Mumbai Court September 1986 Judgments
Kailachand Devchand and Co. Pvt. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1986
Reported in: (1987)(12)LC123Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Kailachand Devchand & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Bombay, have filed this present appeal under Section 129-A(1) of the Customs Act against the Order No. S/6-1196/85 Exp., dt. 3.7.1985 of the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay, under which he confiscated the consignment said to contain Basmati rice and imposed redemption fine of Rs. 65,000/- under Section 113 of the Customs Act, besides levying penalty of Rs. 6,500/- under Section 114 of the Customs Act. Being aggrieved with the decision the Appellants have approached this Tribunal as mentioned above.2. The facts of the case are that M/s. Kailachand Devchand & Co. Pvt.Ltd., Bombay, through their custom house agent M/s. K.M. Ganatra & Co.filed a shipping bill No. 013361, dated 25.5.1985 for export of Basmati rice. The consignment of rice was examined in the docks and representative samples were drawn. The sample was found to show that the consignment had predominantly non-Basmati variety of rice.Accordingly the Agmark author...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. (Mrs.) R.M. CaptaIn Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD419(Mum.)
1. These two appeals, one by the assessee and the other by the department were heard together and they are disposed of by a consolidated order.2. This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)-VIII, Bombay, for the assessment year 1981-82. The assessee was a partner in a partnership firm called Himalaya Drug Co. The wealth-tax assessment for the assessment year 1981-82 for which the relevant valuation date is 31-3-1981 was completed by the First WTO, Asstt. Cir. VI, Bombay on 30-8-1983 on a net wealth of Rs. 55,81,122.The WTO determined the value of the assessee's interest in the firm in terms of Rules 2 and 2A to 2G of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 ('the Rules'). He specifically referred to Rule 2E to hold that amounts appearing in the balance sheet of the firm by way of development rebate reserve, investment allowance reserve, etc., could not be included in computing the net wealth of the firm. A claim was made before the WTO for deduction of gratuity reserve liabili...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadev Krishna Thakur Alias Yam Vs. Home Secretary (Spl), Government ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1986
Reported in: 1990(27)LC101(Bombay)
1. The detention order in this case is challenged on the ground that it is based on one incident of smuggling. In order to appreciate the contentions raised on both sides, it is necessary to state here the relevant facts. On a secret information received by the officers of the Customs Collectorate, Alibag Division, on the 30th June 1985, they searched the house and compound situated opposite the Jetty of Gharapuri and recovered 58 bundles containing foreign goods. The house was occupied by one Smt. Padmibai Padmakar Thakur and on interrogation, she told the officers that in the night of 28th/29th June 1985 at about 3 a.m., four to five fishermen from Mora knocked at her door and asked her permission to keep their goods in her house for two days When she refused the permission, they threatened her and forcibly kept these goods in her house. She identified one of those persons and that was the present detenu. Admittedly the goods are of foreign origin and have been smuggled into this cou...
Tag this Judgment!Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd Vs. National thermal Power Corporation Ltd ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Bom308; 1987(2)BomCR405; [1990]69CompCas389(Bom)
V.V.Vaze J.'If dictatorial England could not bring itself to recognise the sanctity of promises to the extent of making a gratuitous promise a binding contract, what a paradox it would be if we were to carry change through today after the weakening of the belief in the sanctity of promises which this past century witnessed.'1. So observed Eightieth in The Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract, page 689. The famous dictum written by Maine way back in 1861 in his Ancient Law that the movement of progressive societies had been a movement from status to contract is being eroded in modern times by the emergence of the State and State-controlled institutions dominating the field of contract. The pre- industrial revolution era left little freedom to the employee to offer his services to anyone he pleased because the number of employers was limited and the status or class of the employer and employee was well-defined and demarcated. The industrial revolution gave an impetus to the development o...
Tag this Judgment!Maharashtra Adivasi Thakur Jamat Seva Mandal and ors. Vs. State of Mah ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1986
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR489
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed in representative capacity on behalf of Thakurs the Scheduled Tribes, in view of difficulties which were being faced by them in getting the necessary Certificates2. According to the petitioners, the Competent Authorities, who are authorised to issue the necessary Scheduled Tribes Certificates, refused to issue the certificates under the instructions of the State Government in respect of the students who are members of the Thakur Community but who were not residents of 4 districts on the slope of Sahyadri i.e. Nasik, Ratnagiri, Kolaba (Raigard) and Thane. According to the petitioners, this is wholly in breach of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976. The petitioners have also challenged the Government Resolution dated 8th March, 1985 and its accompaniments on the ground that what has been prohibited directly is being sought to be imported indirectly, meaning thereby that though by the Amend...
Tag this Judgment!Maharashtra Adivasi Thakur Jamat Seva Mandal and ors. Vs. State of Mah ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1986
Reported in: 1986(3)BomCR634
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed in a representative capacity on behalf of Thakurs-the Scheduled Tribes, in view of difficulties which were being faced by them in getting the necessary Certificates.2. According to the petitioners, the Competent Authorities, who are authorised to issue the necessary Scheduled Tribes Certificates, refused to issue the certificates under the instructions of the State Government in respect of the students who are members of the Thakur Community but who were not residents of 4 districts on the slope of Sahyadri i.e. Nashik, Ratnagiri, Kolaba (Raigad) and Thane. According to the petitioners this is wholly in breach of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976. The petitioners have also challenged the Government Resolution dated 8th March, 1985 and its accompaniments on the ground that what has been prohibited directly is being sought to be imported indirectly, meaning thereby that though by the Ame...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Bharat Bijlee Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: (1987)(12)LC1084Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed on behalf of the Collector of Central Excise, Thane Collectorate, against the Order No. V.2(68)137/85/4668 dated 18-4-1985 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay, under which he allowed the first appeal of M/s. Bharat Bijlee Ltd., by setting aside the Order No. V(68)4-36/84/7766 dated 19-11-1984 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Dn.IV, Thane, under which the Assistant Collector ordered recovery of Rs. 9,80,327.19 taken as proforma credit by M/s. Bharat Bijlee Ltd. The facts of the case are that M/s. Bharat Bijlee Ltd., were manufacturing Transformers falling under Tariff Item 68 and for the manufacture of these Transformers M/s.Bharat Bijlee Ltd., were receiving 'paper covered copper strips' manufactured by M/s. Devidayal Electronics & Wires Ltd., on which duty was being charged under item 68. The amount of duty paid on paper covered copper strips manufactured by M/s. Devidayal Electronics & Wires Ltd., was taken as cr...
Tag this Judgment!Maruti Shripati Dubal Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)BomCR499; (1986)88BOMLR589; 1986MhLJ913
Sawant, J.1. The petitioner is a police constable attached to the Bombay City Police Force. As of today he has put in 19 years of service as constable. In 1981, he met with a road accident and suffered head injuries, and although he recovered from them, he became mentally ill continues to be so to some extent even till this date.2. Since January, 1982, he was under psychiatric treatment and his ailments were diagnosed in July, 1982 as 'Giddiness Chabrat (fright), reduced sleep and appetite, nervousness, confusion, etc.' In August 1982 he was diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia. He suffered from auditory and visual hallucinations. He used to sit lonely in bed, had a vacant look and was confused. He was given electric shock-treatment till September, 1982 and was also put on a doze of heave tranquilizers. He continues to take them even today.3. The incident in question which has given rise to the impugned criminal prosecution occurred on 27th April, 1985 on which day about 10 a.m. h...
Tag this Judgment!Bhalchandra Ramchandra Nimkar Vs. BadruddIn Mohamed Hemani and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: 1986(3)BomCR631
B.G. Kolse-Patil, J.1. This Revision Application is directed against the order of conviction dated July 18, 1981 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class (P.M.C.), Pune.2. The brief narration of the facts in this case is as under:-About 11 a.m. on 5-11-1980, the Octroi Department of the Municipal Corporation, Pune, received a telephone call from one Mohan Joshi informing that Matadors Nos. MTD 7105 and MTD 7884 were carrying goods without payment of octroi charges. He further informed that the Matadors were standing at Narangi bag locality within the limits of Pune Municipal Corporation. The complainant along with other officers from the said Department immediately rushed to Narangi Bag by a jeep. The matadors, containing goods, were standing there. The Octroi Superintendent and the other officials also followed the complainant. Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 (original accused Nos. 1 and 3) were also present there. They were questioned about the receipts of the payment of octroi...
Tag this Judgment!Kishan Arjundas Motwani Vs. Keshav Gurdinomal Makhija
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)BomCR291
A.D. Tated, J.1 This appeal is directed against the order dated 13th February, 1981 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay, in S.C. Suit No. 842 of 1974 directing the plaint to be returned for presentation to proper Court on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction to decide the suit.2. The case of the appellant plaintiff is that the alongwith his brother is the sub-tenant of an office room on 4th floor, Nanabhoi Mansion, Sir Phirozeshah Mehta Road, Bombay-400 001. The sub-tenancy rights in the said premises were originally allotted to the plaintiff's father by the Custodian of Evacuee Property. The plaintiff's father expired on 9th July, 1967. A space which is enclosed in a corner of the room by a low wooden partition was originally used by the plaintiff and his father. The respondent-defendant was permitted to the use thereof as licensee for 11 months under the Agreement Ex.'A' annexed to the plaint on his agreeing to pay monthly compensat...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »