Mumbai Court September 2006 Judgments

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Shield Security Force

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)8STJ382CESTAT(Mum.)bai

(a) The respondents, M/s. Shield Security Forces, were rendering security services which came under tax net from 16-10-1998 onwards and they have not registered themselves and observed the statutory formalities required under Service Tax laws. (b) When the Central Excise authorities visited 21-11-2002 and commenced investigation it came to light that the respondents were aware, at least six months prior to the visit of the officers, that service tax was leviable but they have not chosen to fulfill their statutory obligations. (c) In addition, from 15-1-2002 they have been collecting service tax from their clients but failed to deposit the same with the Central Excise authorities. (d) The original adjudicating authority vide order dated 2-6-2004 confirmed demand of duty on Rs. 4,89,212/- and imposed penalties under various sections. In particular, he has imposed penalty of Rs. 4,89,212/- under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 and penalty of Rs. 4,89,212/- under Section 78 of the Fin...

Ram Steel Rolling and Forging Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal filed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. RJB/MII/126/2001, dated 30-5-2001 upholding the order of the original authority which itself is a de novo order No.44/2000-2001, dated 5-10-2000.3. The relevant facts in brief relating to the present proceedings are as follows: (a) Six show cause notices demanding differential duty relating to the period from June, 1985 to August, 1990 were issued during the year's 1988-91 and the total amount involved is Rs. 3,88,718.71. (b) The show cause notices were issued apparently on audit objections which were reportedly closed.4. The issue involved is that the appellant has claimed incurring burning loss of about 10% in respect of the raw materials used in the manufacturing of rerollable products by hot-rolling method. The appellant relies on guidelines of the Ministry of Steel and Heavy Industries issued under letter No. PS-55(6)62, dated 19-3-1963 which was reiterated by the Steel Ministry in the clarification in...

Shrikrishna Dattaram Parab Vs. Commissioner of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant herein is an employee of M/s. Samnan International Agency, CHA on whom Commissioner has imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 for allowing one Shri Girish Gopal Parab to use his CHA licence by giving the rubber stamp and thereby abetting the transportation of all the consignment of foreign currency found concealed in the consignment of fresh fruit exported by M/s. Roshan Enterprises.2. We have heard both sides. We note that although foreign currency was found concealed in the consignment of fruit and absolutely confiscated the order does not in any manner bring out how, the use of the rubber stamp of the CHA has resulted in abetment by the appellant of the transportation of such concealed foreign currency, particularly when the exporter as categorically stated that even Shri Girish Parab did not know about the concealment of the seized foreign currency. In other words, if the person, who misused the rubber stamp of the CHA himself ...

Dy. Cit Vs. Rajiv A. Shah

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. Since common issue is involved in all these appeals, the same are being disposed of by the common order for the sake of convenience.2. The only issue common to all the appeals is, whether the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is justified in holding that the transfer of interest in the property of shares had not been completed in the year under consideration.3. At the out set, it may be mentioned that the facts in all the appeals are, identical except the variance in the number of shares or the amount involving therein. All the assessees were shareholder of a company Vasant Sagar Properties Pvt. Ltd. (VSPPL). All of them had agreed to transfer their shares in that company to Veena Investment Ltd. (VIL), vide agreement dated 4-11-1999. Since facts are identical in all these appeals, it would be appropriate to refer to the detailed facts, as recorded by the lower authorities in the case of Mr. Anant G.Shah.4. VSPPL owned an immovable property somewhere near Churchgate, Mumbai.This prope...

Chohung Bank Vs. Deputy Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These appeals filed by the assessee against separate orders both dated 30-8-2002 of Commissioner (Appeals) for the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99. Ground raised common to both the appeals is as under The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the JCIT thereby rejecting the appellant's claim for the benefit of the nondiscrimination clause of the Indo-Korea Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "the DTAA") and taxing the appellant's income at the rate of 48 per cent instead of 35 per cent.2. At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the only issue in both the appeals is covered against the assessee by the decision dated 25-11-2005 of the ITAT 'D' Bench in ITA No. 4948/ Mum./05 for the assessment year 2002-03 in assessee's own case. However, he submitted that there have been several developments on the interpretation of the non-discrimination article of the Double Tax Avoidance...

Rajendra S/O Bhimrao Salunkhe Vs. Jalgaon Jilha Maratha Vidya Prasarak ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(2)ALLMR349

M.G. Gaikwad, J.1. Heard learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the respective parties.2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.3. By this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the order of transfer dated 29-04-2006 issued by the respondents No. 2 and 3, transferring the petitioner from respondent No. 3 college to the Arts, Commerce and Science College at Yawal run by the same Institution i.e. respondent No. 1.4. The petitioner has come with a case that he was appointed as Junior Clerk by order dated 30-11-1986 and since then, he is working with the respondent No. 3 college. He came to be confirmed by order dated 06-07-1987. On 16-08-1994, the petitioner had been elected as a Member of Local Managing Committee as per the provisions of Section 85 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. The said election of the petitioner came to be cancelled on technical gro...

Rama Subhash Naik Vs. Communicate of Usgao

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)ALLMR450; 2006(6)BomCR546

Kakade P.V., J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the District Judge, Panaji dated 5/10/2001, rejecting the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act.2. By notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 20/07/1992, the Government acquired the property belonging to the Communicate of Usgao for the purpose of construction of four rooms with compound wall for Government Primary School at Kasaile, Usgao, Ponda, Goa. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded an amount of Rs. 33,921/- on account of the said acquisition of the land. By an application dated 22/12/1993 filed before the Land Acquisition Officer, the applicant claimed that he was a tenant in respect of the acquired land and prayed that the compensation should be paid to him. As the dispute was raised by the appellant claiming to be deemed owner of the acquired land, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the dispute to the District Court for the apportionment of th...

Ajay Shetty Vs. Savio Faria and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: III(2007)BC213

N.A. Britto, J.1. These are complainant's appeals against the acquittal of' the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, ('Act' for short).2. The parties hereto are being referred to in the names as they appear in the cause title of the complaints.3. The complainant filed two complaints against the accused on 17.1.2003. Both the complaints were tried together and disposed of by a common Judgment dated 23.4.2004 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Margao. Hence, this common judgment disposing of both the appeals.4. The subject matter of both the complaints were two cheques issued by the accused to the complainant. There is no dispute that the complainant was supplying to the accused lubricants, auto polishes, etc. from August, 1999 to 20.1.2002 or thereabout The subject matter of one complaint was cheque No. 24192 dated 18.10.2002 for Rs. 15,200/- drawn by the accused on Ratnakar Bank Limited, and. the subject matter of the other complaint was cheque No. ...

Chistia Textiles, Iqbal Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(114)ECC105

1. These three appeals emanate from a common show cause notice, a common order-in-original and a common order-in-appeal of the Commissioner (Appeals) a) M/s Chistia Textiles, a 100% EOU was found to have removed clandestinely imported raw material from the bonded warehouse without payment of duty and the duty evaded amounting to Rs. 68,109/- was paid on 30.10.2001 b) Other appellant M/s Iqbal Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. was found to nave clandestinely removed domestically procured raw materials and finished excisable goods without payment of duty and the duty evaded amounting to Rs. 1,96,225/-was paid on 30.10.2001. c) Shri Azam Satar Motiwala, Director of M/s Iqbal Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. is the third appellant. d) A common show cause notice was issued on 28.3.03 against the three appellants herein demanding duty as mentioned above and proposing appropriation of amount already paid by them. The show cause notice proposed to impose penalty under Section 209(A) against Shri Azam Satar Motiwala. ...

Sanjay Founders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The relevant facts, in brief, relating to the proceedings are as follows: (a) The appellant have defaulted payment of duty for the months of November, 2002 and December, 2002 and accordingly the Assistant Commissioner issued an order forfeiting them of certain facilities as provided under the Rules prevalent up to 31-3-2003. (b) As per the Assistant Commissioner's order dated 15-1-2003, appellant were required to pay duty on consignment basis as against the normal practice of paying on monthly basis. (c) In addition, the Assistant Commissioner's order prohibited availing of Cenvat credit for paying duty. This order was valid for two months or till the payment of dues and duty defaulted along with interest is completed whichever is later. (d) The appellant was strictly following this order and paying duty only in PLA and that consignment were for goods cleared up to 31-3-2003 and they had accumulated Cenvat credit of Rs. 7,28,220/-. (e) On 1-4-2003 the law was changed which did not ...