Mumbai Court March 1996 Judgments

Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Mahara ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR111; 1996(1)MhLj953

A.S. Venkatachala Moorthy, J.1. By this writ petition, under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray this Court to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the petitioners' case and after satisfying itself as to the legality of the orders dated November 5, 1986 and demand notice dated November 11, 1986 and orders dated October 27, 1987 (exhibits L1 to L9, A1 to A9 and M1 to M9) to quash and set aside the same, and also a writ of prohibition prohibiting and restraining the respondents, their servants and agents from giving effect to and/or continuing to take any steps or proceedings and/or in furtherance of the impugned orders and notices.2. The facts of the writ petition can be narrated as follows :The 1st petitioner is a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. It is a co-operative sugar factory which is mainly engaged in the manufacture of sugar. The petitioners, inter alia, manufacture spirit and liquor, etc. The State ...

Smt. Noreen Nerenha Vs. State of Goa and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR233

P.S. Patankar, J.1. Heard both sides.2. The petitioner herein has prayed for setting aside and quashing the Order dated 31st December, 1994 passed by respondent No. 1 herein. By the said order, the respondent No. 5 was held to be entitled to the seniority among the primary teachers from her original date of appointment i.e. 18-6-1984.3. The respondent No. 5 came to be appointed in the primary section on 18-6-1984. Thereafter she was transferred to pre-primary section. The petitioner came to be appointed in the primary section on 25-6-1988.4. The question arose before a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 160 of 1992 and others reported in Maximiana Fernandes, Opp. Railway Station, Chandor, Salcete, Goa and another v. The Director of Education, C/o. Directorate of Education, Government of Goa, Panaji, Goa and others, : 1995(4)BomCR115 , due to various representations made by Pre-Primary teachers to be brought back to the primary section in view of great disparity in the pa...

Executrix of Estate of Late Shri L. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Dy.CIT(A).2. The AO completed the assessment on the assessee in the status of an AOP. The AO did not allow deduction under s. 80L as the assessee was assessed in the status of an AOP. On appeal the learned Dy. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance.3. The assessee is still aggrieved and has come up in appeal before the Tribunal contending that the AO and the Dy. CIT(A) erred in assessing the assessee in the status of an AOP and thereby disallowing deduction under s. 80L(1) of the Act.4. At the time of hearing Shri A. K. Jasani, the learned counsel of the assessee, submitted that this issue is now concluded in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Deepak Family Trust No. 1 & Ors. (1995) 211 ITR 575 (Guj) and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Krishna Bandar Trust (1993) 201 ITR 989 (Cal). On the other hand, Shri Ashutosh Dikshit, the...

Oriental Containers Ltd. Bombay Vs. Engineering Workers Association an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR488; (1996)IILLJ454Bom

Majithia, J. 1. M/s. Oriental Containers Ltd. and Engineering Workers Association, aggrieved against the Award of 11th Labour Court at Bombay in Reference (IDA) No. 711 of 1981 dated June 30, 1994 have moved this Court through Writ Petition No. 2473 of 1994 and Writ Petition No. 1500 of 1995, respectively. 2. To begin with, the factual matrix. M/s. Oriental Container Ltd. (hereinafter 'the management'), after domestic enquiry, dismissed 37 workmen by order of dismissal/discharge dated July 30/31, 1980. Engineering Workers Association (hereinafter 'the Association') raised a demand for reinstatement of the 37 workmen before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation), Bombay, referred the dispute between the management and the 37 workmen employed under them, under Section 10(1)(c) read with Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act'), with the following Schedule to the Labour Court :- 'The following 37 workmen shoul...

Joseph Lourenco and anr. Vs. Fr. Rosarinho E. Lourenco and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1997(1)BomCR176

R.K. Batta, J.1. Inventory proceedings were initiated on the death of Edward Lourenco, Maria Pia Lourenco and Agapito Lourenco and in the said Inventory proceedings Fr. Rosario was appointed as 'Cabeca de Casal', being the eldest male member of the family. Applicant Joseph, who is brother of Fr. Rosario, filed objection to the appointment of Fr. Rosario and claimed that he should have been appointed as 'Cabeca de Casal'. An application to that effect was filed by the applicant Joseph. Applicant Joseph produced three documents, namely, a copy of declaration of Electoral Roll dated 12-5-1983, three medical certificates of Doctors relating to the said three deceased and a certificate from the Chief Officer. In addition the applicant relied upon an affidavit of Robert D'Souza.2. After hearing the parties, the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Margao, dismissed the application filed by the said applicant Joseph and it is this order which is challenged in this Revision.3. Counsel the parties wer...

Vasant Sukhdeo Sandanshiv and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR678

A.D. Mane, J.1. These two appeals are preferred by the original accused Nos. 1 and 2 respectively (hereinafter referred to as the accused Nos. 1 and 2) to challenge the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amalner on 19-11-1993 in Sessions Case No. 40 of 1990.2. The grave man of the charge levelled against these accused was that on the night between 18-10-1990 and 19-10-1990 they forcibly entered in the hut of P.W. 6 Kasubai and committed sexual inter-course not only with her but with her married daughter P.W. 1 Sangeeta, who had come there for Diwali festival.3. The accused No. 1 is convicted under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default, rigorous imprisonment for one year in addition to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year under section 448 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused No. 2 is, however, sentenced under section 448 of the India...

Prabhat Solvent Extraction Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)(64)LC548Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These appeals directed against the common order in Appeal were heard together and are being disposed of through this common order.2. The issue relates to leviability or otherwise of cess on the vegetable oil produced from oil seeds, different oil cakes 3. Arguing for the appellants Ld. Counsel for the Appellants makes the following submissions: 3.1. Though the issue is covered against them by judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Andhra Pradesh Rice Bran Solvent Extractors Association v. UOI, the tribunal in the case of Rartchi Solvent Oil Industries v. CCE, Calcutta , following the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Bhasir Oil Mills v. UOI also judgment of the Allahabad High Court in case of U.P. Solvent Extractors Association v. UOI held that oil extracted by solvent process from oil cakes etc. does not come within the definition of vegetable oil as defined in the National Oil Seeds and Vegetable Oil Development Board Act, 1983 and hence no cess is le...

Advani Oerlikon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)(87)ELT272Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various types of electrodes. Welding electrodes were classifiable under T.I. 50 and some special type of electrodes were classifiable under T.I. 68 of the erstwhile Tariff. In respect of welding electrodes classifiable under T.I. 50, they were extending discount of 12% to the dealers whereas in the case of special types of electrodes classifiable under T.I. 68, they opted for invoice value assessment as per Notifiction No. 120/75.In the invoices, they were claiming discount of 12% as was available to other buyers of welding electrodes classifiable under T.I. 50, over and above that they also claimed discount of 23% in respect of clearance effected to Cosmics, in terms of two agreements both entered into on 11.1.1979. As per the first agreement 12% as is available to other buyers is extended. However, as per the second agreement 23% discount is extended on the following considerations : (i) Cosmics shall market the Fan products of the...

Pfizer Ltd. and 5 ors. Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)98BOMLR193

ORDERM.B. Shah, C.J.1. The only question involved in all these petitions is whether this Court by exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should order refund of excise duty paid because of erroneous interpretation of Tariff item or exemption Notification or ignorance of such Notification, despite the fact that such applications were filed before the authority beyond the prescribed period of six months as provided under Section 11B of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Re : Writ Petition No. 1656 of 1987. 2. The petitioners-Pfizer Limited-manufacture pharmaceuticals and bulk drugs liable to excise duty under Item 14E of the First Schedule to the said Act. In the manufacture of the said drugs, the Petitioners use guillotine capsules and rubber plugs, both liable to duty under the erstwhile Item 68 of the First Schedule to the Act. 3. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Ex...

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Merry Weather Food Products Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT348Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This appeal by the department is directed against the order in appeal No. A-193/91, dated 19-11-1991 disallowing the Modvat credit on the glass bottles which have not gone for the packing of their final product.2. The respondents are the manufacturers of ketch-ups and most of their products were packed in glass bottles and in the course of manufacture some of the bottles got broken and they were disposed of as scrap. The Department felt that the broken bottles were not used in relation to the manufacture of the finished product and therefore the appellants were not eligible for availment of Modvat credit on the inputs used in those bottles which were broken and a demand for Rs. 31,165/- was raised and ultimately claimed. In the appeal before the Collector (A), he came to the conclusion that under Rule 57D of the Modvat credit could not be reversed on the ground that part of the inputs in which the credit had been taken was contained in the by-product or in the waste. He also referr...