Mumbai Court July 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.
Smt. Shobha Ashok Patil Vs. Smt. Mahananda Rajaram Nikam and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)BomCR700; 1997(3)MhLj353
ORDERF.I. Rebello, J.1. The petitioner in this petition impugns the order dated 23rd June 1995 whereby the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division at Madha dismissed the election petition being Election Petition No. 2 of 1995 filed by the petitioner herein.2. The elections were held to the Grampanchayat of village Ujani (Tahsil) Madha on 20th April 1995. The petitioner contested from Ward No. 3 which was a multi seats ward. There were three candidates to be elected of which one seat was reserved for woman. The petitioner had filed her nomination alongwith opponent No. 1 for the reserved seat meant for woman.3. At the elections held the votes secured by the candidates is as under :-NameNo.of votes.SharadDigambar Vaste (Resp. 3)134Smt.Mahananda Rajaram Nikam (Resp. 1)119ShobhaAshok Patil (Petitioner)118HaibatraoNivruti Nikam (Resp. 2)115NavnathBhanudas Lokhare (Resp. 5)112AbhimanBaliram Lokhare (Resp. 4)92LaxmanNamdeo Lokhare (Resp. 6)74The Returning Officer declared Smt. Mahananda Rajara...
Heeralal Ramlal Parmar and Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ574
1. Since both these appeals arise out of the same set of facts, and a common impugned judgment, I am disposing them off together. 2. Vide judgment and order dated 30-7-1990, passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Mr. A. I. Cheema, in Sessions Case No. 282 of 1989, the appellants were convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter :- (i) Under Section 148, IPC to undergo 3 years RI and a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to undergo 6 months RI; (ii) Under Section 307 r/w. 34, IPC to 5 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- in default to suffer RI for 2 years; (iii) Under N. 147, IPC; No separate (iv) Under S. 352 r/w. 149, IPC; sentence was (v) Under S. 326 r/w. 149, IPC. awarded to them on said counts. Hence, this appeal. 3. Briefly stated the prosecution case runs as under :- The informant-victim Raju Choudhary, PW 1, has a shop near the Mhasoba square in Pune town, Pune. On 21-4-1989, at about 9.30 a.m. the appellants, co-accused Bittya, Shrikant and Rajendra Mankar, wer...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ask Enterprises
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: [1998]230ITR48(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf J. 1. By this application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Pune, seeks a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state the case and refer the following questions of law to this court for opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) holding that an inadvertent mistake committed by the assessee cannot be equated with an act of concealment 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in camouflaging the fact of a concealment by inadvertent and bona fide mistake ?' 2. We have heard Mr. Khatri, learned counsel for the Revenue, and Mr. Bhujle, learned counsel for the assessee. We have also perused the order of the Tribunal on the merits as well as the order rejecting the reference application under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act. 3. So far as question No. 2 is conce...
Krishna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: [1998]229ITR577(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the contribution to the education fund under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, is not allowable as business expenditure ?' 2. This reference pertains to the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80. The assessee is a co-operative society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. It is engaged in the manufacture and sale of sugar. Under section 68 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, it was required to make a contribution to the education fund of the State federal society at the prescribed rates. The assessee-society paid a sum of Rs. 50,000 in each of the two previous years relevant to the assessment years 1978-79 and 1...
Nestle India Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: (1997)(72)LC594Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue for determination in this appeal which arises out of the order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay is the eligibility or otherwise of "Double Drum Roller Dryer" imported by the appellants herein, who are manufacturers of Lactogen infant food and cereal products, to the benefit of concessional rate of auxiliary duty of 25% under Serial No. 11(xii) of Notification 189/86-Cus. dated 1.3.1986 which covers "goods falling under Heading 84.19 excluding machinery and equipment for food, other than milk..." The catalogue of the machine showed that the use thereof was not limited to the mere evaporation of water or solvents from given products but also in the case of certain nutritious substances, a ready cooking effect by which instant properties were obtained. The classification of the goods was confirmed by the lower authorities under Chapter Heading 8419.81 which is applicable to 'machinery, plant and equipment for making hot drinks or for cooking or for heating food'...
Kumar Printers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT422Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Each of the appellants imported a consignment of 745 four colour offset printing machine from M/s. Kovo Foreign Trade Corporation, Czechoslovakia. Each of the Bill of Entry filed for clearance did not indicate any amount payable to M/s. J. Mahabeer & Company Ltd., who are the indenting agent. On the basis of investigations which had [been] conducted, the Customs department recovered documents to show that M/s.J. Mahabeer & Co. was to be paid 20% of the cif value by each of the buyers towards commission, technical advice and installation charges.It is also confirmed by the statements of Managing Director and other officials of M/s. Mahabeer & Co. Notice was issued proposing inclusion of this 20% to the cif value in the assessable value of the machine, and confiscation of the machines under Section 111(m) since the value of the machines was not declared to be this extent. The assessees resisted the contention, on various grounds. The Collector passed orders, separately in...
Sandoz (India) Limited Vs. Association of Chemical Workers and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALLMR26; 1998(1)BomCR528
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Ms. Buch waives service for respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 is formal party and, therefore, service is dispensed with. By consent, writ petition is heard finally at this stage.2. The only question involved in the present writ petition filed at the instance of the employer petitioner Sandoz (India) Limited is whether the Industrial Tribunal Mumbai erred in upholding the objection raised by the respondent No. 1 union to appearance of the advocate for the employer first party in the reference before the said Court.3. Short facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are that upon charter ofdemands submitted by the union to the employer, the employer refused to have anynegotiation or discussions with union. Conciliation failed and the industrial dispute wasreferred by the appropriate Government to the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay which wasregistered as Reference (II) No. 55 of 1995. In the said reference the petitioneremployer is fi...
Smt. Nilofar Altaf Masalewala Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1997
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)233
ORDERS.S. Parkar, J. 1. This writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of detention dated 3rd October 1992 under the provisions of COFEPOSA Act can be allowed on the only point raised in this petition that the detenu was not apprised of his right to make representation to the detaining authority against the impugned order of detention.2. The order of detention was issued by respondent No. 2 on 3rd October, 1992, against the detenu by name Mohd. Altaf Iqbal Masalewala under the provisions of COFEPOSA Act which was served on him on 5th December, 1996. The said order of detention came to be passed in the following background.3. The detenu with his associates was apprehended by the Customs Officers (Preventive), Bombay, on 14-8-1991 from Room No. 206 of Hotel Sahil situated on Belasis Road at Bombay Central. At the same time two cars, which were parked in the car parking place in the said hotel, were also intercepted. On the search of one of those two ...
Pramod Digambar Koti Vs. Association of the State Road Transport Under ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1997
Reported in: [1998(79)FLR29]
Shah, J.1. The petitioner was an employee of Respondents No. 2 Central Institute of Road Transport (Training & Research) (for short 'CIRT'). The respondent No. 2 is a branch of respondent No. 1 viz. Association of the State Road Transport Undertaking. The petitioner joined the services of CIRT on 30th October, 1972. Later on the petitioner was appointed as Officer on Special Duty with effect from 1st October, 1984. By an order dated 2nd December, 1985, the Chairman, Governing Council, CIRT directed departmental inquiry against the petitioner on the ground of misconduct. During the inquiry, the petitioner was placed under suspension. The Inquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of the charges levelled against him. Pursuant to the report of the Inquiry Officer, the Chairman, Governing Council, CIRT imposed penalty of removal from service. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the President, Association of State Road Transport Undertaking and Secretary to the Government of India. A...
Magnachem Pharmaceuticals Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT197Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants herein are manufactured of P & P medicines falling under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They cleared the goods in standard commercial packages, they also cleared physician's samples of the same goods which are distributed by them without any charge. The issue in the appeal is the determination of the assessable value of the physician's samples. The Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise held that the assessable value of the Physician's samples will be on the basis of pro rata price of commercial packs of the medicines in terms of Rule 6(b)(i) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules. The order of the Assistant Commissioner was upheld by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune.2. Shri K.V. Sahasrabudhe, the ld. Consultant for the appellants fairly submitted that there is a decision of the Tribunal Cheryl Laboratories (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad -1997 (93) E.L.T.127 (Tribunal), in which the Tribu...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »