Mumbai Court January 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S. Telco Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise, Pune I
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-2010
Per : Ashok Jindal The short issue involved in this case is that whether the appellants are entitled to classify the vehicle manufactured by them viz. Tata Sumo Ambulance under CET Heading 8703.10 or not. The period in dispute is from 01.06.2000 to 31.12.2000. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The learned Advocate for the appellants submits that for the earlier period this Tribunal has allowed their appeal holding that the impugned vehicle is classifiable under Sub Heading 8702.10 of Central Excise Tariff Act. 4. We have gone through the decision of the Tribunal in the appellant s own case as reported in 2006 (206) ELT 873 (Tri. Mumbai) which squarely covers the issue involved in this case. Accordingly, we hold that the impugned vehicle is classifiable under Sub Heading 8702.10 of Central Excise Tariff Act. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed....
Shree Venkatesh Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Custom ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko, Member (J), The appellant-company was holding CHA licence No.11/560 issued to them under the provisions of the Customs House Agents Regulations, 1984. This licence was suspended by the Commissioner of Customs as per orders dated 19.3.2008 under Regulation No.20(2) of the Customs House Licensing Regulations, 2004 on certain grounds. The suspension orders were challenged by the CHA in appeals No. C/313 and 314/08 before this Tribunal and, by interim orders dated 13.5.2008, this Tribunal directed the department to complete the inquiry proceedings against the CHA within three months (The said appeals were dismissed in due course vide order No. A/539 and 540/08 dated 01/10/2008). Accordingly, the Commissioner issued show-cause notices to the appellant under Regulation 22(1) of the CHALR 2004. One of these notices was issued on 9.6.2008 and the other on 10.6.2008. Six charges were raised against the CHA in each of these notices. An Assistant Commissioner of Customs was appo...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad Vs. M/S Kopargaow Ssk Ltd. ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-2010
Per : Shri. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) These appeals are filed by the Revenue. The facts are that the respondents are the manufacturer of rectified spirit which falls under the sub heading 2204.10 and chargeable to nil rate of duty. The respondents further convert the portion of the rectified spirit into Alcohol / Denatured spirit and clear the same on appropriate duty under Sub Heading 2204.10. The respondents are also transfers the rectified spirit to their country liquor manufacturing unit. The respondents are availing modvat credit on common input i.e. molasses used in manufacture of denatured spirit (dutiable final product as well as rectified spirit exempted final product) the respondents have been paying an amount of 8% on the value of second category i.e. rectified spirit consumed in case of captive consumption within the factory. The respondents reversed the amount of 8% on the value of rectified spirit on the basis of provisions contained in Rule 57 AD(2)(b) of Central E...
M/S. Supreme Petrochem Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-2010
Per : Shri. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) This appeal is filed by the appellants on the following grounds:- “1. Central Excise duty amounting to Rs.1,81,917/- in respect of raw materials found short should not be demanded and recovered and the amount already paid by them should not be appropriated. 2. Central Excise duty amounting to Rs.1,454/- in respect of finished goods found short should not be demanded and recovered and the amount already paid by them should not be appropriated and 3. Central Excise duty amounting to Rs.61,875/- payable on samples dawn during the period 01-06-1995 to 30-11-1997 for quality control tests should not be demanded and recovered from them.” 2.1 Shri. M.H. Patil, learned Advocate for the appellant submits that with regard to the issue No.1 and 2 where the shortage of raw materials was found and shortage of finished goods were found and the appellants have submitted their explanation along with documentary evidence which were not considered ...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane Ii Vs. M/S. Durian Industries Lt ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-12-2010
Per : B.S.V. Murthy Revenue has filed these two appeals against two orders of Commissioner vide Orders-in-Original No. 33/NRN/TH-II/2003 dated 17.12.2003 and 34/NRN/TH-II/2003 dated 18.12.2003. The first order No. 33 was passed in the case of M/s. Durian Industries Ltd. and the second order was passed in the case of M/s. Palghar Plywood Products (P) Ltd. In both the orders the issue involved was that the respondents had under valued Decorative plywood by mis-declaring the same as Repressed plywood and it was also held that there was clandestine removal of decorative plywood. In the case of Palghar Plywood Products (P) Ltd. there was also another issue viz. that the respondent was not eligible for small scale exemption in view of the fact that they had cleared Durian brand decorative plywood. The Commissioner dropped the issue relating to under-valuation against both the respondents. However, she upheld the charges of clandestine removal. The appeals filed by the parties including the t...
Vital Health Care Pvt Ltd., Vs. the Commissioner of Customs (General), ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-11-2010
Per: Shri. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) 1. Vide Order No.S/476/CSTB/WZB/2009/C-II dated 07/12/2009, the applicant was directed to deposit the balance amount (after availing benefit of waiver of pre-deposit the entire amount of duty and to report compliance on 11/01/2010. 2. When the matter was called today for ascertaining compliance with the above order, none appeared for the appellant nor is there any compliance report on record. As such, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of the statutory requirements of the provisions of Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962....
Bhagyanagar India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-11-2010
The appellants were directed to pre-deposit the amounts refunded to them, within eight weeks and report compliance on 31.8.2009 vide order No. S/209-211/WZB/2009/SMB/C-IV dated 24.6.2009. Instead of depositing the amounts, they filed modification applications, which were dismissed on merits vide order No. M/201-203/WZB/2009/SMB/C-IV dated 26.10.2009, wherein the parties were also directed to comply with the direction for pre-deposit within eight weeks and report compliance on 28.12.2009. It was also made clear in the order dated 26.10.2009 that non-compliance would result in dismissal of the appeals without any further notice. The matter has ultimately arisen for report of compliance today. There is no representation for the appellants, nor any request of theirs for further extension of time for making pre-deposits. There is no evidence of pre-deposit either. In the circumstances, the three appeals are dismissed for non-compliance with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act....
The Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Mumbai Vs. Imtiyaz Pothiawala and ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-11-2010
Per: B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical) 1. This is a case of seizure of 575 gold bars. In the process of seizure of gold bars, the departmental officer had also seized three vehicles in addition to the vehicle, which had been used for transporting 575 gold bars. Three vehicles were viz., one Mahindra and Mahindra Commander vehicle, one Mahindra and Mahindra Armada vehicle and one Maruti 800 Car. The vehicles were seized since they were found parked in the premises along with the other vehicle, which had been used for transportation of gold bars. Further, the officers also found that all the three vehicles had special cavities made for the purpose of transportation on smuggled goods. Further, the officers also seized Indian currency of Rs.2.5 lakhs from one Shri.Suresh Bhanji Patel. 2. In the impugned order, the Commissioner had observed in paragraph 154 that the currency was brought to the premises during the time of visit of the officers was liable to confiscation under Section 121 of...
iccon Oil and Specialities Ltd. a Company Incorporated Under the Provi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2010
Ferdino I. Rebello, J.1. The petitioners are before this Court against the order dated 29th January, 2008 whereby the Appeal preferred by the petitioners herein has been disposed off on the ground that it is hopelessly barred by limitation.2. The order by B.I.F.R. is dated 21st December, 2005. Considering Section 25 of the Act the limitation to prefer an Appeal is within 45 days from the date on which a copy of the order is issued to the party who prefers an Appeal.3. On behalf of the petitioners learned Counsel places reliance on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Paam Pharmaceutical (Delhi) Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors. Section 25 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 which hereinafter referred to as the Act reads as under:25. Appeal.-- (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Board made under this Act may, within forty-five days from the date on which a copy of the order is issued to him, prefer an appeal to the Appellate Authority;Pro...
In Re: Europlast India Ltd. a Company Incorporated Under Companies Act ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-07-2010
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This common order will dispose of all the pending applications, show cause notices and Chairman' reports.2. The background in which the present proceedings have emanated can be briefly mentioned as follows: The unsecured creditors of M/s. Europlast India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as `E' for the sake of brevity) passed resolution on 14th October, 2000 which read thus:.Resolved that subject to floor price for sale of the assets of the `E' company i.e. Land and factory building at Khopoli is fixed at Rs. 3.60 Crores. Creditors are voting for the following Scheme.The amount will be paid to the creditors through the Hon'ble Court within three months from the date of receipt of the entire consideration in proportionate after incorporating the additional names of creditors, if any, not later than three months from today after proper verification from the Books of Accounts of the Applicant company and rest of the claim is given up by the creditors.Provided that the Sa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »