Mumbai Court July 1989 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.
Balbindra Singh Joga Singh Vs. the Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1989
Reported in: AIR1989Bom401; 1990(2)BomCR544; (1989)91BOMLR577
1. What the Appeal is about This is the Plaintiff's Appeal . He was the owner of a Truck. While crossing the level crossing of a Taloja, an engine of the Railway Knocked down the Truck and broke it into pieces. The plaintiff filed the suit for damages on the ground that the Railway Administration was Negligent in the matter of not locking the level crossing gate while the engine was moving on the rails. The suit was filed in form pauperis. The trail Court upheld his contention that there did exist negligence on the part of the Railway Administration as alleged by the plaintiff. Major protion of damages pleaded by the plaintiff was held established. All the same, the suit was dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitation.In effect, the learned Judge has held that the presentation of the pauper petition on the last day of the date of limitation should have been by the petitioner himself, that the presentation of the same by his Advocate and his verification of the same about 5...
Ahmed R.V. Peermohamed Vs. Jogi S. Bhar and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)BomCR592; 1990CriLJ2195; 1990(1)MhLj126
ORDER1. This is plaintiff's motion for action in contempt against defendant Nos. 5 to 23 as also the respondents who are the directors of defendant No. 5 Company.2. Facts and circumstances, briefly narrated, are as follows :At Wodehouse Road, Coloba, there was situated an immoveable property 'Marble Hall' owned by the plaintiff and occupied by his tenants. The plaintiff instituted suits for possession inter alia under Section 13(1)(hh) of the Rent Act against his tenants on the ground that he desires to demolish the said property and put up in its place a new building. The plaintiff undertook to give to his tenants premises in the new construction to be put up in place of the old building 'Marble Hall'. On 18th November, 1978, the plaintiff entered into an agreement of sale his aforesaid property with defendant No. 4, a partnership firm with defendant Nos. 1 to 3 as partners thereof, for a consideration of rupees twenty five lacs and subject to the rights of the tenants. The purchasers...
Vishal Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1989
Reported in: 1990(29)ECC34; 1989(44)ELT420(Bom)
1. The petitioners manufacture closed circuit television cameras. Closed circuit television lenses are components of such cameras. The petitioners imported closed circuit television lenses from Japan and filed Bills of Entry in respect thereof in February and March 1981.2. The heading under the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act relevant to such import is numbered 90.02 and reads thus :'90.02 Lenses, prisms, mirror and Rate of duty applicableother optical elements of any material to the instrumentsmounted, being parts of or fittings or apparatus to whichfor instruments of apparatus, other they are parts orthan such elements of glass in fittings.'optical work,3. The rate of duty applicable to carry CCTV cameras is set out Heading No. 85.15, which reads thus :'85.15. Radio-telegraphic and radio-telephonic transmission and reception apparatus, radio broadcasting and television transmission and reception apparatus (including receivers incorporating sound recording or reproducers and ...
M.J. Talegaonkar Vs. Tejoomal Lakhmichand Narang and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1989
Reported in: 1989(3)BomCR436
C. Mookerjee, C.J.1. This appeal is by M.J. Talegaonkar, defendant No. 1, who was described in the plaint of the Suit No. 604 of 1974 as a member of Bombay Zionist Association for himself and representing all the members of the Bombay Zionist Association, an unregistered Association, having its office at Narang House, 2nd Floor, 41-45, Hamam Street Bombay. The plaintiffs respondents Nos. 1 and ' instituted in this Court the said Suit No. 604 of 1974, inter alias for declaring that the Bombay Zionist Association and the 1st defendant and all members of the said Association or persons claiming through them and the defendants Nos. 2 to 13 had no right, title or interest in the said suit premises, viz., part of the 2nd floor at 41-45, Hamam Street, Bombay, or any part thereof. The prayer (b) of the plaint was for ordering the 1st defendant and all members of the Bombay Zionist Association and the defendants Nos. 2 to 13 to remove themselves and to deliver to the plaintiffs vacant possessio...
Indian Card Clothing Co. Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1989
Reported in: (1990)(42)LC820Tri(Mum.)bai
1. I have heard Shri N.D. Khosla, consultant for the appellant who appeared for personal hearing today. The case has come from Tribunal by remand. The impugned order dated 25.7.1984 had rejected refund claim Of the appellant on the ground that Card Clothing Foundation imported by the appellant was not cut to size and shape to form identifiable part of the machine and as such it was in the form of Cotton Fabric and so correctly assessable under Tariff item 19(i) of C.E.T. He had also placed reliance on the invoice and the packing slips indicating that the goods were cotton fabric. After carefully hearing learned advocate, seeing sample of the impugned product and also going through certain other orders cited by the learned advocate viz. S/49 - 495/88 CL, S/49 - 21/88 CL, S/49 - 444/87 CL, S/49 - 471/87 CL, passed by Collector of Customs, Appeals, Bombay and also the case of M/s. International Conveyer Ltd., in the R.A. before Addl. Secretary, Govt. of India, Deptt. of Revenue against o...
K. Govindaraj Vs. Central Board of Excise and Customs
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1989
Reported in: 1989(24)LC739(Bombay); 1989(43)ELT626(Bom)
ORDERBhaktavatsalam, J.1. The Writ Petition has been filed praying for issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the petitioners the reward amount of Rs. 4,62,700/- being the 20% of the estimated market value of the contraband goods seized.2. The following narration of facts would show the funny attitude of the petitioners and the wrong interpretation given by them to the notification issued by the Government. When the petitioners went for fishing during May 1986 they saw some bundles floating in the sea and two persons struggling for help. It seems that they salvaged the above bundles and also rescued the said two persons and the two persons informed that they were transporting contraband goods to Indian shores from Sri Lanka. The petitioners salvaged the contraband goods and brought them to Nagapattinam and handed over the same, to the Customs Officials. There were sixteen bundles containing VCRs and Zip fasteners.3. In the statement before the authorities the pet...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1989
Reported in: 1989(25)LC28(Bombay)
C. Mookerjee, C.J.1. The short point in this Appeal is whether the learned Single Judge was right in holding that the price charged by the Petitioner-Respondent Company to its sole distributors M/s. Voltas Ltd. represented the wholesale cash price within the meaning of Section 4(a) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (as the said provision stood before 1.10.1975) for determination of excise duty on the tractors manufactured by the Petitioner-Respondent Company. Before we deal with the question, we may briefly set out the facts.2. The International Tractor Company of India Ltd. with which the Petitioner Company subsequently had merged during the period from 4th October 1971 to 11th February 1972 and from 14lh February 1972 to 12th October 1972 had sold diverse number of tractors of the said Company to M/s. Voltas Ltd. under a distributorship agreement dated 17th March 1970. The said distributor Company in turn had sold the said tractors to various parties. In the event the said sa...
Liberty Oil Mills and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1989
Reported in: 1990(26)ECC274
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. Between 1980 and 1981 the petitioners imported 11 consignments of unprocessed palm kernel oil and 12 consignments of unprocessed crude coconut oil. They paid Rs.7,18,957.11 as additional customs duty in respect of the said import.2. The said oils are vegetable non-essential oils. They fall under item 12 of the Central Excise Tariff and the rate of excise duty is Rs.100/- per M.T. There is a special duty thereon at the rate of Rs.5/- per M.T. On 4th September, 1981 the Superintendent, Central Excise, Bombay, informed the petitioners that oils of the nature they had imported had been exempted from payment of the whole of the central excise duty thereon by reason of an exemption notification dated 1st March, 1963. The petitioners thereupon sought refund of the amount that had been paid as additional customs duty upon the said oils. There being no response, this petition was filed.3. The said exemption notification, as it read at the relevant time, stated: 'In exercise ...
Tubeweld Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1989
Reported in: 1990(26)LC84(Bombay)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The Petitioners imported stainless steel tubes from Japan. The vessel carrying them crossed into territorial waters on 27th February 1982. On 5th March 1982 the Petitioners filed a bill of entry for removal of the said tubes to a bonded warehouse and they were so removed.2. It was the contention of the Petitioners that the said tubes were not dutiable when they crossed into territorial waters because there was no entry in the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act that was applicable to them They therefore filed this Writ Petition seeking to clear the said tubes from the bonded warehouse without payment of Customs duty. By an interim order dated 8th December 1982 they were permitted to clear the said tubes from the bonded warehouse upon the furnishing of a bank guarantee.3. The Full Bench judgment of this Court in Apar Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India 1985 23 ELT 644 : 1988 (19) ECR 514 holds that if goods are not dutiable when they cross the Customs frontier, DO Customs dut...
income-tax Officer Vs. Millars Machinery Co. Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD16(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 24-3-1984 for the assessment year 1980-81.2. Two substantive grounds taken in this appeal are against the deletion of the addition of Rs. 6,00,000 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on account of the income from business transferred by the assessee to M/s. Acme Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and the deletion of the addition Under Section 40A(8) in respect of interest paid to the directors.3. As regards the first ground, the facts are that the assessee is a public company. Besides other activities, the company carried on the activity of manufacture of road and building construction machines. By an agreement dated 1-1-1979 the activity of manufacturing road and building construction machinery was transferred to one M/s. Acme Manufacturing Co. Ltd. The Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that the transfer was not legal nor in substance of a real transfer because of the followi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »