Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat mumbai Year: 2012 Page 1 of about 10 results (0.085 seconds)

Jan 06 2012 (TRI)

M/S. Loreal India Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pun ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-06-2012

sahab singh m/s. loreal india pvt. ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the appellants ) are engaged in the manufacture of various types of cosmetic preparations falling under chapter 33 of central excise tariff act,1985. they have their head office at mumbai and branches located at various parts of the country. during the scrutiny of records of the appellants by the central excise officers, pune, it was noticed that they were importing and trading in certain types of cosmetic preparations from their head office at mumbai. the same were being imported by their head office and subsequently cleared directly to customers or to their branches located at various parts of the country. they were availing cenvat credit on inputs and input services used in or in relation to manufacture of their final products. cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods was availed on the basis of duty paid on inputs and capital goods received by them in their factory. cenvat credit on input services was availed on the basis of input services received by them for their factory as well as on input services received for their head office and various branches. as per provisions of rule 2(l) and rule 2(p) read with 2(h) of the central excise rules, 2004, the department felt that cenvat credit can be availed on services which are used for providing any output service or used directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final product. however, the trading activity undertaken by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 13 2012 (TRI)

Baxter India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Export)

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-13-2012

ashok jindal: the appellant are in appeal against the impugned order along with the following applications: (a) application for early hearing of their stay application as well as appeal; (b) stay application; (c) application for provisional release of the impugned goods i.e., machines; (d) application to place additional evidence on record. 2. after hearing both the sides at length, we find that it is a case of live consignment. therefore, we allow the application for early hearing and considering the factual matrix of the case we are taking up all the applications and appeal together for disposal. 3. the appellant imported second hand semi auto coiler machine, second hand semi auto coiler belt conveyor and second hand welding generator for semi auto coiler and filed bill of entry under epcg licence obtained from dgft. the epcg licence was originally granted for new machine which was subsequently amended to import second-hand machines by dgft at 0% rate of duty. during the course of inspection of these machines, it was found that the appellant has declared the machines as second-hand machine which seems to be new one. therefore, the matter was taken up for further proceedings. as the appellant waived show cause notice, the matter was adjudicated holding that the imported machines are new one. therefore, the machines were confiscated and allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine of rs. 20 lakhs and penalty of rs. 12 lakhs. it is also held that the appellant are not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 2012 (TRI)

Jcb India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune I

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-27-2012

s.s. kang 1. heard both sides. 2. appellant filed appeal against the order passed by the commissioner of central excise whereby a demand is confirmed alongwith interest. 3. the contention of the appellant (a 100% eou) is that the main demand of more than approximately rupees one crore is confirmed by denying the benefit of notification no. 23/03 dated 31.3.2003 in respect of the goods cleared to dta on the ground that the goods cleared to dta are not wholly manufactured out of the indigenous raw material. the contention of the appellant is that the dispute is for the period january 2009 to june 2009. the appellant made a request for debonding of their unit and provisional debonding order was issued on 3.1.2009 in pursuance of the request made by the appellant. the proper officer directed the appellant to deposit duty in respect of capital goods/raw materials imported as well as indigenously procured. as per the direction of the proper officer, the appellant made a deposit of duty of rs 4,62,27,385/- on 3.1.2009. subsequently rebonding order was passed on 11.6.2009. the contention of the appellant is that during the period in dispute the goods are manufactured out of the indigenous raw material as the duty has been paid as per the direction of the proper officer in response to the request made by the appellant for debonding of the unit. this issue was specifically raised before the adjudicating authority and the adjudicating authority noted this contention in para 11.1 (v) to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2012 (TRI)

Reliance Communications Ltd. and Others Vs. Commissioner of Customs (A ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-12-2012

ashok jindal, member (judicial) c/278/10 and c/410/10 are filed by the revenue for dropping the penalty against the respondent. appeal no c/51/11 has been filed by reliance communication ltd. for imposition of penalty. as the issue involved are common in all the appeals, so they are disposed of by common order. 2. the brief facts of the case are as under. an intelligence was gathered by the special intelligence and investigation branch, jnch that reliance communication infrastructure ltd. c/o terene fibres india ltd., navi mumbai were importing free wireless terminals (fwt) by wrongly classifying them under cth 85171210 instead of cth 85177090. it was also gathered that they were claiming undue benefit of central excise notification 6/2006 sr.no.28 and also benefit of cess notification 69/2004 (sr.no.1). the importer has declared the description as fwt for free wireless terminals and in some bills of entry had declared cellular telephone in bracket to mislead the department. 3. it was also gathered that the said goods are wireless apparatus and required licence for the clearance at the time of import from the wireless planning coordination wing as per section 3 of the indian wireless telegraphy act, 1933 read with section11 of the customs act, 1962. 4. investigations revealed that rj-11 port is located on the side of the free wireless terminals for connecting telephone cord to it, which proves that the terminal in itself is not a telephone and an external device i.e. a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 2012 (TRI)

Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad Castrol India Ltd. Vs. Castrol ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-25-2012

s.s. kang 1. revenue filed the application for early hearing of the stay applications. since the stay applications are listed for hearing today, the present application for early hearing is dismissed as infructuous. 2. applicants filed applications for waiver of pre-deposit of the dues in respect of the appeals filed against the two impugned orders passed by the commissioner (appeals). 3. as the common issue is involved, therefore, all the stay applications are being taken up together for disposal. 4. applicants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods namely lubricating oil classifiable under chapter 27 of the central excise tariff act and lubricating preparations classifiable under chapters 34 and 38 of the central excise tariff act. the assessments for the period in dispute were provisional and the adjudicating authority finalized the assessments and demand of differential duty is confirmed. the earlier orders passed by the adjudicating authority were challenged by the applicants and the commissioner (appeals) vide order dated 11.7.2001 partly allowed the appeal filed by the appellant. the appellant and revenue filed appeals before the tribunal and the tribunal vide final order dated 21.9.2007 remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for de novo consideration. in pursuance of the remand order passed by the tribunal, the adjudicating authority finalized the assessments for the period in dispute and confirmed the demand of differential duty. appellant filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 22 2012 (TRI)

Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mu ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : May-22-2012

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 by m/s. essel shyam communications ltd., noida. for such broadcasting, the turf club receives royalty income from other race clubs and the royalty amounts are worked out either on a fixed percentage of betting placed at the respective clubs or a fixed lump sum amount depending upon the understanding made with the respective race clubs. the turf club also receives royalty from caterers who have been permitted to use the infrastructural facilities and to operate within the premises of the turf club. 2.1 four show-cause .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2012 (TRI)

Jet Airways (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Thane

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : May-29-2012

ashok jindal: these appeals are filed by the appellant against the confirmation of demand against them under the category of cargo handling service. 2. a show cause notice was issued to the appellant on the ground that the appellant is a service provider under the category of cargo handling service and is liable to pay service tax on the activity of transporting passengers and goods by their aircrafts. 3. it is the contention of the revenue that as the appellant are transporting cargo from one destination to another, therefore, they fall under the category of cargo handling service. the show cause notices were adjudicated and impugned demands were confirmed against the appellant. 4. shri j.h. motwani, learned counsel for the appellant appeared before us and submitted that in their own case, on the identical issue for the same period, the issue came up before the ahmedabad bench of this tribunal and vide order reported in 2008 (11) str 645 (tri.ahmd) held that the activity of transporting of cargo from one place to another as carried out by the appellant does not come under the definition of cargo handling service during the impugned period. therefore, the appeals are to be allowed. 5. heard the learned counsel. 6. perused the records and considered the submissions made before us. after going through the decision of this tribunal in the appellants own case, reported in 2008 (11) str 645 cited supra, and also the decision of the bangalore bench 2010 (17) str 94 (tri.bang.) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 01 2012 (TRI)

Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad Vs. Nectar Steel Cast Pvt L ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-01-2012

s.s. kang 1. heard the learned deputy commissioner (a.r.), as none appeared on behalf of the respondents. 2. revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order passed by the commissioner (appeals) whereby the commissioner (appeals) held that as per the provisions of section 35e (2) of the central excise act, the appeal against the adjudication order is to be filed by the same authority who passed the impugned adjudication order and in the present case the adjudication order is passed by the joint commissioner whereas the appeal is filed by the assistant commissioner of central excise. 3. we find that as per the provisions of section 35e (2) during the relevant period, the commissioner of central excise may, of his own motion, call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which an adjudicating authority subordinate to him has passed any decision or order under this act for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of any such decision or order and may, by order, direct such authority to apply to the commissioner (appeals) for the determination of such points arising out of the decision. 4. we find that the honble bombay high court in the case of cce vs silver streak welding products india pvt ltd reported in 2008 (226) elt 704 (bom) while interpreting the provisions of section 35e (2) of the central excise act at the relevant time held that the appeal is to be filed by the same authority who passed the adjudication order. in view of the above, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 05 2012 (TRI)

Commissioner of Customs (import), Nhava Sheva Vs. M/S. Ndc Drug and Ch ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-05-2012

p.r. chandrasekharan, member (technical) this is a revenues appeal directed against order-in-appeal no. 03/(gr.ii-c)/2010 (jnch)-imp-03 dated 23.04.2010 passed by the commissioner of customs (appeals), nhava sheva. the issue relates to classification of xanthan gum. 2. the respondent m/s. ndc drug and chemical p. ltd. imported consignment of xanthan gum usp 80 mesh vide bill of entry no. 813195 dated 18.12.2009 and claimed classification under heading no. 39.13 of the customs tariff. on examination of the goods, it appeared that the classification claimed by the appellant is not correct and the product merit classification under heading no. 13.01. accordingly, the matter was referred to the dy. chief chemist along with catalogue and literature submitted by the importer. the dy. chief chemist vide report dated 31.12.2009 opined that since the product under import is produced by natural process (bacterial fermentation of carbohydrates which are also natural in origin) and has characteristics of natural gum, hence it merits classification under cth 13.01. accordingly the adjudicating authority classified the product under cth 13.01. the appellant preferred an appeal before the commissioner (appeals). the ld. appellate authority observed that the imported goods are polysaccharide produced by fermentation of carbohydrates (glucose or sucrose) by xanthomonas campestris bacteria and it is not the same as xanthium gum classifiable under heading 13019034. further, there was no .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2012 (TRI)

Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai.V Vs. M/S. Gtc Industries Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-22-2012

sahab singh this is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order passed by the commissioner of central excise (appeals) who allowed the appeal filed by m/s. gtc indus.ltd. ( hereinafter referred to as the respondent). 2. the brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of cigarettes and they had initially filed refund claim of rs. 54,40,642.71 vide their letter dated 30.10.1984. this amount was paid by them against show cause notice dated 23.12.1982 issued by the range supdt. the said amount was paid by the respondent vide tr6 challan no.82/83/280 dated 3.1.1983 being the differential duty on the clearances of cigarettes effected during the period 30.11.1982 to 13.12.1982 on account of rescinding of notification no. 30/79-ce dated 1.3.79 ( prescribing concessional rate) by notfn. no.284/82-ce dated 30.11.1982 which made the tariff rate of duty applicable to cigarettes with effect from 30.11.1982. however, the respondent came to know about the order passed by the madras high court in the case of m/s. asia tobacco ltd. that any notification issued takes effect not from its date of issue but from the date it is made known to the public in gazette. since the notification 284/82-ce dated30.11.1982 rescinding the notfn.30/79-ce dated 1.3.79 was brought to their notice on 14.12.1982 vide letter dated 14.12.1982 of the range supdt. , the duty at the tariff rate ought to have been collected from them from 14.12.1982 onwards and not from 30.11. .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //