Mumbai Court June 1993 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.
Rifakatalikhan Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1993
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR75; 1993CriLJ3844
Kamat, J.1. The order of conviction, firstly under section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and secondly under section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default further rigorous imprisonment for 5 years on the first count, and rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default further rigorous imprisonment for one month on the second count, imposed in Sessions Case No. 19/1991, by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna, by the impugned judgment dated July 25, 1991, is impugned by the appellant in this appeal.2. The appellant was found in possession of 2 Kgs. of Charas valued at Rs. 1,95,305/-. The appellant was an external student for the degree course of engineering at Aurangabad. 3. There are cases in which the Police act on prior information. There are cases in which panchas are easily available and the search can be made or the articles...
Usman Gani Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another and A.S. Bidarkar and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1993
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR563; 1993CriLJ3853
ORDER1. This is a Contempt Notice of Motion for alleged breach of Orders dated 2nd February 1987 and 22nd September 1988. The alleged breach is on two grounds : Firstly, on the ground that there is contempt by interference with the possession of the Court Receiver and, secondly, on the ground that in spite of Orders of this Court, the Contemnors have demolished certain structures. 2. The facts briefly stated are as follows : The petitioner claims that he is the owner of certain sheds and that these sheds had been in existence prior to 1963. As the Bombay Municipal Corporation was threatening demolition of the sheds, the petitioner filed Bombay City Civil Court Suit No. 4194 of 1985 for an injunction that the sheds should not be demolished without due process of law. An Ad Interim Injunction was granted on 12th July 1985. On 22nd July 1985 a statement was made on behalf of the Bombay Municipal Corporation that there will be no demolition without due process of law. On such a statement t...
Gujarat Metal Box Co. Vs. Cegat
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1993
Reported in: 1993LC557(Bombay); 1993(67)ELT461(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioner imported rubber blankets for Printing Press and the goods were cleared by levy of 100% duty + 20% under Customs Tariff Item No. 40/ 16(1). The bill of entry was failed on July 27, 1979 and the goods were cleared. On March 3, 1980, the petitioners filed refund claim for Rs. 48,129.20 on the ground that the rubber blankets were classifiable under Customs Notification No. 159 and attracted duty at 40% only. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim by order dated March 24, 1980 on the ground that the refund application was filed beyond statutory period of limitation prescribed under sub-section (1) of Section 127 of the Customs Act. The petitioners carried appeal before Customs Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal but the appeal ended in dismissal, by order dated April 299, 1983. The two orders are under challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. It is not in dispute that levy of duty under Tariff Item No. 40/ 16(...
Grentex and Company Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1993
Reported in: 1993LC556(Bombay); 1993(67)ELT459(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioners carry on business as exporters, importers and manufacturers of man-made fibres. In the course of the business, the petitioners imported two consignments of Cash million Brand Acrylic fibre. The customs duty is leviable on the imported item under Heading 56.01/04 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The rate of duty payable in respect of items covered by Entry 56.01/04 is 140%. By notification dated March 1, 1983 issued by the Central Excise Rules, manmade fibres other than textured falling under Item No. 18 of the First Schedule the duty of excise leviable thereon at the rate specified in the First Schedule as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rates specified in the table annexed to the Notification. In respect of acrylic fibre, the table provides that the rate would be Rs. 24/- per kilogram. The table further reads as under : ' Provided that acrylic fibre shall be exempted from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon und...
Siganporia Bros. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR34; 1993LC244(Bombay); 1993(66)ELT606(Bom)
Pendse, J. 1. Thee petitioners are a Partnership Firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 and carry on business as Ship Chandlers. The petitioners import various goods and articles of consumption for the purpose of re-exporting the same as ships stores. The petitioners do not require any import licence in accordance with provisions of Import (Control) Order, 1955 as the petitioners supply the goods imported as stores to vessels. On such import, the petitioners store the goods in the warehouse after filing the bill of entry for warehousing. Chapter IX of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') deals with the topic of Warehousing and Section 59, inter alia, provides that the importer of any dutiable goods which have been entered for warehousing and assessed to duty under Sections 17 and 18 shall execute a bond to observe all the provisions of the Act and the rules and regulations in respect of such goods. Section 12 of the Act is a charging section and ...
Principal, Bhartiya Mahavidyalaya and anr. Vs. Ramakrishna Wasudeo Lah ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1993
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR594; (1994)IILLJ556Bom
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. The Principal of a college as also the President of the educational institution have approached this Court challenging the orders passed by the Labour Court. Akola, as also the concurring order passed by Appellate Authority, at Nagpur. By these two orders the Courts below allowed the application filed by the respondent for the payment of gratuity. The claim of the employee originally as it stood was that he was entitled to be paid the gratuity in the light of the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Gratuity Act')2. The application was opposed by the petitioners on number of grounds. Firstly, it was contended that the college or the institution was not an 'industry' and, therefore, there was no question of the application of the Gratuity Act. Secondly, it was stated that even if it was an industry, the salary of the concerned applicant was more than the prescribed limits and, therefore, the petitioners were not liab...
Subash Popatlal Shah Vs. Smt. Lata Subhash Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Bom43; (1993)95BOMLR260; (1994)DMC115; 1993MhLJ923
ORDERH. H. Kantharia, J. 1. These twoappeals are being disposed by this common judgment as they arise from the same impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Judge of the Family Court, Bombay, on June 28, 1991, in M.J. Petition No. 799 of 1989 and Petition No. 500 of 1989. The appellant-husband in both the appeals, Subhash Popatlal Shah, shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the appellant' and the respondent-wife, Mrs. Lata Subhash Shah, shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the respondent'.2. The respondent filed M.J. Petition No. 799 of 1989 for dissolution of marriage under Sections 13(1)(i); 13(1)(ib) and 13(2)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Petition No. 500 of 1989 for separate maintenance for herself and son Anand under Section 125 ofthe Criminal Procedure Code in the Family Court. Her case was that the marriage between herself and the appellant took place asper Hindu Vedic rites in the month of April, 1973 at Bombay whereafter she stayed with her husband...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Rambhau Fakira Pannase and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR668; 1994CriLJ475
A.A. Desai, J.1. This appeal by the State is directed against the finding of acquittal for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The facts leading to the prosecution are as thus : Accused Nos. 1 and 2, respectively as Sub-Inspector and Constable, were attached to the Police Station, Wadi, of city of Nagpur. On 19-1-1989, one Mr. Hiwanje lodged a complaint of abuses and quarrel by P.W. 1 Sangamlal and his wife. Accused No. 1, therefore, called them to the Police Station. On 23-1-1989 at about 9.30 a.m. accused No. 1 demanded Rs. 1500/- from P.W. 1 Sangamlal for dropping the proceedings. With the intervention of the accused No. 2, the demand was settled at Rs. 1300/-. The complainant P.W. 1 Sangamlal at about 12-45 hours lodged a report in this behalf, vide Ex. 19 to the Anti-Corruption Bureau. Accordingly Panchanama was drawn vide Ex. 32. P.W. 3 Purushottam Manapure was introduced as a Panch. Thirteen tainted curre...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1993
Reported in: [1996]217ITR216(Bom)
V.A. Mohta, J. 1. Under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions at the instance of the Revenue : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting fully the interest levied under section 215 by holding that under rule 40(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, such interest is to be totally waived and not merely reduced to that leviable for a period up to one year after the submission of the return, for 1966-67 and 1967-68 assessment years? 2. Whether Tribunal was justified in holding that under rule 40(5) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the waiver of interest was justified and even if so, whether the refusal of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner to waive interest under rule 40(5) would be tantamount to a refusal by the Income-tax Officer so as to make such an order appealable to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for 1966-67 assessment year? 3. Whe...
R.D. Alloys Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1993
Reported in: 1993LC559(Bombay); 1993(67)ELT53(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioners imported ferro nickel (ferro alloys) and the item was liable to payment of Customs duty under Item No. 73.02 of First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Central Government had issued notification dated January 1,1981 in exercise of powers conferred under sub- section(1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act granting total exemption in respect of import of ferro nickel. The petitioner had booked purchase order on December 14,1982 and the ship carrying the imported cargo entered territorial waters on March 22,1983. The petitioners filed bill of entry for warehousing on the same day and the goods were warehoused. Subsequently, on August 3,1983, the petitioners filed bill of entry for home consumption. By that time, the exemption notification dated January 8,1981 was rescinded and a fresh notification dated July 19,1983 was published withdrawing the exemption. 2. The Collector of Customs demanded duty from the petitioner on filing of bills of entry for ho...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »