Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: customs tariff amendment act 2003 chapter x cereals Court: mumbai Page 23 of about 230 results (1.041 seconds)

Asarwa Mills and ors. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(94)ECC261

..... issued to the assessee and directed that the goods shall henceforth be classified under sub-heading 2107.99 of the central excise tariff, was applied to the case. apart from relying on cas-4 provisions, learned counsel also cited case law in support of their contention ..... be finalised accordingly." ld. counsel countered this argument of the dr on the strength of certain decisions of the tribunal relating to customs valuation. reliance was also placed on final order no.166/2003-nb(a) dated 25.3.2003 ..... industries that proformae c, f and m under the cost accounting records (cotton textile) rules 1977 (as amended) clearly indicated that bonus, gratuity and interest were not elements of cost of production. annexures-iv, vi, ..... accountants. the costing-related accounts of the assessees were audited by the respective cost accountants as per section 233b of the companies act, 1956. from the cost audit reports ("car", for short), rt-12 returns and other records, it appeared to the department that the .....

Kalyani Steels Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. By a common order no 8/2000 dated 5.5.2000 the Commissioner of Central Excise Belgaum denied an amount of Rs. 84,64,164 availed as Modvat Credit on capital goods, by the assessee company, appellant in E/1975/00 (herein after referred to a KFIL for short) imposed a penalty of equivalent amount under Rule 57 U(6) with interest under Rule 57U(8) and a penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs under Rule 173Q(1) ordered the confiscation of an EOT Crane ladles, DG sets, equipments installed in MRSS (short for Main Recurring Sub Station) and gave an offer to KFIL to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 75 lakhs confiscation of building, machinery etc under Rule 173Q(2) belonging to KFIL was ordered and allowed to be redeemed on fine of Rs. 20 Lakhs. Penalties under Rule 209 A of Rs. 2 lakh each was imposed on the other employees of KFIL who are appellants herein. Hence these appeals no E/1975/2000, E/2260/2000, E/2238/2000, E/2239/2000, E/2240/2000.2. Vide Commissioner order no 7/2000 dated 12.04.200...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2006)(107)ECC603

1. These are two appeals filed by the department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dropping the proceedings against the respondents M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd. in the first case and M/s Fetrofac International Ltd. in the second case. Since the issue involved in both the appeals is common, they are being decided through a common order.2. In the first case, the respondent M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd. were awarded a contract for setting up of (1) Solvent - Dewaxing/De-Oiling Uni 9SDU) and (2) Hydrotreater, Amine Treating Unit, Control Room pad Sub-station at Digboi Refinery vide contract No. (1) PROJ/SDU/DR/53 of 1999-2000 and (2) PROJ/HDT/DR/54 of 1999-2000 which includes the work of "Residual Process Design, Detailed Engineering, Procurement, Supply, Construction, Erection, Installation. Testing Commissioning and Mechanical Guarantee of the said Units. The Lump sum Price offered by the said assessee against the work of Turn Key Project for the said units of Digboi Refine...

Rattan India Power Limited Vs. The State of Maharashtra through the Ch ...

Court : Mumbai Nagpur

..... held that: it [the insurance company] requires (sic) to satisfy the requirement of reasonableness and fairness while dealing with the customers. even in an area of contractual relations, the state and its instrumentalities are enjoined with the obligations to act with fairness and in doing so, can take into consideration only the relevant materials. they must not take ..... considered as adequate irrigation restoration charges. in paragraph no.11, the said division bench also takes note of the fact that the petitioner is paying block water tariff at a higher rate of rs. 32 per 10000 liters. paragraph no. 14 of the said order shows that amount of rs. 10 crores was deposited on 21 ..... dated 21.02.2004 with respect to the water allocated to the petitioner, based on deficit in water for irrigation as per the latest report. the prayers have been amended and a prayer to restrain the respondents from recovering interest as per demand letters dated 17.01.2013 and 04.02.2013 has been added. hiwever, no .....

M/s Hotel Shobha, through Its Proprietor: Shri Atul Virendrakumar Jais ...

Court : Mumbai Nagpur

S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1 Both appeals arise out of the common judgment and order, therefore, they were heard together and can be disposed of by common judgment. 2 These appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent are directed against the judgment and order dated 27.06.2012 of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.3440/2011. That Writ Petition was filed by the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 in LPA No.278/2012, who are original Petitioners and they impugned the order passed by the Respondent No.1 State Government dated 30.10.2010 in Revision Application by which the Revisional Authority has set aside the orders dated 20.02.2010 and 22.06.2010 of the Collector, Nagpur and the Commissioner, State Excise respectively. The Revision Application before the Minister was filed by the Appellant before us in LPA No.278/2012 as its application seeking FLIII licence was rejected. 3 The facts leading to the filing of these Appeals are that the Appellant in LPA No.278/2012 made an application for gran...

Noble Drugs Ltd.,shri D.D. Oke and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... /-.6. the applicants submit that rule 8(a)(2) of the central excise rules, 2001 has undergone a change with effect from 01.03.2003. according to the said amendment, forfeiture of two months period has been done away with and instead payment through cenvat credit account has been continued, but penalty by way of heavy interest ..... (account current). they were issued two show cause notices dated 16.04.2003 and 09.07.2003. on adjudication, the asst. commissioner of central excise & customs, nashik, by his order-in-original dated 13.11.2003 confirmed the duty demand of rs. 7,29,478/-and 7,39,000/-, imposed equal penalty ..... medicines falling under chapter 30 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. the applicants are availing cenvat credit and paying duty on monthly basis.due to financial crises, there was a delay in payment of duty on due date during the period august 2001, november 2001 and december 2001.the dy. commissioner, central excise & customs, division-ii, nashik, vide his order dated .....

Ms. Komal Manu Sahani Vs. Pure Drinks Ltd. and Another

Court : Mumbai

1. The short question that arises for consideration of the Court in this Petition is whether on the death of accused, the proceedings under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 abate, or, the same can be continued by substituting him with his heirs? 2. The brief facts leading to the question are that the Petitioner is the daughter of one Mrs. Ranjit Charles Singh, the accused in C.C. No.353/SS/2011 filed by Respondent No.1/company under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, (for short the Act), for continued unauthorized occupation of the residential premises owned by the company. The original accused expired on 30th January, 2012, after issuance of process by the Court against her. A few days prior to her death, the petitioner herein, her married daughter, came to the disputed premises for the purpose of looking after her. The petitioner, however, continued to occupy the premises even after the death of the mother. Therefore, on 2nd May, 2012, the company filed application at Exhi...

Proctor and Gamble and Shri Ashish Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(190)ELT490Tri(Mum.)bai

..... limited) (hereinafter referred to as pgil) are inter alia engaged in the manufacture of ariel microsystems detergent powder falling under chapter 34 of the central excise tariff act, 1985, the appellants along with their manager. thse appeals are being disposed by this common order.1.2 on 19.11.93 pgil divested ..... appellants case since it prescribes that the manufacturers price when sales are at arms length or all sales made to one customer cannot be rejected (see para 6,5, & 2 & 7 of the decision) the price in that case was rejected by the tribunal by relying on specific clause of the agreement that sales promotion of the product ..... pilky's case. moreove, the pilky's case was for clearance in 1969 & price under section 4(4)(c) when 'related person' concept was absent, introduced only by amendment of section 4 on 1.10.1975.b) the reliance on the decision of this tribunal in case of killick slotted angles limited (1988 (35) elt 647 would help the .....

Bhikusa Papers Pvt. Ltd. and B.V. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... basis.3. m/s bhikusa papers pvt. ltd, nasik, is engaged in the manufacture of wrapping and packaging paper falling under chapter heading 48 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. they are also manufacturing such paper on job work basis as per notification no 83/94 dated 11.4.94 as amended.4. show cause notice dated 27.03.2003 was issued as to why central excise duty amounting rs. 5057446/- should not be demanded and recovered under ..... and wrongly claiming exemption under notification no 83/94 dated 11.04.94.5. the impugned order confirmed the demand for rs. 40,55,519 under section 11a(2) of the central excise act, 6. it is contended that assistant collector, central excise customs, nasik, in his order-in-original dated 11.6.98 extended the benefit of notification 83/94 dated 11.4.94, which became final, as such confirmation of demand for the period 1997-98 .....

Laxmi Board and Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)(114)ECC63

2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Waste paper based kraft paper and Baggasse of Kraft paper, falling under Chapter 48 of the schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act. They claimed exemption under Notification No. 48/91-CE dated 25.07.1991 for the period June, 1992 to January, 1994 and on according approvals, they effected clearances at NIL rate of duty. The officers concerned being under the belief that the appellants have wrongly availed exemption under said notification, have searched the premises of the appellants on 12.12.1996 and during the course of investigation, the appellants were directed to pay amount of Rs. 10,42,008/- and accordingly they have deposited the sum on 01.01.1997. A Show Cause Notice dated 26.06.1997 proposing to recover the duty amount amongst other proposals and also sought to appropriate the amount of Rs. 10.42 Lakhs paid by them towards duty liability. The notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III, vide his Ord...