Mumbai Court March 1988 Judgments
Abdeali Rehmatali Nulwalla Vs. Collector of Customs and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1988
Reported in: (1989)(23)LC75Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the order in original bearing No. VIII (Cus.) 25-56/Adj./81, dated 26-3-1983 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Pune, On 27-3-1981, the residential as well as the shop premises of the appellant were searched by the officers of the City Preventive Party of Hqrs., Pune. The officers seized goods of foreign original in all 48 items valued at Rs. 8,792/- from the shop premises. They also seized goods of foreign origin valued at Rs. 20,931/- from the residential premises of the appellant. The statements of the appellant were recorded and the diaries maintained were also taken possession of. After the completion of the investigations, show cause notice was issued to the appellant alleging among other things that items at Sl. Nos. 6, 7, 15, 17, 19 to 34 and 39 to 47 of Annexure II to the panchanama (items seized from the shop premises) and Sl. Nos. 1 to 8, 16, 17, 25 to 31 and 33 to 36, 53 and 79 to 137 in An...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Shantilal G. JaIn Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1988
Reported in: (1989)(22)ECC353
1. The Revision Application filed before the Central Govt. against Order-in-Appeal No. S/49-82/82/GC dated 29-4-1982 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal. The appellant Shri Shantilal G. Jain filed an application for issue of a Gold Dealer's Licence. After the receipt of the application it appears that the department considered the application in terms of Rule 2 of the Gold (Control) (Licensing of Dealers) Rules, 1969 (for short 'The Rules"). Thereafter show cause notice dated 23.6.1981 was issued to Shri Shantilal G. Jain calling upon him as to why his application should not be rejected since the demand for gold in the city has gone down in the year 1980. The figures of turnover of gold ornaments as compiled on the bais of the returns filed by existing dealers was made an Annexure to the show cause notice. The appellant sent a reply dated 1.7.1981 stating, among other things, that for the past...
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Woollen Mills Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1988
Reported in: 1988(17)LC247(Bombay); 1988(36)ELT35(Bom)
1. The 1st petitioner is a limited company engaged in the manufacture of, among other things, woollen yarn which includes hand-knitting yarn. The 2nd petitioner is a Director of the 1st petitioner company. The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the view taken by the respondents who are the authorities under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The view taken by the said authorities is that the hand-knitting wool which the petitioners are manufacturing does not get the benefit of the exemption granted by Notification No. 27/75 issued on 1st of March, 1975 by the Department of Revenue in the Ministry of Finance. That notification says that various types of yarn spun out of synthetic staple fibres falling under Item No. 18(1) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act and of the description specified in column No. (2) of the table to the said Schedule shall stand exempted from so much of the duty of excise l...
Tag this Judgment!General Spares Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1988
Reported in: 1988(17)LC184(Bombay); 1988(36)ELT562(Bom)
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. This petition challenges the order dated 16th of December, 1980 passed by the Additional Chief Controller of Import and Exports, having his office at New Delhi, in an appeal preferred by the petitioners against the orders passed on 10th of January, 1980 and 7th February, 1980. These two latter order have been passed by the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Ministry of Commerce, having his office at Bombay.2. The facts leading to these orders have been mentioned in great details in the petition. It is not necessary to refer to the same. Briefly stated, it may be mentioned that it is the case of the Department that the petitioners have imported certain articles on the basis of actual user licence, which licence was obtained by them on a misrepresentation that they would be manufacturing certain articles for which the articles which were being imported were necessary. The controversy, after one round of litigation, has now crystallised into a narrow poi...
Tag this Judgment!Mandovi Pellets Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1988
Reported in: (1989)IILLJ364Bom
Parekh, J.1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, inter alia, seeking a declaration that the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 are not applicable to the petitioners and for issue of an appropriate writ quashing the notices dated 26th Dec. 1985, 17th Feb. 1986 and 8th May, 1986 and the proceedings adopted in pursuance thereof by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Maharashtra and Goa.2. The petitioner's case is that on 19th April, 1985 Chowgule Metal Industries Ltd., came to be incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. That by a resolution dated 13th Dec. 1975, the name of the Company was changed to Mandovi Pellets Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner'). That in the year 1976, the petitioners put up an iron ore pelletization plant at Shiroda. That the same came to be duly registered under the Factories Act, 1948 on the 7th of Aug. 1979. The factory started its trial runs in May, 1979 and commenced c...
Tag this Judgment!Nandini Sanjiv Ahuja Vs. Sanjiv Birsen Ahuja
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Bom239; 1988(3)BomCR418
ORDER1. By this revision the applicant Nandini, who is the wife of the non-applicant Sanjiv Birsen Ahuja, prayed for quashing the order passed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, on 19th January, 1988 in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 176 of 1986 rejecting the application, Exh. 64.2. The non-applicant filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking a decree of divorce against the applicant -- his wife, on the allegations that she had adulterous relations with one Anil Jaydayal Taneja; who is the husband of the sister of the applicant. That petition is being resisted by the applicant by filing a detailed written statement. The applicant in para 13 of the written statement contended that in the marriage the non-applicant has been able to gain handsome amounts and also received attractive and costly presents, the list of which would be filed in due course. During the pendency of the petition an application (Exh. 64) was moved by the applicant stating th...
Tag this Judgment!Executors of the Estate of Late Vs. Second Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1988
Reported in: (1988)27ITD525(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 1981-82.2. The short dispute in this appeal is about the taxability of gratuity amount received by the legal heirs of late Sri D.S. Mistry who was in employment of three companies including M/s. M. Dinshaw and Co. P. Ltd. He died on 1-9-1980 and on his death the gratuity funds of the three companies paid the gratuity of Rs. 2,21,250 to the legal heirs of the deceased. The executors filed two returns of incomeone for the period from 1-4-1980 to 1-9-1980 in the capacity of legal representative and the other from 2-9-1980 to 31-3-1981 as executor. In the second return the receipt of gratuity was claimed non-taxable. The Income-tax Officer however made only one draft order for the entire period from 1-4-1980 to 31-3-1981 and brought the sum of Rs. 2,21,250 to tax. In the proceedings under Section. 144B the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner however accepted the content...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Annie Lewis Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR354; (1988)90BOMLR180; [1989]66CompCas889(Bom); 1988MhLJ764
1. This revision is directed against the order dated February 13, 1985, passed by the learned judge of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay sitting in Court Room No. 20 in Regular Suit No. 1189/1376 of 1982 and confirmed by the Full Court of that court by its order dated April 8, 1985, in Full Court Application No. 49 of 1985 filed in the said suit whereby the learned trial judge directed the return of the plaint for presentation to the proper court, that is, the High Court.2. Regular Suit No. 1189/1376 of 1982 was a simple suit by the petitioner for recovery of her share of insurance amount of the policy on her deceased son. The son was insured with respondent No. 1-defendant No. 1-Corporation. The son died on December 23, 1981. He had nominated respondent No. 2-defendant No. 2, his widow, in the policy. He died leaving behind him his mother, the petitioner-plaintiff, and th widow, defendant No. 2. Both of them, under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, are the heirs of the deceased, Jame...
Tag this Judgment!Swan Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1988
Reported in: (1989)(22)LC261Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeal fled before the Central Board of Excise and Customs against the Order No. S/10-80/81 E-Gr. dated 17.4.1982 passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are: The appellants M/s. Swan Mills Ltd. imported Polyester Filament Yarn under OGL 1/81 dated 3.4.1981. Their first import were permitted to be bonded under the Bond Bill of Entry. When the appellants presented seven Bills of Entry for ex-bond clearance, the Customs took objection with regard to the clearance of the goods for bonding.2. The appellants imported two other consignments of the Polyester Filament Yarn and claimed clearance under O.G. L The Customs raised objection for the clearance.3. In respect of the consignment which had been cleared for warehousing the Collector exercised his revisional power under Section 130 of the Customs Act as it then stood and issued a review notice calling upon the appell...
Tag this Judgment!Dubai Dry Docks Co. Ltd. Vs. Hede Navigation Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1988
Reported in: [1988]64CompCas1(Bom)
G.D. Kamat, J.1. This petition is instituted by Dubai Dry Docks Co. Ltd. for winding up of M/s. Hede Navigation Co. Ltd., for short, ``the respondent company', on the ground that the respondent company is unable to pay the debt of Rs. 13,88,725 corresponding to US $ 1,24,985 which includes their claim in the principal amount of US S1, 06,825, the remaining being interest.2. The respondent company wanted the petitioners to dry dock a vessel, Discaria Harvest, to carry out repairs. Estimates were prepared on March 22, 1986, amounting to US $ 5,97,658. However, the respondent company indicated that they were not in a position to carry out the rapiers for that value and that they would be content to carry out such repairs so as to maintain the class of the vessel as a result whereof it was agreed that the repairs of the value of US $ 1,51,000 be carried out and accordingly repairs were done in April, 1986. The invoice dated April, 1986, speaks of repairs being carried out worth US $ 1,51,0...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »