Mumbai Court November 2007 Judgments

Voltas Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cwt

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)113ITD19(Mum.)

1. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 255 of the Income Tax Act, the Hon'ble President has constituted this Special Bench to decide upon the following issues: 1. Whether the value of the immovable asset owned by an assessee is includible in the net wealth of the owner/assessee or the lessee in terms of Section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth Tax Act read with Section 269UA(f) of the Income Tax Act where the term of the lease is (i) exceeding 12 months but less than 12 years; and/or (ii) exceeding 12 years 2. Whether the words in parenthesis in Section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth Tax Act "(excluding any rights by way of lease from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year)" in fact relate to the nature of the lease agreement, which will not qualify for applying the provisions of Section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth Tax Act 3. Whether lease agreement for a period for less than one year with an extension clause which is normally an agreement of leave and licence, will not be covered by ...

Mustang Mouldings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. Since common issues involved in all these appeals, the same are being disposed off by the common order for the sake of convenience. The only issue arising from these appeals for our consideration relates to the disallowance of director's training expenses pertaining to the years under consideration. At this stage, it may be stated that in appeals pertaining to assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-01, the assessee has also raised ground challenging the reopening of the assessment Under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), but no arguments have been advanced in respect of such ground. Therefore, we shall deal with the sole ground relating to disallowance of director's training expenses.2. The assessee is a private limited company promoted by the family members headed by Shri Kanshi Sitaram Deora. In the assessment year 2001-02 the assessee had debited an amount of Rs. 24,13,356/- under the head director's training expenses. In the course of assessment proceedings, the as...

Mr. Dipesh Ambaram Mesuria S/O Mr. Ambaram Karsanbhai and Mrs. Pushpaw ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR729; 2008(1)BomCR579; (2007)109BOMLR2767; 2008(1)MhLj274

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. The petitioners before this Court were the applicants before the Civil Judge Senior Division at Mapusa in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 132/2007/A(PORT). It is the case of the Petitioners both of whom are British Nationals and holding British passports that they desire to get married in the State of Goa and accordingly considering the laws in force in the State of Goa they were entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court considering Article 248 of the Code of Civil Registration. Their application was rejected by order dated 13/11/2007 on the ground that there was no impediment certificate obtained from the Embassy. It is this order which is the subject matter of the present petition. 3. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for the State of Goa. 4. Article 248 reads as under:The marriages celebrated in the State of India (Goa) between foreigners (foreign nationals) belonging to any Country for which there i...

First Global Stockbroking (P) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)115TTJ(Mum.)173

1. The assessee and Revenue are in cross appeals against the order of learned CIT(A), Central-II, Mumbai dt. 30th March, 2004 passed for the block period starting from 1st April, 1990 and ending on 23rd March, 2001. According to the assessee the assessment in this case is a classic example of fatuous exercise of unbridled power at the hand of executives to tame the media and its supporters, who otherwise have been insulated under the Constitution from interfering in their freedom at the hands of the executives. It was pointed out that assessment in this case is result of sting operation carried out by Tehalka.com of whom the assessee and other sister concerns were having shares at the relevant time, exhibiting irregularities in Defence Arms Deal. Before taking cognizance of the specific grievance and arguments of both the sides in seriatim let us take note of the brief facts.2. Both the learned Revenue authorities have narrated the facts in detail as their orders are running into 264 ...

Nestle India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)(126)ECC10

1. This stay application is directed against the confirmation of demand of Rs. 1,48,182/- and penalty of Rs. 15,000/-.The issue involved in this case is regarding the eligibility of the appellant to avail cenvat credit on the TR 6 challan issued during the period from 1.1.05 to 15.6.05, for availing services of Goods Transport Agency.2. The credit is sought to be denied to the appellant on the ground that TR 6 challan are not duty paying documents during the relevant period as Notification No.28/2005-CE(NT) was issued to consider TR 6 Challan as duty paying documents for availment of Cenvat Credit is w.e.f. 16.6.2005.3. Since the issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal, I grant the waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts involved and take up the appeal itself for disposal.4. After careful consideration for the facts of the case, I find that the appellant had availed cenvat credit of the service tax paid by them for the services availed from the...

Sunil Kumar Jain, Santhosh Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)(124)ECC211

1. The appellants M/s. Indoworth India Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'IIL' for short) are a 100% export oriented undertaking engaged in the manufacture of polywool yarn, wool tops, and this would include blended yarns. They were permitted to set up a captive power plant / captive generating sets on 01/11/1994. Accordingly, they had set up a power plant by installing three generating sets each capable of generating 4 MW of electricity. One sot was standby while two were being used to generate electricity required.2. As per the EOU scheme, for the raw material and the capital goods required by an EOU, Notification No. 1/95-CE was issued enabling an EOU to procure goods without payment of duty from the domestic tariff area, while notification 53/97-Cus entitled the EOU to import such goods without payment of duty. IIL had procured fuel (furnace oil mentioned in the Customs Notification table) for generation of Electricity.3. Consequent to certain intelligence gathered by the office...

Diambel N.V. Antwerk Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)(124)ECC201

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the Order-in-Original No. COMMR/MCT/ADJN/15/2005 dated 30.9.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Airport, Mumbai.2. The Commissioner, vide the impugned order, has ordered the absolute confiscation of rough diamonds weighing 21075.10 carats valued at Rs. 75,41,148/- (CIF) seized under panchanama dated 16.4.2001 and imported by Vijaybhav, 419, Pancharatna, Opera House, Mumbai under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962.4. The appellants i.e. M/s Diambel N.V. Antwerk are a proprietary firm registered in Belgium and are engaged in the business of trading in diamonds. On or about 27.2.2001, they had exported a consignment of rough diamonds from Belgium. These goods are submitted by them as were to be purchased by M/s Vijaybhav of Mumbai. The Commissioner passed an order dated 11.7.2003 in the case of M/s Vijaybhav and others ordering confiscation of the said consignment of rough diamonds. The appellants sought relief from the...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Dil Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)9STR411

1. The issue in dispute in this appeal is whether the respondents herein are eligible to avail credit of service tax of Rs. 6,47,567/- paid by their job worker, during the months of December 2004 and January 2005. According to the revenue, the availment of credit was in contravention of the provisions of Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for the reason that the job worker was not required to pay service tax as it was exempted vide Notification No. 8/2005-S.T., dated 1-3-2005.2. I have heard both sides. On merits the service tax paid by the job worker and the receipt of service in the factory of the respondents have not been questioned by the revenue. The Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the Tribunal's orders in Kerala State Electronic Corporation. v. CCE and CCE v. Trinetra Texturisers Pvt. Ltd. in concluding that the respondents were eligible to avail credit of service tax paid by job worker.3. Learned SDR has not brought any contrary decision to my notice. He is also not...

ito Vs. Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The Department has filed the present appeal against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 07.06.2004 on the following grounds: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of 'unabsorbed loss on capital expenditure on Scientific research & development of the demerged company and treating the same as accumulated loss/depreciation loss as per provisions of Section 32(2) and hence to be treated at par for the purpose as contemplated Under Section 71A(4) of the I-T Act 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that M/s. Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. Ltd. (de-merged company) had a Vegetable Seeds Division, which was separated by way of de-merger duly approved by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide its order dated 20.09.2000 w.e.f.01.04.2000. As a result of the aforesaid de-merger, the resulting company, i.e., M/s. Mahyco Vegetable Seeds Ltd. (assessee) was created.Before de-merger, there was unabsorbed depreciation amo...

Media Advertising and Marketing Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Commissioner of Central Excise has enhanced the penalty imposed upon the appellants herein from Rs. 1,000/- as imposed by the Assistant Commissioner, to Rs. 1,46,709/- (equal to the service tax demand) in terms of Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994.I find that the Commissioner has enhanced the penalty only on the ground that minimum penalty prescribed under Section 76 is of Rs.l00/-per day for delay in payment of Service tax. However, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held in the cases of CCE v. Mukul S.Patil in Central Excise Appeal No. 220 of 2006, CCE v. Vinay Bele & Associates in Central Excise Appeal No. 193 of 2006 and CCE v. D.R.Gade in Central Excise Appeal No. 213 of 2006, that there is a discretion in the quantum of penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Court has held that the authorities had a discretion to impose penalty lesser than that prescribed in Section 76. In the present case, the Commissioner has not given any reason for enhancement of ...