Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: merchant shipping amendment act 2002 section 2 substitution of new section for section 76 Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat mumbai Page 1 of about 3 results (0.454 seconds)

Megabytes International Pte. Vs. Commr. of Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(187)ELT89Tri(Mum.)bai

..... l showing "megabyte international pte. ltd., 60 albert street, 10-09, singapore - 189 969" as ntg. besides pis collect all charges from these amendment at your end" (ii) the steamer agents, m/s. merchant shipping services pvt. ltd. issued a letter dated 16th august, 2002 to the manager, punjab con-ware, jawaharlal nehru port trust (custodians) which is reproduced ..... mention that the indian importer had, earlier, imported other consignment through m/s. megabytes international pte. ltd., singapore where the indenter one mr. om prakash berlia had acted as the guarantor as well, and possibly the same may be the case here too. i am, therefore, inclined to hold that the title of the goods lies ..... that the goods had acquired character of warehoused goods and export of such goods may not be possible except under the provisions of section 69 of the customs act, 1962. he has also noted the serious objection of the importers to the re-export request, under cover of their letter dated 24-11-2003. he .....

Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. Vs. Cce and C

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(89)ECC173

..... .3. it is contended by the appellant that engines were in fact supplied for fitment of ship. counsel for the appellant relies upon the definition contained in section 283a of the merchant shipping act, of a new ship or new vessel as a "ship or vessel whose keel is laid or which is at a similar stage of construction on or ..... date as defined in sub-section (2)". this section comes in part x of the act relating to safety and is only applicable to that part. further, the provisions of the merchant shipping act, which has been enacted to regulate matters relating to shipping, cannot be made use of in construing the terms of an exemption notification issued under section ..... any duty, claiming the benefit of the exemption contained in entry 3 of the table to the notification 64/95 as amended. this entry exempts from duty goods supplied as stores for consumption on board ships of the indian navy or coast guard. notice issued to the appellant demanded duty and proposed penalty on the ground that .....

Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)(148)ELT1006Tri(Mum.)bai

..... and imposed penalty.3. it is contended by the appellant that engines were in act supplied for fitment of ship. counsel for the appellant relies upon the definition contained in section 283a of the merchant shipping act, 19 of a new ship or new vessel as a "ship or vessel whose keel is laid or which is at a similar stage of ..... date as defined in sub-section (2)". this section comes in part x of the act relating to safety and is only applicable to that part.further, the provisions of the merchant shipping act, which has been enacted to regulate matters relating to shipping, cannot be made use of in construing the terms of an exemption notification issued under section ..... any duty, claiming the benefit of the exemption contained in entry 3 of the table to the notification 64/95 as amended. this entry exempts from duty goods supplied as stores for consumption on board ships of the indian navy or coast guard. notice issued to the appellant demanded duty and proposed penalty on the ground that .....

Noble Asset Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... goods imported in connection with off shore oil exploration or exploitation granted vide notification no. 516/86-cus. dt.30-12-1986 as amended. the clearance was effected on 28-5-1987 vide b/e no. 1571, dt. 28-5-1987. the name of the said ..... in the eez. both these places being in international waters were clearly outside india and therefore the question the applicant filing a shipping bill could not arise as no export of the rig could be said to have taken place as a result of this movement ..... chartered agreement dt.23-12-1996 was entered into between noble and essar. on 21-10-1997 vide a registration issued by panama merchant marine registry, in the name of m/s. noble jimmy puckett. on 12-11-1997, the bearboat chartered agreement was entered ..... 23-3-2005 of cc(prev), mumbai and waiver of pre-deposit required under the provisions of section 129e of the customs act, 1962 were heard together and after hearing id. senior counsels and other advocates for the appellants and the department, all these .....

Ramayan Impex Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(189)ELT446Tri(Mum.)bai

..... case of prayag importers pvt. ltd. by the apex court and on considering the submission of the advocate that section 113(d) has since been amended. (d) the id d.r's reliance on the case of merchant export ltd. v. cc, cochin - also will not help the revenue's case and persuade us to hold a different view, since we find ..... port authorities, is not a cause for their liability to confiscation under section 113(d), since no prohibition under the customs act, 1962 would be found by us in this carting of goods. the goods which are covered by a shipping bill as in this case, can be brought to and carted to the customs area, they have not acquired the status ..... -7-2004 was issued calling upon the exporters to show cause : (i) why the goods covered under the two shipping bills should not be confiscated under section 113(h)(ii) of the customs act, 1962? (ii) a penalty under section 114 of the customs act, 1962 should not be imposed; (iii) why the credit of depb benefit amounting to rs. 8,32,200 .....

Ajanta Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)(143)ELT82Tri(Mum.)bai

..... them not to issue delivery orders in their name. on 4-12-1995 the shipping agent requested their agents abroad for amendment of the manifest showing consignee as ajanta industries. m/s. oceanic exports gave their noc for this amendment. an amendment application was filed. subsequently the central intelligence unit examined the consignment which was found to ..... against the same order of the commissioner. the facts being common they are being disposed of vide this single order.2. m/s. ajanta industries were merchant-exporters. they were holders of an advance licence enabling them to import 100% mulberry raw silk. m/s.hetampuria textiles was a proprietary unit owned by anand ..... the commissioner held that the goods were imported by agarwal without a valid import licence thereby rendering them liable to confiscation under section 111(d) of the act. in this belief he confiscated the goods and imposed the penalty on agarwal.6. thus the commissioner in the same order held two separate people as .....

Sea Bridge Maritime Agencies Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1999)(108)ELT250Tri(Mum.)bai

..... customs department. much less is the customs department concerned with the activity of the local agent of the charterer.further the manifest itself was permitted to be amended and the cargo cleared. the contention of the departmental representative that the penalty has been imposed for the reason that the slot charterer omitted to supply the ..... vessel had been found carrying 12 containers which the slot charterer had contracted to ship on behalf of parties. these containers were not included in the import manifesto filed by the agent of the vessel. the agent filed an application for amendment of the manifesto explaining that the slot charterer had omitted to intimate him of the ..... order of the commissioner of customs imposing a penalty of rs. 11 lakhs on the appellant under section 112 of the act.2, the appellant is an agent of the slot charterer of m/s. hyundai merchant marine co. the slot charter is explained in the following terms in the book maritime law by christopher hill, published .....

Anjani International and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(95)ECC551

..... hand-book of procedures volume ii ........vide the public notice no. 121(pn)/92-97 dated 31/3/1992 as amended .......... and which inputs are declared by the exporter to have been actually used in the product exported." 15. we ..... (purchase of actual input used in the export product), if read into the scheme would render it in applicable to merchant manufacturers. we therefore agree with the appellants that the fact that they did not purchase processed fabrics actually used in ..... job working of such grey cotton fabrics into processed fabrics, conversion of the job worked fabrics into export products, invoices/shipping bills/bill books etc., for the input items as well as export products.2. the government of india introduced the ..... inputs and manufactured export products there from.consequently the statements of the exporters were recorded under section 108 of the customs act, 1962 in which they stated that they had applied for and obtained pass books. they also submitted documents pertaining .....

B.V. Jewels Vs. Commissioner of Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(155)ELT589Tri(Mum.)bai

..... the detection of this case. moreover, para 8.78(b) cannot be read in isolation because the earlier provisions of para 8.34 and 8.35 are not amended and the units are required to furnish the details even now as existed earlier. in view of the above said the unit has failed to satisfactorily explain the stock ..... units have to take specific permission from the development commissioner, the powers of which has been delegated to the development commissioner vide the said para, as prior to this amendment in the handbook the powers rested with seepz board. the investigations also revealed that there is no production in m/s. b.v. star since june, 1997 and ..... and the fera, 1973. it, therefore, appeared that m/s. b.v. jewels having presented the said shipping bill for export of jewellery studded with cut and polished diamonds contrary to the aforesaid prohibition imposed under the customs act, 1962 and the fera, 1973 and therefore the aforesaid 63,078.35 cts. of cut and polished diamonds valued at rs .....

Tonira Pharma Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... petitioners and upheld the validity of the 1951-act under article 22(4)(b). while upholding the validity under article ..... expire on 31-3-1952. the maximum period of detention the 1950-act was one year. on 22-2-1951, while they were still under detention, the preventive detention (amendment) act, 1951 came into force. this 1951-act, inter alia, continued the operation of the 1950 - act until 31-3-1952. the supreme court dismissed the challenge of the ..... shows the apparent contradiction in the stand of the revenue. v.4 no demand of duty should be made on 3700 kg. of ascorbic acid exported through merchant-exporter. v.5 no demand can be raised on the quantity of 345 tmba imported which has been converted into anilino compound since there can be no dispute .....