Mumbai Court January 1995 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.
Nandalal K. JaIn Vs. Collector of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT68Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In both the cases the appeals have been filed against the Order in Appeal No. 04/94 B.R. (F. No. S/49-138,143 & 144/93 T.S.), dated 12-1-1994 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals).2. There is a delay of about 3 months (2 months and 26 days) in filing the appeals by both the appellants. During the last hearing, the ld.Consultant Shri Sonavane indicated that the appellants are interested in pursuing their appeals and to establish their bona fides, they will be depositing the entire penalty amounts. However, now he pleads that they have not deposited the penalty amounts and the condonation applications may be considered on merits.3. We find that in both the cases, it is an admitted fact that the impugned order in appeal was received on 15-1-1994 and they ought to have filed the appeals on or before 15-4-1994. However, the appeals came to be filed on 11-7-1994. It is contended that the marriage of the appellant Shri Dilip K. Jain was fixed on 20-2-1994 and their family were ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Vijay Waman Moghe
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT66Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order in appeal No.S/49-135/86-T, dated 27-3-1981 setting aside the order passed by the Assistant Collector.2. The respondents gave an advertisement for sale of movie camera and acting thereon, the Department made enquiry about the licit import and though the respondents gave a statement of having received it from an individual who had imported the same, could not produce any documentary evidence. Subsequently, the respondent modified his version and stated that the importer had gifted the camera to his relative and he had purchased it from the said relative and that the importer had died in a air crash and he was not in a position to produce the documentary evidence. The Assistant Collector did not accept the version, however, in the appeal before the Collector (Appeals), the said authority came to the conclusion that the camera was at the relevant time, neither a notified item nor an item specified under Section 123 of the Customs Ac...
Collector of Customs Vs. Vardhan Silk Mills
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1995
Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT332Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Invoking the provisions of Section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 the Collector of Customs, Bombay has sought reference to the High Court, on the questions as formulated, pleading them to be the issues of law arising out of the Final Order No. 784/94-WRB, dated 2-5-1994 passed by this Bench, on the majority view, after reference to the third member, against divergent views held by two members of the Bench vide Order No. 1562-65/92-WRB, dated 7-10-1992, in Appeal C/498/88.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of the present application are, that the Respondent Importer was holding an Export House Additional Licence, issued during the policy period AM 1982-83 with endorsement in terms of Para 186 of the Policy Book for the said period, and as such, they were entitled to import items appearing under Open General Licence. When the said licence was issued "Cita Stearyl Alchohol" was one of the items importable under OGL. On announcement of the Policy for the year 1982-83 AM announced o...
Miraj State Bank Ltd. Vs. Poonawalla Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1995
Reported in: (1995)97BOMLR466
M.L. Pendse, J.1. The Miraj State Bank Limited has preferred this appeal to challenge legality of judgment and decree dated March 31, 1986 passed by Third Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune in Special Civil Suit No. 346 of 1983, By the impugned decree, the trial Court decreed the suit against respondent No. 1 for a sum of Rs. 10,06,683.69 together with interest thereon at the rate of 17% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till the date of payment. The suit was dismissed against defendant Nos. 2 to 6. The facts giving rise to the passing of this decree are as follows :The respondent No. 1 is a registered Private Limited Company and carries on business as Construction Contractor and Builder. On August 8, 1976, the respondent No. 1 sought secured credit facility upto a limit of Rs. 3 lakhs towards the working capital for construction of building known as Paramount Apartments. The respondent No. 1 was desirous of constructing ownership flats and shop premises on the ....
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Bayer India Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT560Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the Order in Appeal No. M-399/TH-74/85, dated 22-5-1985 allowing the appeal of the respondent. The amount involved in this case is Rs. 18,230.59. Since the Collector (A) has allowed the appeal of the respondents, the Revenue have come in appeal.Though in exercise of the discretion vested in me, for not entertaining the appeal where the amount involved is less than Rs. 50,000/- during the material period, since a point of law has been raised. I am taking up the appeal for decision on merits limited to the point of law.2. The question is whether the refund claim is time barred or otherwise in terms of the amended provisions of Section 11B, which came into force on 17-11-1980. The refund claim was filed under Rule 173L on 24-11-1980. Goods which were cleared on payment of duty, were returned on 2-4-1980. D-3 declaration was filed on 3-4-1980 and the reprocessed goods were cleared again on payment of duty on 10-10-1980. The refund claim came to be filed on 24-...
India Electricals and Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT72Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. GSM-1328/89-AHD, dated 4-6-1989 rejecting the appellant's appeal.2. The undisputed facts involved in the appeal are that the appellant was availing the proforma credit procedure prior to the introduction of Modvat Scheme. During the period, when he was availing proforma credit procedure, there was a dispute about the eligibility of proforma credit in respect of certain inputs, which was finally resolved in favour of the appellant by the Asst. Collector by allowing proforma credit to the extent of Rs. 16424.60. The order allowing proforma credit came to the passed by the Asstt. Collector on 29-7-1986. By that time, the appellants had switched over to Modvat credit and hence they could not avail of credit of this amount in the proforma account in RG 23. Hence they requested for permission to transfer this amount in Modvat account in RG 23A Ft. II which was refused by the Asstt. Collector. The appeal against the order of the Asstt. Col...
Smt. Meena Jayendra Thakur Vs. the Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2533
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. The petitioner is the wife of the detenu Jayendra Vishnu Thakur alias Bhai Thakur. By the present petition, she seeks a writ of habeas corpus seeking to quash the order of detention bearing No. SPL. 3(A)/PSA 0192/17 dated 5th February, 1992 issued by Shri D. B. S. Sohal, the Secretary (Preventive Detention) to the Government of Maharashtra Home Department (Special), Mantralaya, Bombay - 400032 issued under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the COFEPOSA Act'). She also seeks to impugn the declaration bearing No. 9/93 of No. 675/781/92-CUS-VIII dated 15th September, 1993 issued by the Central Government, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi, under section 9(1) of the COFEPOSA Act. Lastly, she seeks to impugn the order of confirmation dated 17th November, 1993 issued by the Government of Maharashtra under section 8(f) of the COFEPOSA Act. She also seeks an ...
inacio Mariano Dias and ors. Vs. Smt. Palmira Valadares
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR416
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. Rule. By consent heard forthwith.2. The plaintiffs, in a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing in the suit property or otherwise obstructing the enjoyment of the property are the revision petitioners herein. 3. The petitioners filed an injunction application along with the Suit No. 167/92 and interim injunction restraining the defendant. The petitioners' case is that the suit property originally belonged to the Communidade of Carambolim surveyed under Nos. 280/1 and 288/1. The petitioners claimed that they are in exclusive possession of the property as tenants since 1954-1957. In an auction by the Communidade in 1954-1957 of the suit property which is a cashew garden, one Smt. Maria took the suit property on rent and sub-leased the same to the petitioners No. 1 to 3 and predecessors of the plaintiffs No. 4 and 5. Since the time of the said auction the petitioners claim that they used to pay rent to the Communidade till 1...
P.P.C. Constructions Vs. National Buildings Construction Corporation L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR397
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. Rule. By consent to be heard forthwith.2. The petitioners are a partnership firm who have undertaken some work with the respondent. It appears that disputes have arisen during the execution of the contract and the petitioners wanted to get an Arbitrator appointed invoking the relevant Arbitration Clause contained in the contract. The petitioners filed an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act to appoint an Arbitrator as Special Civil Suit No. 152/1993 on the file of Civil Judge, S.D. at Margao. By Order dated 15-2-1994 the Court has directed the respondent to appoint an Arbitrator in terms of the Arbitration Clause contained in the contract within one month. Even after the lapse of one month, no information was received by the petitioners of having appointed an Arbitrator in terms of the order of the Court. Then the petitioners had to file another application on 18-3-1994 to appoint an Arbitrator by the Court. But in the meantime the appointm...
Atlas Copco Ab of Sweden Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
Reported in: (1995)53ITD293(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee relating to the assessment year 1986-87. The first two grounds taken by the assessee relate to the taxability of the amount of two instalments of US $ 60,000 each received out of the lump sum consideration from Indian company M/s Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., as royalty.2. Assessee is a non-resident Swedish company. It had entered into an agreement with M/s Atlas Copco (India) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to in short as "Atlas Copco") on 25-3-1985, for supply of the technical know-how for the manufacture of screw type air compressors and to render technical assistance that may be required in the said manufacture during the existence of the agreement against a lump 'sum consideration of US $ 1,80,000 payable in three instalments. Assessee filed a return of its income declaring a total income of Rs. 23,13,600 which did not include receipt of the first two instalments of US $ 60,000 each received by the assessee during the year under consideration on the gr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »