Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2007)11STJ28CESTAT(Mum.)bai
..... the appellants took a categorical stand before the lower authorities that the services rendered by them for repairing of the vessels, under a contract with their customers cannot be treated as "port services" and hence are not liable to service tax.however, the authorities below by referring to the board's circular no.67/16/2003-st, dt.11.10.2003 and also by referring to the various ..... appellant is admittedly a partnership firm carrying on a business of all types of marine repairs for which purpose they are given a repair contract involving supply of material, steel removal job, fabrication, refitting, and overhauling of machinery, from the principle contractor like mazagaon docks ltd ..... this fact leads us to hold that such contract services of repair of vessel cannot be held to be "port ..... period 16.07.2001 to 30.09.2003, the appellants did such job under contract with their customers for a value of rs. ..... informed that such consideration depends upon the contract arrived at after much negotiations. ..... they also receive direct contract of repair from foreign ship owners or through their ..... the consideration for repairing of the vessel has been given to the: appellants not in terms of the tariff rates, but the same are result of contract entered by way of negotiations. ..... such person for the loss destruction or deterioration of goods of which he has taken charge shall, subject to the other provisions of this act, be that of a bailee under section 151, 152 and 161 of the indian contract act, 1872. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(158)ELT375Tri(Mum.)bai
1. this is an application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of rs. 50,000/- imposed upon the applicants herein on the ground inter alia that the goods in question were liable to confiscation as the applicants had not disclosed to the department the product in dispute viz. egg free cake mix was being sold in unit containers for the purpose of determination of classification under cet sub-heading 1901.19 as contrasted with the claim of the appellants that the goods fall for classification under cet 1905.90 attracting nil rate of duty.2. we have heard both sides. we note that in the classification declaration, the assessees have shown the unit of assessment and therefore, prima facie it cannot be said that there was no disclosure to the department of the fact of the product being sold in the containers. the other plea including the plea that a penalty of rs. 50,000/- was already imposed in respect of the same goods, and therefore, there is no warrant for imposition of fresh penalty will be considered when the appeal is taken up for hearing. in view of the prima facie finding that the classification declaration shows that the product was being sold in the unit containers, we are of the view that a strong prima facie case for waiver has been made out and hence dispense with the pre-deposit of the penalty and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(161)ELT832Tri(Mum.)bai
..... he relied upon certain instructions issued by the board which were passed subsequent to the amendment whereby the prices charged at the depots were made the basis of assessment provided the goods were deposited in such depots without payment of duty. ..... he observed that the show cause notice did not allege that such sales on contract basis were not genuine. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2001)(76)ECC472
..... from the case records, it is seen that the ammonium sulphate, which arises as a by product is sold as a fertilizer at a contracted price of rs 3.15 per kg and is a marketable goods hence the provisions as stipulated under rule 57cc are applicable. ..... the amount required to be deposited in terms of rule 57cc (i) has nothing to do with that duty.it has no relation to the value under section 4 of goods or for the credit taken on them. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2005)(101)ECC200
..... a reputed establishment by itself and having experience for several years in central excise matters, the assessee should have the wisdom of assuring that the raw materials received by them were of correct specification they contracted for. .....
Tag this Judgment!