Mumbai Court June 1997 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.
Finolex Cables Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-19-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT406Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue in these two appeals is identical, whether the waste and scrap of wires and cables are excisable goods and if so whether it is classifiable under Chapter 85 of Central Excise Tariff Act or under Chapter 74 as waste of copper.2. On hearing Shri B.N. Rangawani the ld. Consultant for the appellants and Shri S.V. Singh, ld. DR for the revenue, we find that the matter stands settled by the recent orders of the Tribunal in the case of the very same appellants. In its decision reported in 1995 (9) RLT 19, the Tribunal had held that waste and scrap of wires and cables are not excisable goods and the question of their classification under CETA, 1985 does not arise. This decision of the Tribunal was followed by another decision in the case of Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Hitech Cable & Paramount Cable Corpn. - 1996 (13) RLT 119. Appeals against both these decisions of the Tribunal have since been dismissed by the Supreme Court, one of them is reported in 1996 (87) ...
Purshottam Gopal Nanavare Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-19-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR168; 1998BomCR(Cri)4
ORDERV.H. Bhairavia, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of conviction and sentence dated 14th August, 1992, awarded by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Special Judge, Satara in Special Case No. 3 of 1988, wherein the appellant/accused has been convicted under section 5(1)(e) punishable under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default, R.I. for 6 months. 2. The prosecution case in short is that, originally, in all 5 accused persons were charge-sheeted. Accused Nos. 1 to 4 are the family members. Accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the wife, son and mother of appellant-accused and accused No. 5 is the friend of the appellant-accused. However' accused Nos. 2 to 5 have been acquitted. It is the prosecution story that the appellant-accused was serving as Police Sub-Inspector at Panvel Police Station, Dist. Raigad in the year 1986. The appellant-accused entered in the Police service as Pol...
Ficom Organic Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1997)LC319Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The brief facts are that the appellants imported into Kandla, a consignment of DI ISO BUTYLENE uantity covered by the Bill (DIIB) and filed a Bill of Entry in May, 1994. Of the of Entry, the appellants transferred quantity of 24.140 MT. into customs bonded warehouse a Khopoli under the jurisdiction of Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Panvel Division, Mumbai-III Commissionerate. On 26-9-1995 ex-bond Bill of Entry for clearance of the goods was filed claiming classification under Heading 27.10 CET Act, 1975 as Naphtha at the rate of duty NIL for Customs and @ 10% for additional duty of Customs ( c.v.d.). Scrutiny of the documents submitted by the appellant led the department to take a stand that there was no evidence to substantiate the appellant's claim that DUB was Naphtha. Sample of the goods warehoused at Khopoli were drawn and sent to Chemical Examiner on 5-10-1995 who reported that the same is in the form of clear colourless volatile liquid composed wholly of un...
Shree Products Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT1057Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue in this appeal is whether when there is an amalgamation of one Company with another what will be the consequence with regard to Modvat credit of the amalgamated unit insofar as the entitlement the credit is concerned based on their original declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. The ld. Counsel Shri C.M. Korde appearing with ld. Counsel Shri D.B.Shroff submits that in this case Shree Products amalgamated with Fidelity Containers. According to the terms of amalgamation, the rights and liabilities are taken over by Fidelity Industries Ltd. and Shree Products, thereafter became a division of Fidelity Industries. The High Court at Madras as well as the High Court of Bombay have sanctioned to the amalgamation, ordering, inter alia, that with effect from 1-4-1990 of all rights and liabilities of the Transferor Company shall stand transferred to the Transferee Company without any further act or deed.The Central Excise authorities in this case initiated p...
Skf Bearings India Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1997)(72)LC892Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In all these appeals common question of law and facts are involved, hence they are taken up for disposal as per law.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of "Pendulum Arms", which are used in the textile machinery. They imported 'component parts', which are required for manufacture of "Pendulum Arms". They sought the benefit of exemption Notification No. 155/86-Cus. dt.1.3.1986 in respect of Appeal No. C/2533/90-B2, Notification No.181/87-Cus. in respect of Appeal No. C/3391/90-B2 and Notification No.179/86 in respect of Appeal Nos/C/3220-3221/89-B2.3. In Appeal Nos. C/3220-3221/89-B2, their claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector on the ground that the Bill of Entry has been provisionally assessed and therefore, the claim for refund at that stage cannot be considered. The Collector noted that in two claims the period of importation is different i.e. dt. 16.8.1985 and dt. 19.6.1986 and in the later importation, the Notification No. 179/86 was rescinded and a new No...
Haldor Topsoe Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1998)66ITD420(Mum.)
1. These cross appeals are directed against the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 28-11 -1989 for the assessment year 1984-85. We may mention that these appeals were decided earlier, but the order of the Tribunal was recalled vide order dated 9-1-1997 in M.A. No. 139/Mum/96.The grounds taken by the assessee in its appeal read as under :- 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not accepting the assessee's contention that the amount of Rs. 99,97,462 received by way of fees for supervision of construction and erection in terms of the Agreement dated 15-2-1981 with RCF Ltd. was in the nature of fees for technical services and was not management charges and, hence, was not liable to Indian income-tax under the IT. Act, 1961, read with the relevant provisions of the Agreement for the Avoidance of Double Taxation of Income between India and Denmark. 2. Without prejudice to the above ground of appeal, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on facts ...
Shri Dinkarrao (Aba) Krishnaji Patil Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR581; (1998)1BOMLR491; 1997(3)MhLj129
ORDERA.V. Savant, J.1. Heard all the learned Counsel.2. On a motion made by Shri Bhosale, name of the fourth respondent Karkhana is deleted. Liberty to add names of the other requisitionists. Such amendment to be carried out within two weeks from today. Shri Desai undertakes to file Vakalatnama within three weeks for the other requisitionists who are to be added as per leave to amend granted above.3. This petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission itself. Since there is nodispute on the facts as they emerge upon hearing the learned Counsel mentioned above.4. Hence, Rule. By consent rule made returnable forthwith and heard ail thelearned Counsel.5. The petitioner is the Chairman of Tasgaon Taluka Sahakari Sakhar KarkhanaLtd. which is a specified society within the meaning of section 73-G of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. On 4th June, 1997, the fifth respondentRamchandra Pandurang Ugale submitted a requisition to convene a meeting forconsideration of a No Co...
Balasaheb Annappa Waghmare Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)170; 1997CriLJ3476; I(1998)DMC249; 1997(3)MhLj397
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. By means of this revision the petitioner has impugned the judgment and order dated 23rd August, 1991, passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 1989. Whereby the judgment and order dated 22-5-89 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Sessions Case No. 95 of 1988 convicting him for offences punishable under sections 304(B), 306 and 498-A I.PC. and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to suffer RJ. for 6 months, R.I. for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 4 months and R.I. for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer R.I. for 2 months respectively has been confirmed.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that the deceased Sunita, daughter of P.W. 1 Laxman Awale was married to the petitioner on 11-5-1986. The evidence is that 8 to 10 months after the marriage, the ceremony in connection with pregnancy of ...
Natha Mahadu Shinde Vs. Vasant Eknath Bahirat and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1998)100BOMLR186
D.K. Deshmuhk, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 23.2.1983 passed by the Second Extra Assistant Judge, Pune in Civil Appeal No. 445/1982. That Appeal was filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment and decree dated 31.3.1982 passed by the Second Additional Small Causes Judge, Pune in Civil Suit No. 2360/1980. That Civil Suit was filed by the respondents, claiming therein that they are owners of the suit House, situated in Pot Hissa No. 2/11-C of survey No. 183 at Hadapsar, Pune and that the petitioner is a tenant of a room admeasuring 10' x 10' on a monthly rent of Rs. 25/-. It was further claimed that by a notice dated 28.7.1980 the tenancy of the petitioner was terminated by the landlord. The Trial Court found that the property is situated at Hadapsar, which is located beyond the limits of the Pune Municipal Corporation, therefore the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act are not applicable to the co...
Haldor Topsoe Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1997
Reported in: (1998)61TTJ(Mumbai)42
ORDERM. V. R. PRASAD, A.M.These cross-appeals are directed against the order of the CIT(A), dt. 28th Nov., 1989, for the asst. yr. 1984-85. We may mention that these appeals were decided earlier, but the order of the Tribunal was recalled vide order dt. 9th Jan., 1997, in NUk No. 139/Mum/96. The ground taken by the assessee in its appeal read as under:' 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not accepting the assessee's contention that the amount of Rs. 99,97,462 received by way of fees for supervision of construction and erection in terms of the agreement dt. 15th Feb., 1981 with RCF Ltd. was in the nature of fees for technical services and was not management charges and, hence, was not liable to Indian income-tax under the IT Act, 1961, read with the relevant provisions of the Agreement for the Avoidance of Double Taxation of Income between India and Denmark.2. Without prejudice to the above ground of appeal, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »