Mumbai Court September 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.
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-v Vs. Shakti Insulated Wire ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-2010
Per: Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President 1. Heard both sides. 2. The Ld. JCDR submits that the appeal filed by the present respondent against the confirmed demand is allowed by the Tribunal vide order No.A/795/WZB/2005/C-III dated 08/06/2005 and the contention is that the final order dated 08/06/2005 be recalled and the matter should be heard together. We find that the appeal filed by the present respondent was heard by the Tribunal in the presence of Revenue and at that time Revenue has not raised any objection for hearing of the appeal. Further, we find that the order was passed in the year 2005 and Revenue had not filed any application for re-calling the order. We find no merit in the prayer of the Revenue for re-calling of the order dated 08/06/2005. 3. Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner, whereby the adjudicating authority has held that the respondents are liable to reverse only the credit availed in respect of the inputs used for the manufac...
Polylink Polymers (India) Ltd., Vs. the Commissioner of Customs (impor ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-2010
Per: Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President 1. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the appellant in spite of notice. Further, we find that on the earlier occasion also when the appeals were listed for hearing the appellants were unrepresented. Hence, the appeals are dismissed for non-prosecution....
Crompton Greaves Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-2010
Per: Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President 1. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the appellant in spite of notice. On the last date of hearing, the case was adjourned at the request of the appellants, Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution....
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad Vs. Midas Care Pharmace ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-2010
Per: Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President 1. Heard both sides. 2. Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the refund claim filed by the respondent. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order held that as the MRP (Maximum Retail Price) during the period in dispute the goods remains the same therefore, it is presumed that the burden of duty has not been passed on. The Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Metro Tyres Ltd., reported in 1996 (82) ELT 95 (T) and other decisions in this regard. 3. The contention of the Revenue is that the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order is that the MRP of the goods remains the same when the duty is paid and when the goods are cleared at Nil rate of duty, therefore, the burden of duty has not been passed on in contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE...
Vinay S/O.Ambadas Kaikini and anr Vs. the Court Receiver,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-2010
1. Heard Mr.K.K.V.Kurup, learned counsel for the Appellants and Mr.Y.S.Bhate, learned counsel for the Respondent at length. Admit. Mr.Bhate waives service on behalf of the Respondent. By consent of the parties, appeal is taken up for final hearing forthwith.2. This appeal is preferred by the original Defendants challenging the judgment and decree dated 22nd February, 2010 passed by learned Judge of the Bombay City Civil Court at Bombay in S.C.Suit No.1154 of 2000. By that judgment, the learned trial Judge decreed the suit instituted by Respondent in terms of prayer clause (a). Appellants shall hereinafter be referred as original Defendants and Respondent shall hereinafter be referred as plaintiff. The facts giving rise to the filing of the present appeal are as under:-3. Plaintiff instituted suit for declaration that Defendants are tresspassers qua the premises bearing Room No.4 in Purshottam Building No.B, situate at Purchottam Tribhuwandas Road, Mumbai 400 004 (for short the suit pre...
M/S. Big Apple Computer Vs. Commissioner of Customs(import), Mumbai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-2010
Per : Ashok Jindal This matter was listed for hearing today when none appeared for the applicant despite notice. It is also noticed from the records that this matter was listed before this Tribunal on 05.07.10, 19.07.10, 06.08.10 and on today. All the times no one represented the appellant nor any request for adjournment was received except for 05.07.10, the date of Bharat Bandh. It is, therefore, appears that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the matter and accordingly, I dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. Application for Condonation of Delay is also disposed of in the above term....
Emirates Shipping Agencies (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Custo ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-2010
Per : Ashok Jindal The appellant (shipping line) has filed this appeal against the imposition of penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 for loading the consignment into the vessel without LEO and the shipping bill. None appeared on behalf of the appellant despite notice nor any request for adjournment received. The matter was taken up for final disposal on merits. 2. Considering the fact that the appellant has loaded the container into the vessel without obtaining LEO and the shipping bill which is violation of Customs law, the appellants are liable for penal action. In a similar facts, the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in Customs Appeal No. 57 of 2009 dated 15th July, 2009 in the case of CSAV Group Agencies (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and ors. has considered the case as a technical breach by the appellants and reduced the penalty to 40%. 3. Following the same ratio, in this case also the appellants are liable for penal action and the penalty is reduced to 40...
Sonalaxmi Machhimar Sahakari Soc. Ltd., and ors. Vs.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-2010
1. The action of the Thane Municipal Corporation in giving the cleaning, fishing and boating contract to respondent No.6 without giving any public advertisement or without inviting tenders is challenged by the petitioner by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioner is a Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and Rules framed thereunder. Initially the petitioner was given the contract of boating in Masunda lake situate in the heart of the Thane city. When the lease given to the present petitioner was about to expire and during the existence of the aforesaid lease, the Municipal Corporation of Thane executed a lease agreement of fishing , cleaning and boating with respondent No.6. The said lease agreement is executed for a period of 25 years . By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the lease agreement dated 19th September, 2001 may be declared as illegal and uncons...
Vodafone International Holdings B.V. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Overruled
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-2010
Shares of several operating companies were transferred by diverse holding companies to HMTL, in consideration for which HMTL issued its own shares to these holding companies. Framework Agreements. The transfer of the CGP share resulted in a transfer of 66.9848% interest in HEL. For income to arise or accrue in India, there must be a right to receive income in India. The share of CGP is situated outside India. (b) The transaction was consummated outside India; (c) The transaction related to transfer of a share outside India, contracted to be delivered outside India and the transfer of which was registered outside India. HTIL held its direct equity interest in HEL amounting to 42.34% through eight Mauritian companies. HTIL's indirect subsidiary, CGPM held 37.25% equity interest in TII, an Indian company which in turn, held a 12.96% equity interest in HEL. The entire income which is derived by HTIL had its source in India and arose or accrued in India. HTIL could transfer its controlling ...
M/S. Ina Bearings (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (impor ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-2010
Per : Ashok Jindal The appellant has filed this appeal against the denial of refund of excess amount paid by them at the time of assessment of their Bill of Entry due to clerical mistake. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed a Bill of Entry on 19.02.2007 for clearance of cabinet parts of racks of server for electric control and paid duty on 20.02.2007. Thereafter, it was noticed that some error has been committed at their end as they have taken the price indicated in their invoice as per unit price, in fact it was the value of the whole goods purchased. Accordingly, revised invoice procured from one of the supplier and an application for re-assessment was filed in pursuing to their clerical mistake while calculating the amount payable at the time of filing the original Bill of Entry. Accordingly, re-assessment was done and actual duty payable was worked out to Rs.1,47,390/- on 7.6.07. Thereafter, the appellant filed a refund claim of the excess amount of Rs. 7,85,820/...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »