Mumbai Court September 1990 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.
Kalambar V.S.S.K. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT130Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad bearing No. Collr/No. 40/89, dated 26-10-1989.2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants manufacturing sugar reported a fire accident, which took place on 23/24-4-1987 night and the specific reason for the fire accident was not known. On receipt of the intimation, the Supdt. of Central Excise visited the sugar factory on 13-5-1987 and drew a panchnama and according to the panchnama 2943 bags of sugar were destroyed by fire and the cause for the fire was not known. Thereupon the adjudication proceedings were initiated by the Assistant Collector who confirmed the demand for duty on the aforesaid quantity and the matter was taken up before the Collector (Appeals). He set aside the order for de novo adjudication after personal hearing opportunity being given to the party. Since the question of remission of duty is to be decided by the Collector as per the provision of Rule 49 of Central ...
Raman Lamba and Others Vs. D.M. Harish and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Bom311; 1991(1)BomCR49
1. Relying on S. 31(4) of theArbitration Act, 1940, the Petitioners havefiled this petition for a direction that the impugned award be returned to the arbitrators for being filed in the High Court of Delhi on the ground that this award could not have been filed in this Court. The relevant facts and circumstances of the case leading to the filing of this petition are as under.2. The petitioners along with respondents Nos. 3 to 7 were carrying on business as partners in the name and style of M/s. Hotel Diplomat at 9/39, Sardar Patel Mars, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi. The deed of partnership contained an arbitration clause. Disputes and differences arose among the partners. Sometime in the month of January, 1982, an agreement of reference was executed by and between the petitioners and respondents Nos. 3 to 7 to refer all their disputes and differences with regard to the said partnership business to the arbitration of respondents Nos. 1 and 2. The said partnership business was carried on at N...
Jaysynth Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT246(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioners are a private limited company incorporated under the provision of the Companies Act, 1956, and inter alia, manufacture synthetic organic dyestuff. In the manufacture of the dyestuff, the petitioners are required to use intermediates as raw materials and these intermediates are liable to payment of excise duty and countervailing duty under Tariff Item No. 68 to the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'ACT'). The manufacture of synthetic organic dyestuff is liable to payment of excise duty under Tariff Item No. 14D of the First Schedule. By Notification No. 103/61, the Central Government exempted the dyes derived from coal tar and manufactured wholly or partly out of the intermediates, falling under Item No. 14D of the First Schedule from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is equivalent to the amount of the countervailing customs duty paid on such imported intermediates. The petitioners were thus e...
ion Exchange (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT222(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 is a Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the manufacture of various articles of plastics. The Company has factory at Ambarnath in Thane District where amongst other products, Ion exchange Resins is manufactured. The manufacture of the product is liable to payment of excise duty. Tariff Item No. 15A of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act provides for payment of ad valorem duty at the rate of 50% in respect of manufacturer of article or synthetic resins and plastic materials thereof. Tariff Item No. 15A(2) refers to articles made of plastics, all sorts. By Notification No. 68/71 dated May 29, 1971, the Central Government exempted articles made of plastics, all sorts falling under Item No. 15A(2) from the whole of the duty of excise payable.2. The Company filed classification lists on May 5, 1972, March 1, 1974, and August 1, 1974 under Rule 173-B classifying Ion Exchange resins under Tar...
Shaymrani Wd/O Wasudwo Prasad Gaur Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR324; (1991)93BOMLR467
V.A. Mohta, J.1. This is a reference arising out of difference of opinion between two learned Single Judges of this Court upon the following question:Whether the application under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure code independently or read with Article 227 or independently under Article 227 of the constitution of India is maintainable at the instance of the party who has availed the remedy of revision under section 397 of the Criminal Procedure code We record the answer in the affirmative for the reasons that follow.2. Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code (the Code) confers co-extensive and concurrent revisional powers upon the High Court or any Sessions Judge. A glance at the aforesaid provision will indicate that the revisional powers (i) can be exercised even suo motu (ii) cannot be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order and (iii) cannot be pressed into service second time in the other Court at the behest of the same party in respect of the same subject matter. ...
