Mumbai Court July 1988 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.
Pfaff Industriamaschinen Mbh Vs. Additional Collector of Customs
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1988
Reported in: 1988(18)LC475(Bombay); 1988(37)ELT500(Bom)
Sujata Manohar, J.1. Petitioner is a Corporation incorporated in West Germany. It manufactures, inter alia, industrial Sewing Machines. The 1st petitioner has a manufacturing unit in Brazil. It has subsidiaries in other countries like Singapore, U.K. and U.SA The 2nd petitioner, at all material times, was the agent of the 1st petitioner. The 3rd petitioner is the Manager of the Bombay Branch of the 2nd petitioner.2. The 1st petitioner received a purchase order dated 22.12.1984 from the 3rd respondent Adi Impex, Kutch, India through the 2nd petitioner for 100 Nos. Pfaff 'Class: 463/01 BS High Speed flat bed lock-stitch industrial sewing machines complete with stand, table, treadle, motor and essential spare parts'. During the relevant period under the Import Policy for the period 1984-85 these machies could be imported into India under Open General Licence by actual users. Thereafter respondent No. 3 opened a letter of credit in favour of the 1st petitioner dated 3.1.1985.3. Under the l...
Associated Capsules (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1988
Reported in: (1990)32ITD120(Mum.)
1. Aggrieved by the consolidated order dated 6-11-1984 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) relating to assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74, the assessee is in appeal.2. The relevant facts are these. Original assessments for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74 were completed by the Income-tax Officer on 18-3-1975 and 10-3-1976 respectively. During the course of assessment for 1972-73 (previous year ending 31-12-1971), assessee filed following material: - (i) Statement of raw material consumption for the year ended 31-12-1971. (iii) Account of M/s. Bharat Pharma Distributors, Bombay, in the books of the assessee for year 1-1-71 to 31-12-71. (iv) Cheque Nos., date and address of Bankers on which cheques were issued to M/s. Bharat Pharma Distributors, for payment of their bills, (v) Confirmation of the account of M/s. Bharat Pharma Distributors, Bombay, in the books of the assessee for the year 1971 by Sri R.K. Thakkar, Prop. Of M/s. Bharat Pharma Distributors. (vi) Details ...
Sadanand Nagesh Waikar Vs. Tharumal Gadumal Mirpure and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR386
S.C. Pratap, J.1. This is an acquittal appeal arising out of prosecution under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.2. The article in question was ice candy which, on analysis, was found to contain saccharin. The learned trial Magistrate has recorded an order of acquittal by a very detail and exhaustive judgment. The acquittal is based on several grounds including breach of some of the mandatory rules of the Rules framed under the aforesaid Act. It was also found that it was not established that all the relevant requirements under Rule 16 were complied with. There was also no clear proof either in the evidence or in the panchnama of four distinct and clear impressions of seal of the sender on the wrapper. Indeed, the only panch witness examined admitted that no seal was affixed on the stopper over the jar. Record further shows that the sample was sent to the public analyst on 4th June, 1978. The same was taken up for analysis by different assistants and at different dates. As depose...
Maharashtra Pollution Control Board Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1988
Reported in: 1988(4)BomCR480; 1989MhLJ883
B.N. Deshmukh, J.1. This revision is filed by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board against respondents challenging the order passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge by which the order to issue process against the respondents is quashed.2. The Water Pollution Control Board-petitioner filed complaint under the provisions of sections 25, 26 r/w sections 43 & 44 of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, against the respondents.3. The allegation in the complaint was that u/s 24 of the Act, prohibition is prescribed for use of stream or a well for disposal of polluting matter and u/s 25 of the said Act, consent of the Board is necessary with regard to bring into use any new or altered outlet for the proposed discharge of trade or sewage effluent or waste into a stream in the Water Pollution Prevention Area. An application, therefore, was filed by the accused No. 1 Textile Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. and consent was granted on certain conditions. The prese...
Thakur Shipping Co. Ltd. Vs. Trustees of the Port of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1988
Reported in: 1988(38)ELT449(Bom)
1. By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners seek to challenge the auction sale of the vessel M. V. 'Varuna Kachhapi', held by the Bombay Port Trust on 13th May 1988, principally on three grounds which will be dealt with hereinafter.2. It is common ground that the petitioners were the owners of the vessel M. V. 'Varuna Kachhapi' (hereinafter referred to as 'the vessel'). According to the petitioners the said vessel had been mortgaged to Shipping Development Funds Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'SDFC'), and now the functions of SDFC are taken over by the Shipping Credit and Investment Limited (SCICI), the 3rd respondent. The 1st respondent is the Bombay Port Trust; the 2nd respondent is Union of India; the 3rd respondent is SCICI and the 4th respondent is the auction purchaser.3. There is no dispute that the said vessel came to the port of Bombay in the month of May 1985 and was laid up at Anchorage in the said port. The vessel continued to rema...
S.A. thete Vs. Collector of Customs (Prev)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1988
Reported in: (1989)(23)LC570Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is against the order of the Additional Collector of Customs (Preventive), Bombay bearing No. S/14-4-724/80 PINT dated 30-3-1982 imposing a personal penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on Shri S.A. Thete under Section 112 of the Customs Act 2. The findings of the Addl. Collector with regard to Shri Thete are briefly summed up below.3. (i) It is an admitted fact that Shri Thete also comes under same panchnama which inculpated Shri Shaikh. In front of the panch witnesses, Shri Thete asked Shri Shaikh to be honest enough to admit that the brief case contained wrist watches. This knowledge on the part of Shri Thete negates straightaway his claim in his deposition that he was not aware that the brief case contained contraband wrist watches.The defence cross-examination of the panch witness Shri Gangoli made on behalf of Shri Shaikh, though helps to an extent Shri Thete, Shri Gangoli corrected himself and stated that Shri Thete had asked Shri Shaikh to be honest enough to state the content...
The Industrial Development and Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. S ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Bom156; 1988(4)BomCR423; (1989)91BOMLR537; 1988MhLJ1027
Mookerjee, C.J.1. Appellant had been a tenant in respect of an area measuring 20, 397 square yards forming part of City Survey No. 503, Dharavi, under the Provident Investment company Ltd., Respondent 5. The learned single Judge had dismissed the appellants' writ petition, inter alia, on the ground of delay in coming to the Court, in spite of the finding that proceedings for acquisition of the said plot No. 503 had become invalid by happening of the event hereinafter mentioned. Hence this appeal before us. 2. On 7th February 1967 a development plan prepared under the Manarashtra Regional and Town Planning Act , 1966, was finalised. Under the said plan, the Cadastral Survey Plot No. 503 was reserved for extension of Dharavi Sewerage Purification Works. On September 6, 1972, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-s. (4) read with sub-s. (2) of S. 126. Manarashtra Regional and Town Planning Act , 1966 read with S. 6 Land Acquisition Act , 1894, the Government of Maharashtra made a dec...
Maharashtra Small Scale Ind. Dev. Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. the In ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1988
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ646Bom
Qazi, J.1. The respondent No. 2 is in the employment of the petitioners. He was appointed as a Salesman vide order dated 28.7.1975. He approached the Industrial Court, Nagpur, by way of a complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). His contention in the complaint was that though he was appointed as a Salesman, but in fact he was required to work as an Assistant for several years. He, therefore requested the Industrial Court that since he has worked throughout as an Assistant to the satisfaction of the Department, he should be made permanent. The petitioners contested the claim of the respondent No. 2. According to the petitioners, the respondent No. 2 was not entitled for being made permanent as Assistant. The respondent No. 2 examined himself as a witness, whereas Prakash Ganpatrao Kapale the Divisional Manager, was examined on behalf of the petitioners. The Indust...
Yusuf Kadar Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1988
Reported in: (1988)(38)ELT186Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-Original bearing No. 3/14-4-163/85 Pint(DRI/DZU/115/PSA-10/85), dated 11 -7-1986 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs (Preventive) Bombay.2. The Additional Collector, by the order referred to above, besides ordering absolute confiscation of 325 packages of foreign textiles and Audio cassettes, imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,00,000/- on the appellant.The appellant had challenged only the penalty imposed on him. He had made it clear in the appeal memo "as far as the question of confiscation of the goods and the Craft Arab Dhow is concerned, the appellant had nothing to say as he claims no title interest or claim of the said".3. The main grounds of challenge are that the show cause notice was served on the wife of the appellants and not on the appellant. While handing over the show cause notice to the wife of the appellant she was not informed as to the nature of the document which she was asked to hand over to her h...
Kishan L. Kripalani Vs. Siemens (India) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR131; 1988MhLJ798
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. This petition challenges the propriety and legality of the order passed by a Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Bombay, on 19th April, 1983 on an application made by the petitioner for issuing a commission for examination of four witnesses who are in Delhi under Order XXVI, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner has filed a suit against the respondent for possession of a flat Bearing No. 45-A in Anita Building situate at Mount Pleasant Road, Bombay, which is in the possession of the respondent as a tenant. The said suit had been filed on a ground which is available to a landlord under section 13(1)(g) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Rent Act '.2. The petitioner says that he required the said flat, hereinafter referred to as 'the suit premises', reasonably and bona fide for his own use and occupation because, among other things, his mother, who is an old lady of 75 years and who ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »