein he admitted certain shortages of the final product in Unit No.1 and clarifying that the same were sold through brokers in the open market on cash basis without making entry in statutory records and without payment of Central Excise duty leviab...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Tata Ssl Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(191)ELT799Tri(Mum.)bai

1. In this case the Revenue has filed an appeal on a limited ground that the Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted an addendum to the grounds of appeal five months after the filing of appeal and since there is no 13/199/3 provision to file such type of addendum for additional issue beyond the prescribed appeal period under the provision of Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, such addendum could not have been entertained and the decision based on the same is required to be set aside.3. I have considered the submissions. I find that Section 35A which states as under: The Collector (Appeals) may, at the hearing of an appeal, allow an appellant to go into any ground of appeal not specified in the grounds of appeal, if the Collector (Appeals) is satisfied that the omission of that ground from the grounds of appeal was not wilful or unreasonable 4. Therefore, once this provision allows the Commissioner (Appeals) to entertain any fresh ground of appeal at the time of hearing, entertain...