Gopaldas Udhavdas Ahuja and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR77
S.M. Daud, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution takes exception to an order of confiscation together with the imposition of a penalty purporting to fall under sections 71 and 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968- hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'.2. Petitioners are the son and widow respectively of one Udhavdas Ahuja. The said Udhavdas was married twice-first to mother of the first petitioner who died on 19-2-1950 and next to the second petitioner on 1-7-1950. Petitioner No. 1 was born on 16-2-1950. From the second petitioner Udhavdas had a daughter named Mohinin who was born on 21-2-1951. Udhavdas' mother Bhojibai expired on 4-7-1951. During his life-time, Udhavdas, his mother, wives, petitioner No. 1 and Mohini until her marriage, all constituted an undivided Hindu Family. Udhavdas as also the family were well to do and celebrated Mohini's marriage which took place on 2-5-1974 with great pomp. On 28th August, 1974, the residence of the petitioners was raided by O...
Ashok Kumar Berival Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1990
Reported in: 1990(31)LC390(Bombay)
S.M. Daud, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution takes exception to the objection incorporated in query memo Ex. E vis-a-vis a consignment sought to be imported by the petitioner,2. The petitioner had imported aluminium alloy coated steel sheets weighing about 99.785 M.Ts. of certain specifications. At that time, a query memo was issued called upon the petitioner to explain how that was permissible under the import licence which permitted import of only carbon steel sheets/strips. Petitioner submitted a reply which is at Ex. F and followed up the same with Ex. G to support the contention that the imported article was covered by the import licence. Finding respondents unyielding, petitioner came to this Court and on the basis of the interim relief obtained an order for clearance. The respondents have not filed a return. The only surviving question now is to decide whether the objection raised in the impugned memo is untenable? I find in the affirmative for the reasons...
Assistant Director, Revenue Vs. Pooja Exporters
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC414Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Before the stay application was taken up for hearing Dr. Kantawala, the learned advocate for the respondents raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the appeal itself is not sustainable under the law.2. Shri Mondal stated that he anticipated this objection and he would first like to argue the maintainability of the appeal and if the Bench is inclined to accept his argument, then he would make further arguments on the stay application.3. This appeal has been filed by the Asstt. Director, Revenue Intelligence, Bangalore against the order passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay releasing certain consignments of the respondents. This appeal has been filed under Sec. 129A of the Customs Act. Shri Mondal contended that the Asstt. Director, Revenue Intelligence is the aggrieved person because the order passed by the Collector is against the revenue and is against the public interest. Sec. 129A refers to "any person aggrieved by the order" and hence he, being aggrieved by the ...
Doctor Beck and Co. (India) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT263(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioners are a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and inter alia manufacture insulating enamels varnishes and resins for electrical industry in the factory at Pimpri, Pune. The petitioners manufacture a product known as 'Insulation Adhesive P80'. The adhesive is obtained by dissolving duty paid polyvinyl alcohol powder in water. The petitioners classified the manufacture of adhesive under Tariff Item No. 15(1)(i) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and paid excise duty thereon at the rate of 30 per cent. ad valorem initially and later on at 40 per cent. ad valorem. Sometime in December 1979, the petitioners learnt that the Collector of Central Excise, Pune, has issued a communication dated November 17, 1979, relating to excise duty of aqueous solution of polyvinyl alcohol powder. The communication inter alia stated that change in the form of duty paid artificial or synthetic resins fr...
Koron Business Systems Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1990
Reported in: 1991LC508(Bombay); 1991(51)ELT212(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioners are a limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and are running a factory situate at Kolshet Road in Thane District. The petitioners manufacture photo copying machines known as 'Korestat Copier Machine'. The manufacture of machine is liable to payment of excise duty under Tariff Item No. 33D of the First Schedule to the former Excise Act. The tariff item inter alia prescribes that office machines and a apparatus are liable to payment of twenty per cent. ad valorem duty. The petitioners sold and supplied the machines along with certain accessories like photo conductive plates and black shields. The plates and black shields are not built - in parts of the machine, but are used in the machine in substantially the same manner as a film or plate is used in conventional cameras. The plates used in photo copying machines can be used for a number of exposures after which it is required to be replaced. The petitioners supply each new machine along ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »