Mumbai Court January 1997 Judgments
Gopal Nathan Vs. R.S. Oberoi and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-30-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR686
D.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard Mr. Nusrat Shah for the applicant and Mrs. Pawar, the learned APP for the State in Criminal Application No. 254/97, and also heard Mr. Rahul Rao for the applicant, Mr. Y.S. Bhate for Respondent No. 1 and Mrs. Pawar the learned APP for the State in Criminal Application Nos. 267/97 and Cr. Application No. 268/97.2. So far as Cr. Application No. 254/97 is concerned, Mr. Shah states that he had given notice to this application to Mr. Marvadi, the learned advocate for the petitioner, but, Mr. Marvadi declined to accept the notice. Mr. Shah has tendered a copy of the letter dt. 28th Jan. 1997, sent to the him by speed post to Mr. Marvadi. This application is filed by the original Respondent for setting aside my order dt 8th Jan, 1997, and for rehearing the writ petition No. 137/88 on merits. According to Mr. Shah, firstly, this was an exparte order because he was not given an opportunity of being heard. Secondly, the petition was dismissed in default, was restored ...
Tag this Judgment!Tejinder Singh Makkar Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-30-1997
Reported in: (1997)58TTJ(Mumbai)416
ORDERT. A. BUKTE, J.M. :This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the CIT, Central-II, Bombay, passed under s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 on 28th March, 1994, holding that the assessment as framed by the AO was erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, on the following two grounds :(i) that the claim of the assessee for bad debts of Rs. 28,77,420 was allowed by the AO without proper scrutiny and without looking into the conditions prescribed under cl. (i) of sub-s. (2), of s. 36, of the IT Act, 1961; and(ii) the AO also completed the assessment without making enquiries about the source of funds for the amount of Rs. 8,35,000 given by the assessee to his wife, Smt. Harvinder Singh Kaur.2. It would be necessary to reproduce para 6 of the assessment order in this connection :'6. Assessee has claimed bad debt of Rs. 28,77,420 along with the details of the bad debt. It is stated that he sold the above goods to Shri Bhagwandas Aggarwal whose office is...
Tag this Judgment!Beepee Coatings Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C.E. and Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-29-1997
Reported in: (1997)(92)ELT223Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants against the decision No.13/demand/96/353, dated 13-3-1996 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara disallowing Modvat credit of Rs. 1,20,97,078/- (Rupees One crore twenty lakhs ninety seven thousand & seventy eight) and levied a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- under Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules 1944.2. The appellants are a limited company engaged in the manufacture of Paints & Varnishes falling under Chapter Heading 32.09, 32.08 and 32.14 and for which purpose they have their factory in Plot 443 (Part) GIDC Estate of Vithal Udoygnagar. The appellant company is a 100% subsidiary of Messrs. Berger Paints Ltd. and the appellants manufacture paints on job work basis out of the raw material given by the holding Company.Raw materials were supplied free by Berger Paints to the appellant for job work the holding company placing orders on their suppliers with printed instructions for delivery of the goods to t...
Tag this Judgment!Parakkate Shankaran Keshavan Vs. T.A. Sukumaran
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-29-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Bom381; 1997(4)ALLMR176; 1997(3)BomCR260; 1997(2)MhLj654
1. This is a plaintiff appeal against the judgment and decree dated 20-2-1989 in Short Cause Suit No. 5094/81 on the file of City Civil Court, Bombay. The appeal has been filed in Forma Pauperis. Heard both sides.2. The Appellant/plaintiff's case is as follows :-- The Appellant is the owner of a car which is used as a taxi bearing No. MMI-490. The appellant purchased the car by taking a loan from Canara Bank. The appellant has repaid the loan amount. The taxi permit stands in the name of the plaintiff. The car was purchased for Rs. 34,250/-. Since the plaintiff was in short of funds, he took a loan of Rs. 6,300/- from the defendant. The loan was to be repaid to the defendant at Rs. 300/- per month and it was agreed that the defendant should keep an account of the taxi business. The plaintiff was repaying the instalments to the Canara Bank either by himself directly or through the defendant. The defendant had taken signatures of the plaintiff to some papers at the Esplanade Court statin...
Tag this Judgment!Kallappa Appanna Bebade Vs. Dattatraya Ramchandra Shejal and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-29-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1190; 1997(2)MhLj830
Sahai, J.1. By means of this appeal preferred under S. 378(4), Cr.P.C. the appellant (Orig. complainant) has impugned the judgment and order dated 3-3-1983 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kurundwad District Kolhapur, in C.C. No. 224/80, acquitting the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for the offence punishable under S. 323 r/w. 34, IPC. The gravemen of the allegation of the complainant Kallappa Appanna Bebade, as voiced in his complaint is that, he and his son Bharat while being prosecuted in a case under S. 302 r/w. 34, IPC, were physically assaulted by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 who were police sub-Inspector and constable respectively during the investigation of the said case. 2. On receiving the said complaint, the predecessor of the Magistrate who passed the impugned order, recorded depositions of the complainant Kallappa Bebade and his son Bharat. Thereafter, process under S. 323 r/w. 34, IPC were issued against the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 3. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 a...
Tag this Judgment!Pralhad V. Kanchan Vs. Solapur Dist. Central Co-operative Bank and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-29-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)ALLMR296; 1997(3)BomCR556
R.M. Lodha, J.1. In this contempt petition filed under section 2(b) read with section 12 of the Contempt of courts Act, 1971, the petitioner prays that the respondents be held guilty of 'civil contempt' and punished accordingly for wilful disobedience of various orders viz. the order of this Court passed on 12-7-94 in Writ Petition No. 193/94, the order of the Apex Court on 26-10-94 in Special Leave Petition (Civil No. 17677/94), the order of the Industrial Court dated 5-4-1994 in Appeal (BIR) No. 3/89, the order of this Court dated 27-6-95 in Contempt Petition No. 167/95, and ,. the order of Division Bench of this Court dated 18-7-1995 in Contempt Appeal No. 4/95.2. According to the petitioner he joined service in the Solapur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. -the respondent No. 1 herein in the year 1962 on the post of Sr. Inspector, Class-I. On 3-1-1978 he was transferred from Akluj to village Natepute on the post of Agent which according to the petitioner was not a transfer si...
Tag this Judgment!Shrirang Narayan Datal Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-29-1997
Reported in: I(1997)DMC480
D.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard Mr. J.N. Pawar for the accused appellant and the learned APP Mrs. Pawar for the State. In this appeal, the accused has challenged his conviction Under Sections 498-A and 306, IPC. The matrimonial life of this accused with his wife Sunita was of three years, i.e. from their marriage in 1985 till Sunita's death on 30th July, 1988. They had a child from their wedlock and at the relevant time, Sunita was residing with the accused. She died as a result of bum injuries which were 60% spread over the body and the death occurred after 12 days,2. Two dying declarations of Sunita were recorded in this case. First was recorded immediately by the S.E.M. on 18.7.1988 Exh. 14 and the second was recorded on 29-7.1988 Exh. 20. In Exhibit 14, Sunita did not blame her husband as being responsible for causing the burns, nor did she state anything regarding her attempt to commit suicide. She stated that she caught fire accidentally while she was preparing tea. In the second dyin...
Tag this Judgment!Mithusha Vessels and Engineers P. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-1997
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT239Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed against the captioned order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay whereunder she confirmed the order-in-original dated 31-1-1995 passed by the Assistant Collector Central Excise Badlapur II Dn. classifying Trailer and Semi-Trailers under Tariff Heading 8704 as motor vehicle for transportation of goods rejecting the claim of the assessee appellant to classify the said goods under sub-heading 8716.00. By the said order, the Assistant Collector also denied the claim of the assessee appellant to the benefit of Notification No. 1/93 as such benefit is not given to goods coming within sub-heading 8704.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of the types of products falling under sub-heading 8704.00 and sub-heading 8716 and the same have been declared in the relevant classification lists. In case of goods falling under sub-heading 8704.00 the product manufactured by the appellant is a Pressure Vessel which is fixed on chasis and it ...
Tag this Judgment!Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-1997
Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT504Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Castlerock Fisheries Ltd., Mumbai, was granted an advance licence and DEEC certificate. The licence was initially for import of specified quantities of cardboard and kraft paper (other than ivory board) and high density polyethylene/polypropylene granules. The licencee was required to export a specified quantity of processed/preserved and frozen fish products, packed in packing materials made of these goods. The licence was subsequently allowed to be transferred on the ground that licencee had fulfilled its export obligation and was purchased by M/s. Garware Wall Ropes Ltd., the appellant. The licence was subsequently amended to include some other items, among them fishing nets/raw material. The value was also enhanced.2. The appellant imported a consignment of polypropylene and claimed clearance against this licence and certificate. Notice was issued on two grounds. The first was that the goods exported were not marine products. The second was on the basis that the amendments...
Tag this Judgment!Pravara Ssk Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-1997
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT414Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant is a sugar factory. As a result of a fire which took place in its factory, considerable quantity of sugar manufactured and stored, pending clearance on payment of duty, was destroyed or damaged.Appellant, after obtaining permission, reprocessed part of the damaged sugar and it claimed remission of duty on the sugar destroyed.Remission was refused in the proceedings before the Assistant Collector, whose order was confirmed by the Collector (Appeals). In appeal, this Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal by way of remand, directing the Collector (Appeals) to decide the case afresh, after considering the evidence produced by the assessee, as to the cause of the fire which resulted in the destruction of the sugar. In pursuance of this order, the Collector (Appeals) has passed an order rejecting their claim for remission. Hence this appeal.2. The advocate for the appellant contends that the causes of the fire accident is not ascertainable. He points out that the report of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »