Mumbai Court July 1987 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.
Extrusion Processes Pvt. Ltd. and Mobanbhai I. Patel of Bombay Vs. Shr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1987
Reported in: 1988(14)LC529(Bombay)
H. Suresh, J.1. In Extrusion Process Pvt. Ltd. v. N.R. Jadhav, Superintendent of Central Excise 1974 Cen Cus 13C (Guj) reported in 1979 ELT (380), in which the present petitioners were themselves the petitioners, a Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat, while considering the question whether printing and lacquering of extruded shapes and sections or tubes and pipes of aluminium is liable to payment of duty under the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act' for the sake of brevity), came to the conclusion that 'printing and lacquering do not involve the process of forming a tube from a metal slug or dump which extrusion means. It is therefore clear that since printing and lacquering of plain extruded tubes do not require application of any further process of extrusion, it cannot be covered by sub-item (e) of Item 27.' Thereafter after posing a question; Is the process of printing and lacquering then incidental or ancillary to the completion of m...
Extrusion Processes Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Assistant Collector of Ce ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR111; 1988(18)ECC147; 1989(20)LC441(Bombay); 1987(31)ELT916(Bom)
1. The petitioners are the manufacturers of aluminium metal containers, collapsible tubes and extruded shapes etc. The products manufactured by them are chargeable to excise duty under Tariff Item No. 27 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The said Tariff provides for 50% ad valorem duty on the product.2. By an exemption notification dated October 4, 1979, issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, the Central Government exempted, inter alia, aluminium other than wire rods manufactured from aluminium ingots or billets from excise duty in excess of 40% ad valorem. By another exemption notification bearing No. 192/81-C.E., dated December 3, 1981, the Central Government superseded the earlier exemption notification dated October 4, 1979 and thereby exempted aluminium falling under Tariff Item No. 27 of the first Schedule, so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as was in excess of 40% ad valorem. By another exem...
G.Y. Divte Vs. Collector of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-21-1987
Reported in: (1988)(33)ELT417Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Revision Application filed before the Government of India against the order No. 1375-A of 1980 dated nil passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are as under :- 2. On 9.9.1978 at about 1.55 a.m., the Air Customs Officer in the Customs Import Baggage Hall noticed the present appellant and another each holding a brief case and the brief case held by the appellant appeared abnormally heavy. He could notice blood shot in the finger tips caused due to pressure of the handle of the brief case. Their movements aroused his suspicion and therefore he stopped the appellant and another. When questioned as to why they were inside the baggage hall the appellant and the other told the officer that they were the officers of the CBI and they had come to see one Mr. Chavan. They also produced the identity cards. The appellant also placed the ...
Arvind V. Inamdar Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1987
Reported in: 1989(20)ECC67; 1988(37)ELT21(Bom)
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. By this Petition the original accused No. 3 seeks the quashing of the process issued as against him under Sections 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) read with Section 135(1)(i) of the Customs Act and Section 5 of the Control of Imports and Exports Act, 1947.2. The Respondent No. 1 has filed the present complaint against eight accused for the aforesaid offences on the allegation that the accused No. 1, a resident of Surat was knowing the Petitioner - the accused No. 3 who was a clerk in the State Bank at Surat, as the accused No. 1 was an account holder in that bank. The wife of the accused No. 3 was a partner in Pioneer Construction Company and the accused No. 1 used to give contracts of construction to the said firm in the tune of about Rs. 16 lakhs. The accused No. 1 approached the Petitioner for suggesting some person in whose name the accused No. 1 could carry on business benami. The accused No. 1 was to carry on the business of Import of blank TDK audio cassette tapes ma...
Metro theatre Bombay Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Bom183
ORDER1. This is a petition challenging Section 4 notification issued under the Land Acquisition, Act, 1894 (hereinafter 'the Act') in respect of Metro Theatre at Bombay. The challenge is on various grounds, particularly on grounds of mala fides, grounds of colourable exercise of powers, of hostile discrimination and want of authority etc.2. Before I deal with the facts, I must deal with the preliminary objections raised by Mr. Desai, who appears for the State of Maharashtra and the Union of India (i.e. respondents 1, 2 and 3). Firstly, he contends that this petition is not maintainable, inasmuch as the petitioners will have a chance to object to the said acquisition when objections are heard under Section 5A of the Act and before Section 6 notification is issued. The second objection is that the petition contains several disputed questions of facts. Thirdly, he submits that in the petition there are number of allegations made against the Reserve Bank of India (hereafter 'the RB1') and ...
Shri Deepchand S. JaIn and Vs. Collector of Customs (Prev.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1987
Reported in: (1988)(16)LC129Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Shri Deepchand S. Jain has filed an appeal dated 24.3.1980 under old Section 80 of the Gold (Control) Act to the Gold Control Administrator and this has been transferred to the Tribunal in terms of Section 82K ibid. and is to be treated as an appeal before the Tribunal. Similarly, the appeal dated 20.3 1980 of M/s. Gulabchand Jawanmal & Co. has also been transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal. Both these appeals had been filed against the order No. XV1I(GC)8-16/78 dated 21.2.1980 passed by the Collector of Customs (Prey.) Bombay, under which he had levied a redemption fine of Rs. 40,000/- in lieu of confiscation of gold weighing 2340.300 gms. valued at Rs. 1,39,825/- seized from the premises of Shri Deepchand S. Jain and under which the Collector had imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,000/- on Shri Deepchand S.Jain under Section 74 for contraventions of the Gold (Control) Act and a penalty of Rs. 15,000/- on M/s. Gulabchand Jawanmal & Co. for abetting Shri Deepch...
Nandkumar Natha Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR139; (1987)89BOMLR370; 1987MhLJ820
Jahagirdar, J.1. The appellant, hereinafter referred to as 'the accused', has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Satara of the offence punishable under S. 302 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 30 of 1983 by holding that the prosecution has proved that the accused did, on 25th November 1982, commit the murder of one Vimal Baburao Sawant by setting fire to her clothes after pouring kerosene over the same. The evidence brought on record in the case by the prosecution shows that the accused was having some intimate relationship with the deceased Vimal who was staying in a part of the house of one Sonabai, examined as P.W. 1. There are different shades of impressions among the different witnesses relating to the reaction of Sonabai to the intimacy that had developed between the accused and Vimal. It is, however, totally unnecessary for us to say anything more on that aspect of the prosecution case. It is enough for our purpose to mention what actually hap...
Ceat Tyres of India Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1987
Reported in: 1990(27)ECC99; 1987(31)ELT332(Bom)
ORDER1. The legal proposition that stands invoked in this matter is, whether there can be promissory estoppel as against taxing statute and if so to what extent.2. The petitioners are the manufacturers of tyres and tubes. The tyres and tubes manufactured by the petitioners are subject to central excise duty on an ad valorem basis, as they fall within Item 16 of the Tariff to the said Act. From 1974 onwards the appropriate rate of excise duty levied on tyres and tubes has been, with certain exceptions, 55 per cent ad valorem. It appears that some time prior to 1976 the question of impact of excise duty on the production of goods in the industrial sector generally was engaging the attention of the Central Government. The Central Government came to the conclusion that the element of excise duty had the effect, inter alia, of discouraging an increase in the production. As increase in production was in the interest of the country and the consumers generally, the Central Government with a vi...
The Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Company Limited Vs. Mu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Bom384; 1987(3)BomCR694; 1988(1)MhLj356
a) The case debated on the validity of the permission granted to charge flat rate of the from the water bill towards the sewerage charge - The flat rate was fixed at 50% of the water bill - It was held that the charging was not arbitrary or violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India b) It was adjudged that the scope of the last proviso to Rule 4 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 should be read down as being limited to empower the commissioner to continue the old method of computing the charges in the case where midterm application would work unusual hardship```Daud, J.1. This appeal assails the dismissal of a petition questioning the constitutional validity of Section 170(1)(ii) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. Rule4 of the Sewerage and Waste Removal Rules, 1974-75 and onwards plus the notices and bills claiming sewerage charges on the aforementioned basis.2. Under the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, the respondents 1 to 4 --hereinafter collectively ...
Empress Mills Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Iii, La ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)BomCR275; 1987MhLJ1005
M.M. Qazi, J.1. All these petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment since the question involved is common.2. The petitioner is a Co-operative Society formed by the employees working in the Empress Mills, Nagpur. respondent No. 2 is working as a Clerk with the petitioner. There seems to be no dispute that respondent No. 2 and other employees of the petitioner society were being paid wages as applicable to the employees of the Empress Mills. The wages of the employees of the Empress Mills were revised and an agreement to that effect was entered into on 9-1-1976 between the mills Management and the Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Nagpur. In view of this revision respondent No. 2 and other employees of the petitioner society requested the petitioner for the increase in their wages. The petitioner society in its general body meeting dated 12-9-1976 resolved to pay the wages to respondent No. 2 and other employees of the society so as to bring them on par with the wages of the Em...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »