Mumbai Court February 1995 Judgments
Dr. Manish Prabhakar Khanolkar Vs. the Dean, Goa Medical College and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-23-1995
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR542
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. Rule. By consent heard forthwith.2. A simple but very subtle question arises in this petition. Whether the grace marks awarded by the University to a candidate for his proficiency in sports could be added to the total aggregate marks obtained by him in the M.B.B.S. examination for the purpose of admission to the Post-Graduate medical course in the Goa Medical College.3. The Goa Medical College by a notification called for applications of eligible candidates who obtained degree in M.B.B.S. for admission to the Post-Graduate Medical courses in various streams for the year 1995. The petitioner and the third respondent who are holders of M.B.B.S. degree applied for admission to the Post-Graduate Medical Course pursuant to the said Notification. As notified by the first respondent, the admission to Post-Graduate Medical courses are being regulated by the Rules notified as No. 43/6/80/PHD dated 2-3-1988. The relevant rules with which we are concerned is Rule II...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Silk Mills Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT215Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Both the appeals are directed against order-in-original No. 11 / MP/87, dated 29-10-1987 ordering confiscation of 24,819 L. Mts. of processed MMF vide Rule 173Q(i) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Rule 226 thereof with an option to the appellants to pay fine of Rs. 90,000/- in lieu of confiscation and the direction to pay appropriate duty at the time of clearance and imposing personal penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on appellant M/s. Krishna Silk Mills (Appeal No.E/27/88-Bom.) and of Rs. 20,000/- on appellant M/s. Silk India Corporation (Appeal No. E/28/88-Bom.) under the same Rules.2. On the search carried out at the premises of the appellants on 28-5-1985, 24819 L. Mtrs of processed MMF was recovered for which no excise payment documents were available. The appellants declared that they used to procure grey MMF from open market and get them processed through three processing nouses, namely M/s. Navjeevan Synthetics, IC.Ganghi and Silver Dyeing which used to return processed fa...
Tag this Judgment!Homi P. Ranina and Others Vs. Eruch B. Desai and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Bom141; 1996(2)BomCR577
1. This is an action initiated by an originating summons in which the plaintiffs seek determination of the following questions: (1) Whether the Trustees of Bombay Parsi Punchayet have any power under the present Scheme or otherwise to appoint/elect the President of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet? (2) Whether the Trustees of Bombay Parsi Punchayet have any power or authority to elect any Chairman of their meeting if the President of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet is present at the meeting by removing the President and appointing someone else in his place or otherwise? (3) Whether the Trustees of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet have the power under the Scheme or otherwise to prevent the senior-most Trustee from assuming the office of the President without modification of the present Scheme? (4) Whether the resolutions purported to be passed by the Defendants Nos. 2 to 5 at the meeting held on 30th March, 1993 are validand/or proper and/or effective? 2. The plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 and the defendant...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Controller, M.S.R.T.C. Chandrapur Vs. Giridhar Raghunath De ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1995
Reported in: 1995(4)BomCR646; (1996)IIILLJ638Bom
ORDER1. Legality and correctness of the award passed by the Labour Court, Chandrapur on June 22, 1993 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner Corporation is that the Labour Court, Chandrapur has committed serious error of law in setting aside the punishment of dismissal awarded to the respondent as shockingly disproportionate despite the fact that the Labour Court found that enquiry conducted into the conduct of the respondent was just and fair and that the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer were legal, correct and based on the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel for the petitioner Corporation contended that in one year's service, the respondent has indulged into misconduct of misappropriation three times and twice before the present incident, the respondent was found guilty of the misconduct of misappropriation of the petitioner Corporation's funds and, therefore, punishment of dismissal was...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay Vs. Billion Plast ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)MhLj370
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 made at the instance of the Revenue, the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal has referred the following questions of law to this Court for opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a true and proper interpretation of section 13 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that no purchase tax is leviable on the purchase of goods effected from a person who is not a registered dealer under the said Act till the goods are resold or possibility of their resale is ruled out 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the respondent was a dealer qua purchase of the car and the purchase of the car was in course of business ?' 2. The material facts of the case relevant for the purpose of deciding the controversy before us are very brief. The assessee-company is a manu...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay Vs. Mahalaxmi Sto ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)MhLj561
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion at the instance of the Revenue : 'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and on a true and correct interpretation of the provisions of section 2(17) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, was the Tribunal justified in holding that crushing of boulders resulting in metal of different sizes commercially known as 'gitti' does not amount to manufacture ?' 2. As is evident from the above question, the controversy is whether stone in the form of boulders cease to he stone after undergoing the process of crushing for conversion of the same into stones of smaller sizes known as 'gitti'. The material facts are as follows : The assessee purchased big size stones known as 'boulders' from registered dealers and with the help of crushing machine converted the same into stones of smaller sizes, known as...
Tag this Judgment!Naga Yerra Korte Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary, R ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-21-1995
Reported in: 1996(2)BomCR307
R.M. Lodha, J.1 .One of the arguments raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner in this petition is that no review application is maintainable for review of the order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in exercise of appellate powers under section 6 of Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the provisions contained in Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 are self contained and since no power is conferred on the M.R.T. to review its order, under the Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974, the M.R.T. seriously erred in allowing the review application filed by the respondent No. 3 by the impugned order dated 23-3-1983.2. Suo motu proceedings were started by respondent No. 2 under section 36(2) of Scheduled Tribes Act for restoration of Survey No. 70 admeasuring 16.15 acres which was transferred by the petitioner who happened to be Scheduled Tribe (for short 'tribal transferor') to respondent No. 3 - Manohar...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Engineering Industries Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1995
Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT718Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 468/94 [V-2 (Ch.84)1024/93/1944], dated 6-5-1994 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of plastic extrusion plant and they have declared Speed Regulator as one of the inputs classifiable under Chapter Heading 9032.80. However/the gate pass in respect of this showed the description as DC Drive though indicating classification under the same Heading 9032.80. Hence objection was taken that DC drive is not covered by Modvat declaration and hence credit in respect of duty taken on inputs is required to be reversed. The other issue in this appeal is that certain final products Vacuum tanks, hot stamping machines/inline marking machines/marking machines screw and barrels hopper loaders etc are not declared as final products. However, they have been cleared by debiting the duty from the Modvat account and hence the credit cannot be availed of in respect of the...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT578Tri(Mum.)bai
1. All the three appeals are directed against the Order-in-Appeal Nos.273 to 282/91 [167 to 176-BRD/CE/AHD/COLLR(A)], dated 12-4-1991 passed by the Collector of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Ahmedabad.2. Shri D.M. Mehta, the Ld. Advocate, points out that in all the three appeals, there is an allegation that Mafron Gas is not declared, they have declared freon gas in their Modvat Declaration and Mafron gas is nothing but a Freon gas manufactured under the patent right of Mafatlal Group and hence the description freon gas would cover Mafron gas as well, which is nothing but a refrigerant gas used in their refrigeration system of Chloromethane plant. He also contends that the declaration specifically mentioning Mafron gas was given in April, 1989 but the acknowledgement was given only in December, 1990. Though the only allegation contained in the show cause notice was that Mafron gas was not declared and hence Modvat credit is not admissible, the adjudication was done including...
Tag this Judgment!The Goa Foundation and Others Vs. the North Goa Planning and Developme ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Bom342; 1996(5)BomCR174; (1995)97BOMLR338
ORDERDr. Silva, J.1. This is an application for stay filed by the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 333/93 with regard to the construction of Palm Hotel of the respondent No. 7, situated at Miramar, on the ground that subsequent developments justify the intervention of the Court in order to halt the progress of the same construction which is going on in clear violation of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and its Rules (hereinafter called 'the Act').2. The case of the petitioners is that consequent upon the admission of the aforesaid Writ Petition on 30th August, 1993 an interim application for stay was rejected by this Court vide Order dated 16th September, 1993 and thereafter on a Special Leave Petition the Supreme Court also, by its Order dated 10th January, 1994, refused to interfere with this Court's Order. On 6th September, 1994 the petitioners filed an application, being Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 307/94, for urgent final hearing of the petition which is pending befor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »