Mumbai Court December 1998 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.
Sudh Mohinder Singh Chahal Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1998
Reported in: (1999)(106)ELT447Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal by party is filed against the impugned Order No.1279/90-BCH, dated 28-8-1990 of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai, praying for setting aside the same.1. The facts of the case are that the Appellant imported one Perrari Car with foreign Registration No. TED 274 cleared out of Customs by Yogesh Mehra as a power of attorney holder under Bill of Entry No.870/16, dated 31-7-1984 against the CCP No. P/J/CL 8497/N/NF/88/H/88, dated 30-9-1983. After clearance, it was parked in M/s. A.V. Auto Works garage. Getting information about the ITC Violation in the import of car, the said car was detained along with two other cars No. MEF 3765 and GRJ 5314, which were also cleared from the Customs by Yogesh Mehra, as a Power of attorney holder of Surendra Kumar Mehta. After investigation and issue of show cause notice and receiving reply and personnel hearing, all the three cars were absolutely confiscated on 2-3-1989 by Deputy Collector of Customs, SIIB, and Rs. 1 lakh each was ...
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Mr. Sahadev @ Sadu Ab ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1998
Reported in: I(1999)ACC698; 1999(2)BomCR129; (1999)1BOMLR664
ORDERT.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The matter arises under Motor Vehicles Act. The first respondent's wife Yesabai Sahadeo Pore met with an accident on 28-2-1986 at about 8.30 a.m. when she was waiting for a bus at Painjarwadi bus stand. It is alleged that at that time one S.T. bus No. MTQ-6538 belonging to the appellant driven by one James John Desoza, who was the first opponent in the trial Court, came at the spot with a great speed in Kolhapur Ratnagiri road, which had given a dash to the deceased Yesabai. The deceased sustained fatal injuries and she was removed to the C.P.R. Hospital, Kolhapur. On 13-3-1986 she succumbed to her injuries. In the trial Court the opponent No. 1 driver, did not file any written statement and the matter was proceeded ex-parte. The opponent Nos. 2 and 3 the bus owner and insurer, filed written statement. According to the defence taken by opponents, the deceased sustained fatal injuries due to the dash given by one unknown Ambassador car, which passed t...
Karbhari Piraji Deokar Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1998
Reported in: 1999(3)ALLMR59; 1999(2)BomCR227; 1999(1)MhLj858
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Heard Shri Hon, learned Counsel for the petitioner; and Shri Ghatge, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondents Nos. 1 to 5. Shri R.N. Dhorde appears for the applicants in Civil Application No. 6781 of 1998, which is filed for intervening in the matter. The said civil application for intervention is allowed and Shri Dhorde is also heard. 2. The petition challenges the programme declared by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sangamner respondent No. 3 for the election to Market Committee, Kopargaon; and mainly challenges the voters list which is finalised by the respondents.3. The first contention raised is that the statute gives authority to the Collector to prepare a list of voters in consultation with the District Deputy Registrar; but, here, the work of the revision of the voters list and the declaration of the programme is undertaken by the Sub-Divisional Officer, who has no authority to do so.4. Shri Ghatge, on instructions from the Officer present in the...
Rashtriya Upbhokta Sahakari Sanstha Vs. Jayantilal Dwarkadas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1998
Reported in: 1999(4)BomCR78
ORDER1. Heard Mr. Gawande, for the appellant, representative on behalf of the National Forum for Consumer Education, Akola. The grievance before the District Forum was that the complainant had purchased from the opposite party one number of 'Bigen' Hair Dye and two numbers of tooth brushes for a total consideration of Rs. 49/-. This payment was made by voucher. The allegation was that the opposite party, trader charged 50 ps. in excess in respect of each article. Since the matter was filed before the Redressal Forum, the complainant claimed further amount of Rs. 500/- towards damages and Rs. 400/- towards cost. The District Forum considered to the grievance of the complainant and directed refund of Rs. 1.50 ps. being the excess amount at the rate of 50 ps. for each article. Shri Gawande, wants us to appreciate that such un-fair trade practices are purported by all the traders on the common consumers, and that a serious view of the situation should be taken. Whereas, we have all sympath...
Photophone Industries India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: (2002)(140)ELT83Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against an order dated 30-12-98 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, whereunder he remanded the matter to the jurisdictional Assistant Collector for working out details of deduction with the supporting documents.2. The appellants, who are carrying on manufacture of photographic camera, filed three price lists Nos. 76, 155 and 179 for the year 1991- 92 in respect of their products supplied to the Canteen Stores Department. In the price lists, they claimed deductions from the wholesale price on account of the following viz. (i) instruction manuals, (ii) soft cases, (iii) freight and insurance and (iv) excise duty. The Assistant Collector disallowed the claims made by the appellants. An appeal filed by the appellants have been remanded by the Collector (Appeals) for working out the details. Hence, the present appeal.3. It was contended by the learned Counsel Shri R. Parthasarathy that these matters are covered by the decision of the Tribunal a...
In Re: Jalan Dyeing and Bleaching
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: (1999)(80)LC827Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is a review appeal filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Division G-I, Mumbai-I, (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) in pursuance of the order passed by the Commissioner-II of Central Excise, Mumbai-I, against the Order-in-Original No. G-I/131/95 dated 20.6.1995 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Division G-I, in respect of M/s. Jalan Dyeing & Bleaching Mills, Mumbai-400 013 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent).2. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent had filed a Classification List No. 2/94-95 dated 7.12.1994 classifying their product processed embroidery fabrics under Chapter Sub-heading 5805.13, claiming Nil rate of duty on the basis of Board's Letter No.25/12/69-CX-2 dated 18.1.1974. A show cause notice was issued for denial of exemption claimed and approval of Classification List accordingly, which was adjudicated in Respondent's favour. Hence the department filed the appeal for review.3. Shri Sujay N. K...
Vas Synthetics Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: (1999)(106)ELT76Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These three applications seek waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 3.076 crores demanded from M/s. Vas Synthetics and penalty of Rs. 3 crores imposed on Arun D. Mehra and Rs. 1.5 crores on Ashok Pokharkar.2. In the impugned order, the Commissioner narrates that Vas Synthetics had obtained 28 advance licences under the DEEC scheme by showing wrong export of polyester fabrics. The weight and polyester content of the fabrics, of both, were misdeclared to the Customs officers responsible for making the necessary entries relating to export in the DEEC books issued to this applicant by making changes in the figures relating to the export in the shipping bill after the export was completed, and by suppressing the production of test report by Silk and Art Silk Mills Institute and Research Association (SASMIRA) of samples of the export consignment to be tested as ordered by the Custom House. Such wrongful alterations were made with active connivance of Ashok Pokharkar, the Proprietor of Amol Sh...
Mr. Manuel Caetano Gonsalves Patricio Vs. Mr. Antonio Braganza and Ano ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: 1999(3)ALLMR45; 2000(1)BomCR453
ORDERR.M.S. Khandepakar, J. 1. This petition arises from Order dated 18th July 1998 whereby the trial Court in Regular Civil Suit No. 165/95/C has ordered the deletion of two issues, one, whether the defendant/petitioner proves that the Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and the other, pertaining to the claim of agricultural tenancy rights of the petitioner to the suit property. 2. The facts, in brief, relevant for the decision are that the respondent No. 1 has filed the said suit for declaration that the respondent No. 1 has right in the property bearing Survey No. 112/1 of Calapur village pursuant to grant of lease by the respondent No. 2 in respect of the said property for the purpose of extraction of stones since 1971 and further for direction to the Mamlatdar of Record of Rights to register the name of the respondent No. 1 in the 'Other Rights' column in Form I & XIV in respect of the said property as well as for declaration that the petitioner has no right to the sui...
The United Western Bank Ltd. Vs. Marmago Steel Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR385; 1999(2)BomCR149
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. The present suit was filed on 30th October, 1995. Summons for Judgment was taken out on 30th December, 1996. Writ of Summons was also stated to be served on 16th December, 1995. Clearly thus Summons for Judgment have not been taken out within six months. Thus under Rule 227 of the High Court. O.S. Rules, the suit ought to have been placed on Board for dismissal. Furthermore. Mr. Sanglikar very fairly points out that there is a mistake about the calculation of interest. In view of the above he points out that it would be necessary to withdraw the present Summons for Judgment and to take out fresh Summons for Judgment after making the necessary amendment in the plaint.2. Mr. Madon, learned Counsel appearing for the defendants, on the other hand points out that in view of the gross delay in taking out the Summonsfor Judgment, the defendants are entitled to unconditional leave. In support of this proposition he cites a judgment of this Court in the case of Central Ba...
Jyoti Structures Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)(106)ELT402Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant who manufactures on job work parts of transmission towers, filed a price list in which the assessable value on such goods was worked out at the total of cost of raw material and job charges.Proceedings initiated by the department on the ground that the manufacturer's profits were not included in the assessable value have resulted in the passing of the order impugned in the appeal.3. This Tribunal's decision in Appeal E/5495/91-A, filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad against the order of the Collector (Appeals) for a later period, holding that the job charges included the manufacturing profit has been dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that the job charges would necessarily include the profit element. Liket in that case, the department has no case that the appellant collected any amount from the buyers as profit over and above the job charges. The value declared therefore must be considered to have been included in the manufacturer's profit.4. Appe...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »