Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)(147)ELT490Tri(Mum.)bai
2. This is an appeal filed by the department against the decision of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), Ahmedabad made in Order-in-Appeal No.581/97 made in filed No. (24-KDL) CUS/COMMR/(A)/AHD dated 8.10.1997 whereunder he had held that the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Custom, Kandla made in Order-in-Original No. KDL A.C./04/96 APPB. G.R.I dated 29.11.1996 confirming the duty short levied amounting to Rs.22,57,65,172/- demanded under show cause notice dated 30.10.1996 was wrong and allowed the appeal of the respondents.3. Respondents had been regularly importing heptene/nonene at Kandla.They were using these chemicals for manufacture of oxo chemicals at their factory. There was a dispute with regard to the classification as to whether heptene/nonene could be classified as "AIF/Motor Spirit" or "otherwise". According to the opinion of the Chief Chemist, C.R.C.L., New Delhi, if end use and flash point criteria are taken into consideration, then he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Ashok Jindal 1. The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order confirming the service tax demand of Rs.1,03,65,342/- along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rs.1,000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, under the category of ‘tour operators service’. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are providing following services against the remuneration received by them: a) Bus reservation agreement (BRA). Under this category they supply ordinary buses (not tourist vehicles) to other tour operators as well as commercial or non-commercial concerns on rent basis. b) Seat reservation agreement (SRA) c) Nashik Darshan (ND) d) Tour extension (TE) 3. The department is of the view that the activity undertaken by the appellant is covered under the category of tour operators service, which is liable to service tax with effect from 01/09/1997 and the appellant has not paid the service tax under the catego...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
P.R. Chandrasekharan 1. There are three appeals which are taken up for consideration together as the issues involved are common. 2. The appellant, M/s. Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. (Turf club, in short) is engaged in the activity of conducting horse racing. During the horse race, licensed book makers (bookies in short) accept bets from the public in the premises of the appellant and these bookies have been provided with stalls. The appellant charges fees from the bookies in two components, one is a fixed amount under the Head ‘Stall fees’ and the other is a variable amount under the Head ‘Commission’ which is collected as a percentage of the betting amounts collected by such bookies. The Turf Club conducts live telecast of the races which can be viewed at other racing clubs in India located in Bangalore, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Mysore, Delhi, Madras and Ooty. The technical support for the live telecast of horse race events held in Mumbai and Pune is provided b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Ashok Jindal 1. The assessee has filed the appeal No.ST/55/08 against the impugned order for confirming the demand of service tax for the period post 10/09/2004 and the revenue has filed the appeal No.ST/49/08 against the impugned order for dropping the demand of service tax for the period prior to 10/09/2004. 2. The assessee is engaged in the service of providing bus service to various companies for transporting their employees from the designated spots to the Company and back on a contract basis. The spots from which the employees were to be picked up and timing at which they are to be picked up and dropped was determined by the Companies who hired the buses and the appellant was transporting the employees as per the schedule given by the companies. This activity was considered as taxable service as defined under the category of ‘Tour Operators’ which was under vogue with effect from01/04/2000. The appellants were accordingly issued a show cause notice requiring them to p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
P.R. Chandrasekharan: These appeals are directed against Orders-in-Original CAO No. 53/2004/CAC/CC/RJM dated 31/05/2004 and No. 66/2004/CAC/CC /DJM dated 29/06/2004 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Adjudication Cell, New Customs House, Mumbai. Since a common issue is involved in both these cases, we take up them together for consideration and disposal. 2. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence received an intelligence that several consignments of bearings have been imported in the name of M/s Hiral Overseas, M/s Ankit International, M/s Nippon Bearings Pvt. Ltd., M/s M.M.Corporation, M/s Nippon Bearings (India), M/s S.N.M. Enterprises, M/s Devanti Overseas and a few other firms under the cover of duplicate Advance Licence No. 0111434 dated 22/11/99 issued in the name of M/s Amrit Laxmi Machine Works, Mumbai and transferred in the name of these firms. The duplicate licence was issued against the original licence No. 0314593 dated 28/11/96 which permitted duty free import of 248 p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
P.R. Chandrasekharan: The appeals and miscellaneous application are directed against order-in-original No. 28/07-08 dated 31/08/2007 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House, Nhava Sheva. 2. The facts arising for consideration in this case are as follows. The main appellant M/s Bharat Forge Ltd., Pune, who is a manufacturer of automobile parts, filed 137 Drawback Shipping Bills during the period 6-3-03 to 15-5-03 for export of goods described as,- (1) alloy steel forging, machined, manufactured through forging process; and (2) non-alloy steel forging, machined and manufactured through forging process, claiming drawback on these goods under sub-serial Nos.73.30 and 73.29 of the drawback schedule at the rates specified under notification No.33/02-Cus (NT) dated 29/05/2002 as amended and 26/2003 (Cus) (NT) dated 01/04/2003 under claim for all-industry rate of drawback under Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962. Detailed enquiries conducted with the exp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
P.R. Chandrasekharan The appeals and stay applications are directed against order-in-original No. 18/2010-COMMR dated 24.02.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Goa. 2. The relevant facts in the case are as follows. 2.1 The appellant M/s. Vasco Da Gama Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., had imported a consignment of 80 drums of 200 litres each of concentrate of Scotch whisky vide Bill of Entry No. 108861 dated 07.06.2007. The DRI, Goa Unit had intelligence that the importer had under-valued the consignment and, accordingly, initiated investigation into the matter. It was noticed that the importer had declared the goods as comprising of ‘Concentrates of Alchoholic Beverages, matured for more than three years’ and the total quantity of import was 16000 litres of Scotch Whisky at a unit price of US $ 1.00 per bulk litre (CIF), Goa. It was also revealed that they had imported another such consignment vide Bill of Entry No. 107071 dated 28.09.2006 wherein also a t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Sahab Singh These are two appeals. First appeal No. E/359/10 is filed by M/s Bhushan Steel Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as appellants) against the Order-in-Original No. 03-04/SR (03 to 04)COMMR/RGD/ 09-10 dated 08.12.2009 and second appeal No. E/369/11 is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. YDB/844/RGD/2010 dated 8.12.2010. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. For payment of the Central Excise duty, they are availing CENVAT Credit of duty paid on inputs, capital goods and input services under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On the scrutiny of ER-1 returns filed by the appellants with the Range Superintendent, it was observed that the appellants had manufactured Zinc Dross slabs/ingots and cleared the same without payment of duty. It was further observed from the scrutiny of the invoices under cover of which Zinc Dross slabs/ingots in question ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Sahab Singh This appeal has come up before this Bench for hearing and disposal pursuant to CESTAT Misc. Order No. M/434/CSTB/WZB/ 2009/C.II dated 7.10.2009. This appeal arises out of the Order-in-Original No.18/P-III/STC/COMMR/2007 dtd. 22/11/2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune.III. 2. Background of the case. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant, M/s. Suzlon Infrastructure Limited (in short M/s. SIL) formerly known as M/s. Suzlon Developers Limited is an associate company of M/s. Suzlon Energy Limited (in short M/s. SEL). It is engaged, interalia, in erection, commissioning or installation of windmills or wind turbine generators for its customers on contract basis. The Wind Turbine Generators (in short WTG) are manufactured and supplied by M/s. SEL. It had taken Service Tax Registration for installation and commissioning services on 18.7.2003 which was subsequently amended to endorse other services also. 2.1 Based on intelligence ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
P.R. Chandrasekharan: There are three appeals directed against Orders-in-Original No: 22/2008/C/ST/2008 dated 30/12/2008; 08/2009/ST/C dated 29/12/2009 and 12/ST/2010/C dated 29/10/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Nagpur. Since all these orders pertain to a common issue, they are taken together for consideration and disposal. 2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:- 2.1. Appeal No: ST/65/2009: The appellant, M/s. Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. (BHEL), Nagpur are registered with the Central Excise department for the purpose of service tax, inter alia, under the category of ‘Commercial and Industrial Construction’. The appellant had entered into contracts with their various clients for setting up of power plants at various sites which involved supply of goods as well as supply of services. The appellant were availing abatement of 67% of the total contract value and paying service tax only on 33% of the contract value in terms of Notification No....
Tag this Judgment!