Mumbai Court August 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.
Matulya Mills Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1997
Reported in: (1997)(72)LC817Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Arguing for the appellants, Shri M.H. Patil, Id. Advocate submitted that the demand is barred by time inasmuch as specific allegation of suppression, fraud, etc. is not mentioned in the show cause notice to invoke the larger period.2. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, we find that there was no specific allegation of suppression, etc. in the show cause notice. The Superintendent has issued a notice on 28.8.1985 for the period from March, 1984 to June, 1984 without alleging suppression of facts or fraud, etc., as mentioned in the proviso to Section 11A of the Act. In the circumstances, following the ratio of the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of CCE v. HMM Ltd. and decision, referred to by the appellants in the case of CCE, Kattpur v. UP Lamination , we accept the contention of the appellants and accordingly, set aside the impugned order allowing the appeal on the issue of limitation....
Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh Vs. Khatau Makanji Spinning and Weaving C ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1997
Reported in: [2000]100CompCas33(Bom)
R.M. Lodha, J.1. On May 6, 1997, this court while modifying the earlier order dated May 5, 1997, directed Khatau Makanji Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd. ('the company') to make payment of salary to its workers for February, 1997, on or before May 20, 1997. 2. The matter came up before me on June 9, 1997, and Buch, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submitted that the order dated May 6, 1997, has not been complied with by the company. On that date, K. V. Yakkundi, learned counsel, appeared for the company and did not dispute the fact of non-compliance with the order dated May 6, 1997, by the company. He admitted that the payment to the workers towards salary for February, 1997, was not made till that date. The said non-compliance on the part of the company was indeed, serious. At that time Yakkundi, learned counsel appearing for the company, prayed for short time to file an affidavit setting out the reasons for not complying the order dated May 6, 1997. As requested by Yakk...
Badri Prasad Choudhry Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1997
Reported in: 1998(97)ELT255(Bom)
1. The short question involved in this petition is that the Burma Teak imported by the petitioner from Singapore is exempted from import duty as per Notification No. 280/76-Cus., dated 2-8-1976 as amended by Notification No. 103/86-C.E., dated 17-2-1986. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he had imported Burma Teak Squares that were produced or manufactured from Burma though it was purchased from Singapore and therefore the benefit of notification cannot be denied. Department while denying the benefit of the petitioner did not taken into account the two certificates produced by the petitioner to show squares have been manufactured from Burma Teak though purchased from Singapore. The Assistant Collector of Customs taken a view teak imported by the petitioner from Singapore not from Burma and certificates produced by the petitioner cannot be accepted. We heard Counsels for petitioner and respondents. 3. According to us, the petitioner cannot sustain his contention because of the No...
Garware Plastics and Polyester Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of Indi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR777; 1998(2)BomCR845; 1998(97)ELT256(Bom)
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Petitioner No. 1- a Private Limited Company is the producer of the polyester films. On 11th November 1976, they had filed a classification list under Rule 173-B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 that the Assistant Collector, Central Excise and Customs, Aurangabad after ascertaining the nature of the produce by chemical test and finding that the raw material used is saturated polyester chips and the final product is rigid plastic and noticing the commercial sense and trade parlance of the term 'polyester films' supported by evidence, was pleased to hold that the polyester sheets are outside the purview of T.I. 15-A i.e. plastic, and as such, would fall under T.I. 68 of C.E.T. This order was passed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise and Customs, Aurangabad on 8th December 1977.2. On 30th November 1978, Collector, Central Excise and Customs, Pune issued a Notice under section 35-A of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 intimating his intention to se...
Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh Vs. Khatau Makanji Spg. and Wvg. Co. Ltd. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALLMR684
1. On May 6, 1997, this Court while modifying the earlier order dated May 5, 1997 directed Khatau Makanji Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd. ('the company') to make payment of salary of its workers for February 1997 on or before May 20, 1997. 2. The matter came before me on June 9, 1997 and Ms. Buch, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submitted that the order dated May 6, 1997 has not been complied with by the company. On that date Mr. K. V. Yakkundi, the learned counsel, appeared for the company and did not dispute the fact of non-compliance of the order dated May 6, 1997 by the company. He admitted that the payment to the workers towards salary for February 1997 was not made till that date. The said non compliance on the part of the company was indeed serious. At that time Mr. Yakkundi, the learned counsel appearing for the company, prayed for short time to file affidavit setting out the reasons for not complying the order dated May 6, 1997. As requested by Mr. Yakkundi, the mat...
Govind Nagar Shop Keepers Association and Another Vs. State of Maharas ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR257; 1998(5)BomCR280; (1998)4BOMLR788; 1998(2)MhLj45
Held:Encroachment of public properties have no absolute right of alternative accommodation.In the celebrated case of Olga Tellis and Ors. v. Bombay Municipal Corporation and Ors. the Apex Court was candid enough to deleave that no person had a right to encroach by erecting a structure or otherwise on footpaths, pavements or others places reserved or earmarked for public purpose like gardens or play-grounds. The Apex Court of course in that case had made a reference to Section 314 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act and held that provision not to be unreasonable. Even in the reported decision in Sodan Singh and etc. etc. v. New Delhi Municipal Committee and Anr. etc. AIR 1989 SC 1988, where the question was whether it was a fundamental right of a citizen to occupy a particular place on the pavement where he could squat and engage in trading the business, the Supreme Court therein had very clearly given a negative verdict against such citizens. Carrying the same thread in Ahmedabad M...
Blue Star Limited Vs. Blue Star Workers Union and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR92; 1998(1)BomCR277; [1999(82)FLR925]
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. Exception is taken by the petitioner Blue Star Limited to the direction given by the Industrial Court in its operative order dated 22-12-1995 while dismissing the complaint filed by respondent No. 1 Blue Star Workers Union, by means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India.2. The petitioner Blue Star Limited ('employer') is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in business of air-conditioning products and projects, software exports, medical electronics etc. and has its factory at Pokhran Road, Thane and western regional office at Band Box House, Mumbai. The first respondent Blue Star Workers Union ('union') is a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. It is the case of the employer that on 1st July, 1988 from 10.50 a.m. to 11.15 a.m., 29 employees who were members of the union entered the cabin of Mr. Anil B. Sawant, Manager - Administration and Personnel and gheraoed him. The empl...
Akai Impex Ltd. Vs. General Steel Export and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR170; 1998(2)BomCR199
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J. 1. This suit has been filed by the plaintiffs for a declaration that the first defendants are not entitled to claim, demand or receive an amount to the extent of U.S. $ 2,16,819.55 under the Letter of Credit, hereinafter referred to as the 'L/C', dated 30th August, 1994. Prayer is also made for a permanent injunction restraining the first defendant from claiming or receiving the said amount. The Notice of Motion has been taken out for an injunction in similar terms. An affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion has been filed. Affidavit in reply has been filed by the defendant No. 2. No replies have been filed by defendant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 although the service is stated to have been effected upon them.2. Briefly stated the facts are that the first defendant by an offer (offer/Performa) dated 17th August, 1994 agreed to sell cold rolled sheets of various sizes and gauges on certain terms and conditions. The payment was by way of an irrevocable L/C payable 180 days ...
Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Blue Star Workers' Union and another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1997
Reported in: (1996)IILLJ1032bBom
ORDER1. Exception is taken by the Petitioner Blue Star Limited to the direction given by the Industrial Court in its operative order dated December 22, 1995 while dismissing the compliant filed by the Respondent No. 1 Blue Star Workers Union, by means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The Petitioner Blue Star Limited ('employer') is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in business of air-conditioning products and projects, software exports, medical electronics etc. and has its factory at Pokhran Road, Thane and western regional office at Band Box House, Mumbai. The first Respondent Blue Star Workers Union ('Union') is a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. It is the case of the employer that on July 1, 1988 from 10.50 a.m. to 11.15 am., 20 employees who were members of the Union entered the cabin of Mr. Anil B. Sawant, Manager-Administration and Personnel and gheraoed him. The employe...
Baburao S/O Bhimrao Rathod Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALLMR508; 1998(2)BomCR840
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Leave to amend. Prayer clause be added.2. This writ petition challenges the rejection of the nomination paper of the petitioner in the elections for the Councillors of Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad from Sastur Constituency on a seat reserved for other backward community and the rejection of the appeal bearing Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1997 confirming the order of the Returning Officer by the 1st Additional District Judge, Osmanabad.3. On 15-2-1997 the petitioner filed his nomination paper. It accompanied a copy of caste certificate authenticated by the Head Master of a private school. This certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Omerga was shown to have certified that petitionerbelongs to Laman caste. On 15th February 1997 itself petitioner was intimated in writing by the Returning Officer that he should produce the original certificate of his caste at the time of the scrutiny. When the nomination was taken up for scrutiny the petitioner could not prod...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »