Mumbai Court January 1997 Judgments

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Shivaji Shivram Tambe and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1997(3)ALLMR332; 1997BomCR(Cri)897; (1997)99BOMLR539

Vishnu Sahai, j.1. The appellant aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 30th March, 1984, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Thane, in Sessions case No. 136 of 1982. acquitting the Respondents for an offence punishable Under Section 307 r/w. 34 I.P.C., has come up in appeal before us.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case runs as under:The victim Ramesh Chintaman Kose (P.W. 1) and the Respondents were well known to each other from before the incident. On 20.4.198 I at about 11.15 p.m. the victim was returning from Forest Office in front of Kalyan Police Station. He had gone there to take a pass for transporting wood. He was on a scooter and on the pillion scat (hereof was silting Datta Sudam Jadhav, a deal and dumb person. At the said lime he reached the turning of Rambaug and Murbad Road. There were two betel shops there. In front of one of them namely Krishna's Pan-shop the Respondents were standing. In front of the other shop Arun Chhagan Tapase (P.W. 3) was standing. It is...

Cna Exports (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1997(73)LC32(Bombay)

V.P. Tipnis, J.1. Heard both the sides. The petitioners challenge the inclusion of the landing charges and the inclusion of customs duty in the assessable value for the purpose of charging additional/countervailing duty on the goods imported by the petitioners.2. Both the learned Counsel for the respective parties are agreed that so far as inclusion of landing charges and of the customs duty in assessable value for the purposes of charging additional/countervailing duty is concerned, the matter has been determined against the contention of the petitioners by a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Ashok Traders v. Union of India reported in : 1987(32)ELT262(Bom) . As such, in view of the aforesaid Division Bench judgement, the petition will have to be dismissed so far as these two points are concerned.3. So far as the challenge to proper classification is concerned, we are of the opinion that the petitioners can always agitate this issue before the appropriate authority as per ...

Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Maharashtra Agro Indus. Devp.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT664Tri(Mum.)bai

1. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Collector (Appeals) has held that the plastic strapping used in the packing cartons of processed and preserved food manufactured by it are inputs. Hence this appeal by the Department.2. The Departmental Representative reiterates the grounds in the appeal, which is that the assessee has not included the cost of the strapping in the assessable value of the products which required by proviso (b)(ii) to Rule 57A if credit is to be taken. Departmental Representative contends that the Collector (Appeals) has concluded that the cost of these goods was included in the value only on the non-substantiated claim of the assessee.3. In his order, the Collector records the claim of the appellant that the cost of the strapping forms part of the assessable value of the final product and his order is based on this calim. As against this, there is nothing in the appeal to rebut this contention that the cost is not included. It would have been an easy matter f...

Seekar Iron Works Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1997)(70)LC209Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This Appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original dt. 21.4.1988 of Addl. Collector of Customs. The appellants imported a consignment of what they claimed was MS defective sheets, they claimed assessment for customs duty under CTH 72.09.90 and sought clearance on the basis of an Import Licence dated 25th March, 1986.2. The goods were subjected to Test by Customs House and on such test were found to be chromium coated mild steel sheets. Since the appellants contested these findings the samples were sent for re-testing to IIT, Bombay. IIT, Bombay, on retesting found it to be tin coated MS sheets. Consequent to proceedings initiated against the respondents, Asstt. Collector held that the goods were not covered by the Import Licence, and therefore, he penalised the importers by imposing penalty of Rs. 50,000/- and redemption fine of Rs. 2 lakh.Hence, this appeal.3. Arguing for the appellants, the Ld. Advocate submits that Collector's findings that the impugned goods are tin plate ba...

Janabai Ranu Patole and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1997BomCR(Cri)397; 1997CriLJ2062

Sahai, J.1. The Appellants aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 16-2-1984 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 252 of 1983 convicting and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with 34 IPC have come up in appeal before us. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case runs as follows : The deceased Ranu Mahadu Patole was married to Godhabai who died about 20 years prior to the incident. He had three children from her; 2 sons-Manju and Baban and one daughter-Suman. About 10 to 12 years prior to the incident Ranu Patole married appellant Janabai. Janabai at the time of marriage was having two sons viz : Appellant-Ramdas and Kailash from her former husband. She also had three daughters-Sushila, Leela and Shalan from him. The evidence shows that Manju and others used to stay separately from Ranu Patole in a contiguous hut. Ranu Patole was alleged to be driving a bullock-cart on hire. The Appellants and Sushila were living with ...

Rafiq Abdul Karim Merchant Vs. Rajendra Singh, Secretary to Govt. of M ...

Court: Mumbai

Vishnu Sahai, J.1. By means of this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner who is the brother of the detenue Arif Abdul Karim Merchant has impugned the detention order dated 17-1-1997 clamped against the detenu by respondent No. 1, detaining under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (52 of 1974), hereinafter referred to as COFEPOSA ACT. 2. The prejudicial activities of the detenue necessitating the passing of the detention order are spelt out in the grounds of detention, annexed as Annexure 'B' to the petition. The detention order as well as the grounds of detention were contemporaneously served on the detenue on 13-10-1995 while he was undergoing preventive detention in another case. 3. In short the grounds of detention read thus :- (a) On 6-6-96 officers of the Customs Preventive Commissionerate, Mumbai, on the basis of specific information intercepted at about 1.15 a.m. one Zainab Momin Khan ...

Vasant Ramkrishna Bhide Vs. Board of Trustees of Port

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1998(80)FLR881]; (1999)ILLJ939Bom

Tipnis, J.1. The petitioner joined the services of the Bombay Port Trust as a clerk-cum-typist in the year 1947 and retired on April 30, 1987 after attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 58 years. During his entire tenure he was inflicted with one penalty of reduction of pay by one stage from Rs. 1630 to Rs. 1589 in time scale of Rs. 900-40-1220-41-1630 by order dated April 29, 1987. Subsequently he was paid certain amount by way of his contributory provident fund, voluntary provident fund, and death-cum-retirement gratuity on different dates. As the petitioner was not paid the amount of employer's contribution and the interest thereon the petitioner entertained correspondence with the authorities concerned. It appears that thereafter certain other amounts were also paid on different dates, but still employer's contribution to the provident fund account and interest thereon was withheld. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition against the Bombay Port Trust claiming interest for del...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Cement Allocation and Co-ordinating Org ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1997)141CTR(Bom)241

BY THE COURT :After hearing learned counsel for the parties at some length, we find that the statement of the case drawn by the Tribunal in this case is not sufficient to enable us to determine the question raised by the Tribunal. The learned counsel for the assessee has filed two compilations before us, which are marked as Compilation No. 1 and 2 respectively, and submits that the material facts relevant for deciding the question referred to us can be derived from the documents contained in these compilations. It is also stated that the material facts of the case have been discussed by the Members of the Tribunal in their orders and the same can be derived from those orders.2. Considering the nature of controversy, we are of the opinion that the facts contained in the statement of the case drawn by the Tribunal and forwarded to us along with the questions for our determination are not sufficient to decide the controversy in question referred. We, therefore, refer the case back to the ...

Century Textiles and Industries Vs. Commr. of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT466Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellant placed an order with the supplier in Japan for supply of spares for vertical roller mill in its cement factory. The consignment was shipped in 3 packages, and was cleared from Bombay on payment of duty. Subsequent appellant noticed that some items were short and had the goods examined by a Chartered Engineer who certified in June, 1989 that the goods were short. It then took up the matter with the suppliers representative in India. Subsequently, the supplier informed the appellant through its office in India, that the position had been verified with M/s. UBE (apparently the manufacturer of the goods) who confirmed that 4 items were short. These 4 items were subsequently sent to the appellant under a no charge invoice and cleared on payment of duty. Appellant thereafter claimed refund of the duty paid on the spares short shipped. The Assistant Collector (whose order has been confirmed by the Collector (Appeals) rejected the claim on the ground that the short shipment was n...

Enzo-chem Laboratories P. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT303Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellant cleared a consignment on payment of duty. Goods were subsequently returned to it as they were not accepted by the buyer.Appellant reprocessed them in terms of the permission obtained under Rule 173L and exported them without payment of duty. Its claim for refund of duty paid when the goods were first cleared was rejected on the ground that rule provided that the amount of refund should not exceed the duty payable on the goods after being remade, refined etc.Hence this appeal.2. The Representative of the appellant contends that this interpretation of the Department would result in payment of duty twice on the same consignment which is not permitted.3. This is in fact not the case. Duty is payable on manufactured goods in terms of Rule 9. When the goods, after being cleared from the factory are returned for any process, the provision of Rule 173H would apply, where such a process would not amount to manufacture as is made clear in Sub-rule (3) of that rule. Where the proces...