Mumbai Court September 2006 Judgments

Pramod Shamrao Bhandarkar Vs. Presiding Officer, Additional School Tri ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR774

Gavai B.R., J.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. Shri C.N. Adgokar, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives notice on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 4 and Shri A.R. Patil, the learned Counsel waives notice on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 11th April, 2005, vide which, the learned Additional School Tribunal has decided the preliminary issues. By the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has held that though the School was a recognized school as defined under the MEPS Act, the appointment of the appellant was not made under Section 5 of MEPS Act and the Rules thereunder. The learned Tribunal also held that the approval granted by the Education Officer to the appointment of the petitioner is also not in accordance with law.3. Perusal of the impugned order would show that the learned Tribunal has held that the appointment of the petitioner was not in ac...

Purity Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(114)ECC111

2. The issue involved is classification of man made fabric-Polyester (not processed). Ld. Counsel for the appellant interalia made following submissions: 1. The issue in the present case relates to the classification of grey cotton fabrics, which were sold in rolls during the period December 1990 to 22^nd June 1995. The show cause notice was dated 30^th November 1995. The department contended that the said grey cotton fabrics falling under chapters 52, 54 and 55 were filter fabrics and therefore ought to be classified under heading 59.09 (upto 16^th March 1995) and heading 59.11 ( after 16^th March 1995). 2.1 The aforesaid issue is no long res integra. The Larger Bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Jyoti Overseas Ltd. v. CCE, Indore 2001 (130) E.L.T. 446 (Tri-LB) grey cotton fabric manufactured in running length and not subjected to further processing at the hads of the manufacturer and used by buyers for making tarpaulin, tents, jeep covers, holdalls and bags etc. is classi...

Brimco Plastic Machinery P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(110)ECC363

2. Notice dated 6-10-1986 was issued to the appellant proposing to recover full duty on the works contract orders of various projects for period from 1-3-1986 to 31-8-1986 which included recoveries made on account of installation erection and commission charges. The notice also proposed to deny S.S.I., exemption under Notification No.175/86-C.E. The Asstt. Collector adjudicated by his order dated 3-2-1987 confirmed the demand. The Commissioner allowed appeal by remand directing Asstt. Collector to place papers before Collector for suitable action according to law since portion of the demand was beyond limitation of its jurisdiction provided under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Collector of Central Excise adjudicated the matter on the basis of SCN dated 6-10-86 without issuing any fresh notice, vide Order dated 23-1-89 confirming the demand as arrived at by the Asstt. Collector. The Tribunal vide its Order No. 678/97-A dated 29-4-97 set aside the order and remanded th...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Cable Corporation of India

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Revenue is in appeal. The assessee has filed classification declarations effective 7-11-1998, 1-2-99 and 23-2-99 for their products Insulated Electric Wires and Cables of Aluminium Conductor and copper with PVC insulation of different sizes falling under CSH. 8544.90 claiming exemption under Notification No. 5/98 dated 9-6-1998 as amended as the said cables were to be intended for use as parts of Fly Ash Handling System. They also enclosed copy of certificates from Ministry of Environment of Forests. Classification as claimed were accepted and benefit of Notification as amended was not granted. Being aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order granted the benefit. Hence this appeal filed by Revenue.2. Considering that HSN prescribes, cables even if cut to size would remain classified as cables and in this case the cables have been cleared without cutting to size, classification can be upheld under Chapter 85.44 as cables, that such cables c...

German Remedies Ltd. and G.C. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The appellant are against the manufacture of varicus medicaments falling under chapter 30 of the Central Excise tariff Act, prior to 2.4.1998 as under: Prior to 2.4.98, the appellants were manufacturing enteric coated acetyl salicylic acid acid tablets I.P. 50 mg and put up these tablets in aluminium foil blister packing. The product name was mentioned as "enteric coated acetyl salicylic acid" and also trade mark/symbol registered by the appellants under Trade and Merchandise Mark Act, 1958 was indicated on the packing. Accordingly, such acetyl salicylic acid which was bearing the brand name/trade mark/symbol was declared as falling under sub-heading 3003.10 as patent and proprietary medicament. From 2.4.98 onwards the appellants also cleared acetyl salicylic acid by mentioning the name of the product and also indicating the abbreviation of the product as "ASA". Since in this type of packing there was no trade marks/symbol affixed, the applicants claimed this product as generic pro...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Hira Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. In the instant case, the respondents have cleared the packing material under provision of Sub-rule 4 of Rule 3 Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001/2002. The provision makes clear that when the inputs or capital goods on which Cenvat credit has been taken, are removed as such from the factory, the manufacturer of the final products shall pay an amount equal to the duty of excise which is leviable on such goods at the rate applicable to such goods on the date of such removal and on the value determined for such goods under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 or Section 4 of Section 4A of the Act as the case may be. The respondents have initially mentioned, "For transfer only (no sale)" on the relevant invoices. The Commissioner (Appeals), Mumbai had observed that it will not make any difference in view of the expression "removed, as such from the factory" used in the said Sub-rule, as removal can be for sale or for any other purpose including transfer. There is no dispute that the packing material wa...

thermax Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Mch)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The stay applications are being heard after granting early hearing in the matter as the appellants were served with Detention Notice by the Department. As the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai, had disposed of all these appeals without considering the installation certificate produced by the appellants on the ground that is belated one, therefore, Page 0193 it is felt proper to hear all the appeals and dispose of them simultaneously as there involved only one issue i.e.about non-production of installation certificate before the original adjudicating authority i.e. the Dy. Commissioner.3. M/s. Thermax Ltd., having their registered office at MIDC Industrial Area, Chinchwad, Pune, applied for Registration of Contract in terms of Project Import Regulations, 1986 for assessment of imported goods, viz.Carbon Steel Plates, Copper Tubes and Cupro Nickel tubes required for the manufacture of Vapour Absorption Heat Pump to be supplied to M/s.Vikram Woollens for the initial setting up...

Indian Hotel Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(204)ELT439Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Heard both sides the appellants are well-known hoteliers under the EPCG schemes which imported a consignment of Insulation Glasses and Aluminium Window Frames and filed Bill of Entry No. 11502 dated 27.12.96 seeking the clearance under EPCG licence the goods were claimed to be exempted under the benefit of notification 110/95 as 'Capital Grinds' for use in there premises (Hotels) for rendering hospitality services clearance was allowed provisionally on final assessment the less charge demand. The duty demand was issued to lower authority held that the goods are material required for construction of Building and are not in nature of capital goods as per the notification 110/95-cus dated 5.6.95 therefore, the concession of duty was not available.2. The Commissioner (Appeals) after hearing the appellants purchase manager came to a conclusion after examining EPCG scheme Notification No. 160/92, 161/92, 307/92, 103/92, 122/93, 123/93, 110/95, 111/95 and 130/95 covering the imports of ca...

Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Milton'S Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)106ITD478(Mum.)

1. The Department has filed the present Miscellaneous Application with the following submissions: 2. The Hon'ble ITAT, vide order ITA No. 3385/Mum/1999 dated 08.12.2003, has dismissed the appeal of the department. The Hon'ble ITAT has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shirke Construction Equipment Ltd., reported in 246 ITR 429. However, it is to be stated that the Hon'ble Supreme court has decided this issue in favour of the Department in the case of IPCA Laboratories Ltd. (266 ITR 521) overruling the bombay high court's decision of Shirke Construction Equipment Ltd. Therefore, the Hon'ble Tribunal would have followed the decision of IPCA Laboratories and would have decided the issue in favour of the Revenue instead of deciding the issue against the Revenue. The Hon'ble ITAT is, therefore, requested to recall the order passed on 08-12-2003 and decide the issue in favour of the department as the Hon'ble Sup...

ito Vs. Makrupa Chemicals (P) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)108ITD95(Mum.)

1. Since common issue is involved in all the departmental appeals, these appeals along with assessees appeal are being disposed of by the common order for the sake of convenience. The common issue arising in revenues appeal relates to the determination of annual letting value (ALV) under Section 23(1)(a) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act).2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as stated in the order for assessment year 1998-99 are these: The assessee was the owner of Flat No. 51, NCPA Society, Mumbai which was let out of Swiss bank Corporation on monthly rent of Rs. 50,000 P.M. In addition, the assessee had also received interest-free deposit of Rs. 3.75 crores from the bank. In the return, the assessee declared the ALV at Rs. 6,00,000. The assessing officer was of the view that ALV declared by assessee could not be accepted considering the facts (i) the property was situated in the prime location, (ii) that flat was purchased in May 1991 for Rs. 1,94,35,409 and as per price index, its v...