Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on : Dec-18-2002
Reported in : (2003)(160)ELT1027Tri(Kol.)kata
1. All the three appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by Commissioner of Customs, Patna vide which he has absolutely confiscated 44 gunny bags of metal scrap on the findings that the same are smuggled in character.In addition the truck found transporting the said metal scrap has also been confiscated with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 60,000/- (rupees sixty thousand). In addition personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) has been imposed upon Shri Raghunath Prasad, owner of the metal scrap and of Rs. 1,000/- (rupees one thousand) on Shri Godari Rai, driver of the truck in question.2. As per the facts on record truck loaded with copper and brass scrap was intercepted by the customs officers and the goods loaded therein were seized on the reasonable belief that some of the scrap items were found bearing the country of origin as China, England, Taiwan, Italy ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on : Dec-11-2002
Reported in : (2003)(154)ELT139Tri(Kol.)kata
1. A vessel was proceeding in River Hooghly got collided with a barge and sank causing obstruction to the navigational channel. The Board of Trustee for the Port of Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as "the CPT") floated a global tender for the purpose of salvaging the wreckage. A Greek salvage company, M/s. Tsavliras Rus (Worldwide Salvage & Towage Ltd.) was engaged. The Government of India, Ministry of Finance issued exemption Notification under Section 25(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 to the said Greek firm for payment of customs duty on temporary import of certain equipment for the purpose of the salvage work. The Greek firm failed to perform the salvage work. The contract with the said firm was cancelled by the P&I Club of the United Kingdom (hereinafter referred to as "P&I") and P&I granted necessary authority to CPT to engage M/s.Smit Tak B.V. Rottordom, another salvage company. The said Dutch company had a wholly owned subsidiary in Singapore, the appellant herei...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on : Dec-11-2002
Reported in : (2001)(138)ELT366Tri(Kol.)kata
1. A vessel was proceeding in River Hoogly got collided with a barge and sank causing obstruction to the navigational channel. The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as "the CPT") floated a global tender for the purpose of salvaging the wreckage. A Greek salvage Company, M/s Tsavilras Russian Side (Worldwide Salvage & Towage Ltd.) was engaged. The Government of India, Ministry of Finance issued exemption Notification under Section 25 (2) of the Customs Act 1962 to the said Greek Firm for payment of customs duty on temporary import of certain equipment for the purpose of the salvage work. The Greek firm failed to perform the salvage work. The contract with the said firm was cancelled by the P &I granted necessary authority to CPT to engage M/s Smit Tak B.V Rottordom, another salvage Company. The said Dutch Company had a wholly owned subsidiary in Singapore, the appellant herein were assigned the salvage work. The appellant appointed M/s Forbes G...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-10-2002
Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ69CAT
"(a) to direct the respondents to cancel, withdraw and/or rescind the impugned: (iv) order of dismissal from service dated 22.11.2000 including the recommendation dated 13.10.2000 of the UPSC; (b) to direct the respondents to allow the applicant to discharge his due duties and functions attached to the post as usual as before till he attains the age of superannuation; (c) to direct the respondents to produce the entire records of the case to this Hon'ble Tribunal for adjudication of the points at issue" 2. The relevant facts. The applicant was a member of the Indian Administrative Service. He was of 1976 batch and belonged to West Bengal cadre. It is averred that the applicant worked in various capacities including Additional District Magistrate, 24 Parganas (South) successfully, yet he was superseded in the matter of promotion in April, 1994 and was placed under suspension vide order dated 25.4.94. A charge-sheet dated 2.6.94, containing five charges, was served on him. The charges r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Nov-14-2002
Reported in : (2003)3CALLT100(HC),2005(1)CHN586,2005(30)PTC272(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. 1. The plaintiff is the owner of the registered trade marks 'Odonil', 'Odopic', 'Odomos' both label and word under the common Classes-5, 3, 9, 11, 21, and it has also applied for further registration between the years 1985 and 2001, for the word 'Odo'. This action has been taken against infringement and passing of by the defendant who uses the name and mark 'Odoja' in their products which are under same class. With the word 'Odo' the plaintiff claims that the aforesaid registrations were effected at different point of time ranging from 24th August, 1962 to 26th February, 1990. Admittedly the defendant's mark is not a registered one and it has merely applied for registration of its mark on or about 27th of March, 2000. The plaintiff claims, that it was the first in using of the word 'Odo' in its trademarks for commercial purpose. 2. The defendant in his affidavit in opposition has taken defence that the word 'Odo' is a generic term and used by all the traders a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on : Oct-17-2002
Reported in : (2003)(87)ECC23
1. As all the appellants have deposited partial amounts of penalties imposed upon them at the time of the appeals before Commissioner (Appeals), I allow their stay petitions and take the appeals for final disposal.2. All the six appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same set of facts and circumstances.3. Vide the impugned orders the authorities below have absolutely confiscated 34 pieces of silver lump weighing collectively 97.244 kgs.and valued at Rs. 6,80,700/- absolutely. In addition penalties have been imposed upon various persons.4. As per the facts on record, a tractor was intercepted by the police officers at Araria Camp on 19-10-94. Search of the said tractor resulted in recovery of 34 pieces of silver bars weighing 97.244 Kgs.and concealed in the gear oil chamber of the tractor. The tractor at the relevant time was being driven by Shri Ramjee Bhagat Interrogation of Shri Ramjee Bhagat by police revealed that the said 34 pieces of silver were...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on : Oct-11-2002
Reported in : (2003)(159)ELT612Tri(Kol.)kata
1. The appellant is absent in spite of today's notice of hearing having been sent to him well in advance. It is also noted from records that on the last date of hearing also, nobody appeared, neither was there any adjournment request. Accordingly, I have heard Shri T.K. Kar, learned S.D.R. for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned order vide which the Commissioner of Customs, Patna has confiscated the Pulse (Urad Dal) on the findings of attempted illegal export of the same to Nepal, with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 80,000.00 (Rupees eighty thousand). In addition, personal penalty of Rs. 20,000.00 (Rupees twenty thousand) has also been imposed upon the appellant under the provisions of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962.2. As per the facts on record, the Customs Officers, on 21-4-2001 Motihari intercepted one truck bearing Registration No. DL-1GB-4278 loaded with 360 bags of Indian Pulse (Urad Dal), when the same was par...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Oct-10-2002
Reported in : 2003CriLJ3566
Malay Kumar Basu, J.1. Both these appeals having arisen out of the same judgment and they involving common questions of law and fact, will be governed by this single judgment.2. Both these appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 17th April, 1989 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Purulia in Sessions Case No. 52/1985 (S.T.3/1988) of that Court whereunder the Ld. Sessions Judge found all the accused persons guilty of an offence under Section 148, IPC and convicted them thereunder and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment each for three years, but he found the other charges against the accused persons not established and accordingly he acquitted them of such charges. The convicts have preferred the appeal being C.R.A. No. 202/89 against the first part of the order, that is, against the said order of conviction and sentence, whereas the State has preferred the Appeal No. G.A. 29/1989 against the second part of the order, that is, order of acquittal of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on : Oct-04-2002
Reported in : (2003)(87)ECC21
1. The issue involved in the present appeal is as to whether the Special Additional Duty (SAD) is applicable in respect of imports made from Nepal prior to issuance of Notification No. 124/2000-Cus., dated 29-9-2000 vide which the earlier Notification No. 37/96-Cus. was amended.2. While deciding the case the adjudicating authority has observed that :- Notification No. .18/2000 providing for exemption from SAD on imported goods is categorical in this respect, its serial No. 31 and 32 provide for exemption from levy of SAD on : "All goods which are exempt from - (a) the whole of the duly of customs leviable thereon under the First Schedule; and (b) the whole of the additional duty of customs duty leviable thereon under Sub-section (1) of Section (3) of the Customs Tariff Act". "All goods (a) in case of which Free rates of duty of customs are specified in column (4) or column (5), as the case may be, of the First Schedule, and (b) which are exempt from the whole of the additional duty of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on : Aug-23-2002
Reported in : (2003)(160)ELT1022Tri(Kol.)kata
1. The issue involved in all the four appeals is identical and hence all of them are being disposed of by a common order.2. Vide the impugned orders of Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta, has demanded differential duty on the consignment of candles imported by the appellants from Nepal. The said candles were cleared by the appellant on payment of additional duty of customs equivalent to central excise duty @ 4% ad valorem on the CIF value declared in the bills of entries. The candles, classifiable under tariff sub-heading No. 3406.10, when manufactured in India, carry the central excise duty @ 16% ad valorem. However, in terms of Notification No. 85/98-Cus., dated 5-11-98, the imported goods carry concessional rate of additional duty of customs, subject to the conditions stipulated in proviso (2) of the said notification. Further in terms of Notification No.3/2001-C.E., dated 1-3-2001, candles manufactured in India carry concessional rate of duty at 4% ad valorem provided no Cenvat is ...
Tag this Judgment!