Mumbai Court June 1991 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.
Maharashtra General Kamgar Union Vs. All-India Handloom Fabrics Market ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-11-1991
Reported in: 1991(3)BomCR63; (1991)93BOMLR703; [1991(63)FLR567]; (1992)IILLJ652Bom; 1992(1)MhLj203
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution impugns the second respondent's verdict upon a Complaint under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act 1971 (PULP Act). 2. The first respondent-hereinafter referred to as to 'employer' or 'society' - is a Government of India sponsored body to arrange for the more advantageous marketing of fabrics manufactured by handloom weavers scattered all over the country. It has established sales depots at various places and those in Bombay included the one located at the Dadabhai Nawroji Road. This depot was gutted in a fire that broke out on October 16, 1982. The fire left the employer with a depot at Mahim in Bombay. The 155 employees working in the D.N. Road depot were without work. For some time there was a lay off. Sixty two employees were transferred to depots outside Bombay. The Society converted an office at the Janmabhoomi Chambers into a sales depot and some of the laid - off employe...
international Computers Indian Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1991
Reported in: (1992)(57)ELT671Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal bearing No.SKM-469/PN-132/87 dated 25-6-1987 confirming the order in original bearing No. V-(33DD) 18-577/82/3757 dated 16-6-1984, rejecting the appellants' claim for refund of the amount.2. The appellants who are the manufacturers of computers, despatched some units of computers under the Gate Passes on 27-9-1981, after payment of duty. These units were not accepted by the customers and the same were brought back for repairing and overhauling on 30-4-1982 and 8-6-1982. It is reported that free replacements were given to the customers and excise duty was paid on these replacements and therefore, the appellants filed the claim for refund of duty paid on initial consignments which were brought back claiming refund under Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The claim was rejected by the Asstt.Collector holding that the declarations as prescribed under Rule 173H were not produced and the claim was not tenable under Rule 173L. ...
international Computers Indian Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1991
Reported in: (1992)(39)LC241Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal bearing No.SKM-469/PN-132/87 dated 25.6.1987 confirming the order in original bearing No. V-(33DD) 18-577/82/3757 dated 16.6.1984, rejecting the appellants' claim for returned of the amount.2. The appellants who are the manufacturers of computers, despatched some units of computers under the Gale Passes on 27.9.1981, after payment of duty. These units were mil accepted by the customers and the same were brought back for repairing and overhauling on 30.4.1982 and 8.6.1982. It is reported that free replacements were given to them and excise duty was paid on these replacements and therefore, the appellants filed the claim for refund of duty paid on initial consignments which were brought back claiming refund under Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules 1944. The claim was rejected by the Asstt.Collector holding that the declarations as prescribed under Rule 173H were not produced and the claim was not tenable under Rule 173L. In the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›