Tribunal Court May 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S. Mekala Raja Plywoods Pvt. Ltd and Others Vs. Cce Vapi
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: May-01-2014
M.V. Ravindran, J. 1. All these appeals are disposed of by a common order as these are against the very same Order-in-Original and raise a common issue. 2. Appeal No.E/12927/2013 is filed by the Revenue against very same Order-in-Original, while all other appeals are filed by the assessee and various other parties on whom the penalties are imposed. For sake of brevity, we take up the facts as mentioned in Appeal No.E/12811/2013 of M/s Euro Decor Pvt.Ltd. (formerly known as M/s Subhnen Dicor Pvt.Ltd.) hereinafter referred to as main appellant. 3. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the Revenue authorities, on an investigation conducted in the factory premises of the main appellant, noticed that there was under valuation of the goods manufactured and cleared. During the search operation, certain incriminating records/documents were recovered in mahazars, statements of various dealers/sub-dealers, employees as well as the Director of the main appellant were recorded. ...
Commissioner of Customs (Exports), Chennai Vs. M/S. Asvini Fisheries ( ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-01-2014
1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondents were exporting marine products namely prawns/shrimps through Chennai Sea Port. Department was levying and collecting cess as customs duty @ 0.5% on exports of prawns / shrimps under Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940. The respondent challenged the levy of cess and the assessment orders in the Shipping Bills before the Honble Madras High Court vide Writ Petition No.12097 98/1999. The Honble Madras High Court vide order dated 16.12.2006 directed the respondent to file appeal under Section 5A of the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940 before the appellate authority. In pursuance of the order dated 16.12.2006, the Commissioner (Appeals) passed the impugned order holding that cess is not leviable on export of prawns/shrimps and the cess paid by the respondent would be refunded to them. 2. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, I f...
M/S. Parag Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-01-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. Vide Order No.SO/71464/2013 dated 10.12.2013 this Tribunal directed the Applicant, after hearing their Counsel to deposit 25% of the Service Tax confirmed within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 18.02.2014. On 18.02.2014 the matter was adjourned to 19.03.2014. On 19.03.2014 the proprietor of the Applicant company Shri Pankaj Singh appeared and sought time up to today to report compliance. 2. None appeared today nor there is any report of compliance. 3. The Ld.A.R. for the Revenue submits that in absence of compliance of the direction of pre-deposit, the Appeal is liable for dismissal. 4. Since the Applicant has failed to comply with the direction of pre-deposit dated 10.12.2013 in spite of repeated adjournments, their Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to Service Tax cases by virtue of Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994. Appe...
Commissioner of Customs, TuticorIn Vs. National Steel and Agro Industr ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-01-2014
Pradip Kumar Das, J. 1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Heard Ld. AR on behalf of Revenue. None appears on behalf of the respondent. 3. After hearing the Ld. A.R. and on perusal of the records, I find that the issue involved is levy of CESS on export of Shrimps and Prawns under the Agriculture Produce CESS Act,1940. It is seen that the Tribunal held that in the case of CC Tuticorin Vs Edhayam Frozen Foods 2005 (190) ELT 72 (Tri.-Chennai) held that no Cess is leviable on Shrimps and Prawns under the Agriculture Produce CESS Act, 1940 which is upheld by the Hon'ble Madras High Court reported in 2008 (230) ELT 225 (Mad.). In view of that, I do not find any reason to differ with the order of Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the appeal filed by Revenue is rejected....
Blue Moon Fragrances and Another Vs. Commr. of Customs (Prev.), Kolkat ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-01-2014
DR. I.P. Lal, J. 1. These applications are filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Customs duty of Rs.8,76,699/- , interest (not quantified) and penalty of Rs.8,76,699/- imposed on M/s. Blue Moon Fragrances, Kolkata (Applicant No. 1) and penalty of Rs.2,50,000/- imposed on Md. Ismail, proprietor of the said applicant company. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants has submitted that they had filed two bills of entry No. 205579 dated-28/9/2004 and 241387 dated 15/7/2005 for the goods imported from Singapore and Indonesia based suppliers respectively. The goods were declared to be Patchouli Oil (SL8) and Patchouli Oil (PS 24). The consignments were examined at the material time by the proper officer and the proper officer after having satisfied in all respects allowed the clearances of the goods without raising any objection. Subsequently, the officers of DRI investigated the case resulting into issue of show cause notice proposing enhancement of value ba...
C.C. Kandla Vs. Shree Gautam Adani and Another
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: May-01-2014
M.V. Ravindran, J. These two applications are for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the bench, are filed by the revenue. Since both the applications arise out of the same Order-in-Original, they are being disposed of by a common order. 2. The application for condonation of delay in both these cases is seeking to condone the delay of approximately six years in filing the appeal.3. On perusal of the records, it is noticed that the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla vide OIO No.KDL/COMMR/13/De-novo/2008, dt. 31.03.2008 had dropped the proceedings initiated vide show cause notice dt. 12.10.1999 by the DRI, against three noticees.4. Revenue filed the appeal against one of the respondent M/s. National Impex Corporation before the Tribunal. These applications are filed for condoning delay in filing the appeals against other two respondents.5. Ld. Departmental Representative while justifying the delay in filing the appeal, submits that these two appeals have to be considered as s...
Schneider Electric It Business India Pvt Ltd. and Others Vs. Commissio ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT
Decided on: May-01-2014
B.S.V. Murthy, J. 1. In this case, the matter first came up for hearing on 11/07/2013 and was adjourned to 06/11/2013 and it was decided that stay petitions and appeals have to be listed together for final hearing keeping in view the fact that there were request for early hearing by both sides and the cases involved substantial revenue. The matter came up for final hearing on 04/02/2014 and since the hearing could not be completed it was heard on 05/02/2014 also. Thereafter both sides wanted to make written submissions and the written submissions were received from both sides thereafter. 2.1. American Power Conversion (I) Pvt. Ltd. is a manufacturer of Inverters, Un-interrupted Power Supply Systems (UPS), Power distributions Units (PDUs), etc. They have two EHTP units/ EOUs with Central Excise Registration Numbers AACCA6398QXM002 and AACCA6398QXM001. The two registered units which were operating with common bonded warehouses and common inventory were merged into single registration wit...
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited Vs. Shamanur Sugars Limit ...
Court: Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Decided on: May-01-2014
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson. 1. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (BESCOM), the Distribution Company, is the Review Petitioner herein. 2. The Petitioner BESCOM filed the Petition in OP No.26 of 2008 before the State Commission claiming compensation from M/s. Shamanur Sugars Limited, the Generating Company, the 1st Respondent for the electricity sold by it to 3rd party during the subsistence of the Power Purchase Agreement between the Petitioner and the said Shamanur Sugars Limited. 3. This Petition was allowed by the State Commission directing the Generating Company to pay the compensation to the Petitioner Company. 4. As against the said order, the Shamanur Sugars Limited filed an Appeal before this Tribunal in Appeal No.44 of 2013. 5. After hearing the parties, this Tribunal allowed the Appeal filed by M/s. Shamanur Sugars Limited by the judgment dated 7.1.2014 holding that the BESCOM was not entitled to compensation. 6. Aggrieved by this judgment of this Tribunal, t...
M/S. Atithi Gokul Automobile Works Vs. Cce Ahmedabad-ii
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: May-01-2014
M.V. Ravindran, J. 1. These two Stay Petitions are filed for waiver of pre-deposit of amount of duty liability confirmed by the adjudicating authority and the penalties imposed on the appellant. These Stay Petitions was disposed of by this Bench vide order dt.22.08.2014 which was taken in appeal by the appellant before Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in SCA No.798/2014. Their Lordships in their oral judgment dt.06.03.2014 directed the Tribunal to reconsider the issue on merit subject to the condition that the main appellant pays cost of Rs.50,000/- to the Gujarat State Legal Authorities. We find that the appellant-applicant has complied with the condition of Hon'ble High Court. This matter was listed on 21.04.2014 before the Bench, on which date, advocate Shri Kuntal Parikh submitted that his senior advocate Shri P.M. Dave is held up in High Court and sought a short adjournment. We accommodated the adjournment sought and directed the ld.Counsel to appear before us on 24.04.2014. Today, t...
M/S. Uni Colloids Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.C. Ahmedabad
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: May-01-2014
M.V. Ravindran, 1. When this Stay Petition was called out, we find that on 08.04.2014, this matter was called out and we had directed both sides that appeal itself will be disposed of on next date as the issue is of live consignments in the docks. Accordingly, after disposing the Stay Petition filed, we take up the appeal for disposal. 2. In this appeal the core issue relates to eligibility for duty exemption in connection with import of Amygluten 160 (Wheat Gluten) imported by the appellant under a transferable duty free import authorization dated 30.5.2012 (DFIA for short) in terms of the Notification No. 98/2009-Cus.dated 11.9.2009. The DFIA was issued to the exporter on the basis of SION E-5 for Biscuits. Having completed the export obligation, on 02.07.2013, the exporter (authorization holder) obtained endorsement of transferability from the licensing authority on the said DFIA, and the transferrable DFIA was transferred to the appellant. The appellant being a bona fide transfere...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »