Mumbai Court September 1997 Judgments
Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Shriram Refrigeration
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT511Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The brief facts are that a depot of M/s. Shriram Refrigeration Industries at Silvassa, received, 280 Nos. of Compressors from their factory at Hyderabad under Invoice No. 91 dated 10-4-1996 issued under Rule 52A through Kerala Transport. However, the duplicate copy of the invoice was misplaced in transit by the truck driver. Therefore, the Manager of depot of M/s. Shriram Refrigeration Industries at Silvassa, by a letter dated 25-4-1996 requested the Assistant Commissioner to allow him to accept the consignment of Compressors in question and issue modvatable invoices to parties under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, on the strength of original copy of the invoice No. 19 dated 10-4-1996. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise by his communication dated 22-5-1996 observed that as per the provisions of Rule 57G(2A) of the Central Excise Rules, credit can be allowed on original copy of invoice in respect of manufacturer only and there is no such provision in respect of depot...
Tag this Judgment!Eagle Transport Services Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT469Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant, was a Custom House Agent (referred to as 'agent' for short); notice was issued to it containing 3 articles of charge. These were that it had sublet the licence to M/s. Amol Shipping Agency by falsely stating that the Manager and four other employees of Amol Shipping Agency were its own employees obtained Customs Passes for them, and that it handed over shipping bills, signed but not containing any other particulars to Amol Shipping Agency and thus aided and abetted it in an attempted misuse of the DEEC Scheme by misdeclaring description of goods in 3 shipping bills in connivance with the exporter. After issue of the notice to the appellant under the regulation provision is cancellation of licence as Assistant Collector was appointed as Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer in his report has held all three charges have been proved. The Commissioner after considering the report of the Enquiry Officer and hearing the appellant's advocate has passed the orders cancelling ...
Tag this Judgment!Surendragar P. Gusai Vs. Commissioner of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT415Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant is the owner of the truck from which officers of Customs on 26-6-1987 recovered contraband goods like VCRs, VCR cassettes, wrist watches etc. totally valued Rs. 47,41,197/-. The truck was chased and intercepted. The driver of truck Shri Haripuri, the appellant as the owner of the the truck were contacted on 27-6-1987 when he gave a statement that one Shri Gani Ibrahim has requested him to give the truck to him for transporting smuggled goods within Gujarat. The appellant agreed for a rent of Rs. 20,000/-. Statement was also given by the clearner of the truck on 5-7-1987 in which he stated that the driver of the truck Shri Haripuri has gone along with him upto a place at Mothala village where the cleaner left the truck.Subsequently, he came to know about the interception with contrabands and informed the owner. Proceedings were initiated against the appellants among others and during the adjudication proceedings, the driver Haripuri stated in his cross examination that...
Tag this Judgment!Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. S.B. Shete, Presiding Offic ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR517; 1998(2)BomCR52; [1998(79)FLR272]
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer for issuance of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to call for records and proceedings in Applications (IDA) Nos. 1327 to 1530 and 1561 to 1652 of 1977 from the First Respondent, Labour Court, Solapur and to quash and set aside the order dated 2nd November, 1983 made in Applications (IDA) Nos. 1327 to 1530 and 1561 to 1652 of 1977.2. When the petition came up for admission, operation of the impugned order was stayed. After admission, the matter was appearing on the Board since June, 1997. A number of notices were issued to the respondents by the petitioner at the asking of the Court. The matter was argued on 10th June, 1997. It was kept part-heard till 10th July, 1997 and Mr. Apte has stated that the matter could perhaps be amicably settled. Inspite of the keen interest shown by the petitioner, none has shown any interest onbehalf of th...
Tag this Judgment!MomIn Abdul Rashid Vs. Patil Vilas Raghunath and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)BomCR618
ORDERAshok Agarwal, J.1. The present petition pertains to a dispute in respect of the election of respondent No. 1 to the post of President of Bhiwandi-Nizampur Municipal Council. Petitioner and respondent No. 1 were the only contesting candidates for the election to the post of President held on 9th May, 1997. The post of President for the present term is earmarked for open category candidates, As far as petitioner is concerned, he belongs to the open category and has been elected from a ward earmarked for open category candidates. As far as respondent No. 1 is concerned he belongs to the backward class citizens and has been elected from a ward reserved for backward class citizens. Apart from the petitioner and respondent No. 1, one Shri Dalavi Javed Gulam Mohamad had also filed his nomination for the post of President. He, however, withdrew his nomination. After respondent No. 1 filed his nomination petitioner had raised an objection to his nomination on the ground that the post of P...
Tag this Judgment!Vishnu Sitaram Patil Vs. Gopal Avaba Asurlekar, Since Deceased by His ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR587; 1998(2)BomCR635; 1998(1)MhLj49
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J. 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with the prayer for quashing and setting aside the order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as 'the M.R.T.', in Revision Application No. M.R.T.- K.P. 66 of 1983 dated 17th August, 1984 wherein the M.R.T. has confirmed the judgement and order dated 13th December, 1982 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Karveer Division, Kolhapur, in Tenancy Case No. 7 of 1976. The only controversy involved in this case is as to whether the Collector has jurisdiction to entertain an application under section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' when at the same time the remedy under section 29 of the said Act is available to the applicant. This controversy arises from the few admitted facts.2. The petitioner is the owner of the suit lands being agricultural lands at village Mane, Tal. Karveer, Dist. Kolhapur comp...
Tag this Judgment!Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. S.B. Shete, Presiding Offic ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: (1998)IILLJ477Bom
1. This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer for issuance of Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to call for records and proceedings in Applications (IDA) Nos. 1327 to 1530 and 1561 to 1652 of 1977 from the First Respondent Labour Court, Solapur and to quash and set aside the order dated November 2, 1983 made in Applications (IDA) Nos. 1327 to 1530 and 1561 to 1652 of 1977. 2. When the petition came up for admission, operation of the impugned order was stayed. After admission, the matter was appearing on the Board since June, 1997. A number of notices were issued to the respondents by the petitioner at the asking of the Court. The matter was argued on June 10, 1997. It was kept partheard till July 10, 1997 and Mr. Apte has stated that the matter could perhaps be amicably settled. In spite of the keen interest shown by the petitioner, none has shown any interest on behalf of the respondent. The notice ...
Tag this Judgment!The Jalgaon District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Another Vs. th ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR439; 1998(2)BomCR514
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Respondent No. 2, Pralhadrao Eknathrao Patil is a Director representing petitioner No. 1, the Jalgaon District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. a federal society on the apex bank, respondent No. 1 the Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank Ltd. Both petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 1 are specified Cooperative societies within the meaning of section 73-G of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Respondent No. 1 is an apex bank and naturally has on its own Board of Directors representatives of federal society like the District Central Cooperative Bank. Respondent No. 2 was elected as a representative of petitioner No. 1 bank on 10th April 1993. According to the petitioner it is a nomination and, therefore, is co-terminus with the term of office of the Board of Directors, which has nominated respondent No. 2 as its representative on respondent No. 1- bank whereas it is the case of respondent No. 2 that he is entitled to have a full term of five years...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Maharashtra Vs. Rajesh Alias Kaka Madanlal Soni and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALLMR420; 1998BomCR(Cri)245
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. Since these two connected matters arise out of a common incident and impugned judgment we are disposing them off by one judgment.2. Vide judgment and order dated 25-10-1996 passed in Sessions Case Nos. 1238/ 92 and 609/94 the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, convicted and sentenced 1. Rajesh alias Kaka Madanlal Soni, 2. Arif Rafique Ahmed Shaikh, and 3. Abu Armogam Velu Nadar, in the manner stated hereinafter :(1) Under section 302 read with 149 I.P.C., 302 read with 34 I.P.C. and 27(3) of the Arms Act to death; (2) Under section 307 read with 149 I.P.C. and 307 read with 34 I.P.C. to R.I. for life; (3) Under section 144 I.P.C. to R.I. for two years; (4) Under section 148 I.P.C. to R.I. for 3 years; and (5) Under section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act read with 149 I.P.C. to R.I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 6 months. The substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.3. Confirmation Case ...
Tag this Judgment!Atma Singh and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1997
Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT80Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Each of these appeals is against the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Nava Sheva, confiscating under Section 11l(d) of the Customs Act, [1962], goods described as "used industrial engines for polishing and grinding purposes" giving option to redeem on payment of fine, proposing penalty and increasing the value of the engines of the appellant. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common both these appeals are being disposed of by this common order.2. Advocate for the appellants says that he does not wish to challenge the confiscation of the engines on the ground that their import action required a licence. He says that he accepts that the goods are used automobile engines and that in the absence of an import licence confiscation under Section 111(d) is not questioned. He however, questions the remaining parts of the orders i.e. the enhancement of value the quantum of redemption fine and penalty.3. Each of the appellants imported 96 engines and declared the value to be...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »