Mumbai Court February 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.
Garware Plastics and Polyester Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC405Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appellant is absent in spite of notice of hearing. We have heard Shri M. Ali, JDR.2. The short question arising for consideration is whether on refund of excess duty collected from the buyer and paid to the Government, there should be re-determination of the assessable value treating the excess amount as part of the wholesale price and profit in the hands of the manufacturer. The lower authorities have held that there should be redetermination of the assessable value and recomputation of the duty and only the excess on such recomputation is to be refunded. The Tribunal has upheld this view in Amur Dye Chem . We find no ground to interfere and accordingly dismiss the appeal....
Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Prime Plast Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT337Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad has filed this appeal against the impugned order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune captioned above. The Respondents manufacture plastic films and were availing Modvat credit. In the course of manufacture plastic waste and scrap is generated and they were granted exemption under Notification 53/88 for clearance of this scrap which was removed at 'nil' rate of duty. Show cause notice were issued to the Respondents as to why the Modvat credit in respect of duty paid input contained in waste should not be recovered from them on the ground that such input duty credit is not available where the final product is exempted in terms of Rule 57C The demand was confirmed and in the appeal filed against the Assistant Commissioner's order the Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon a decision of the Tribunal in the case of Anil Starch Products Ltd. -1990 (40) E.L.T. 525 and held that Plastic waste does not constitute final product and...
Babubhai Rambhai Patel and ors. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1998
Reported in: (1998)(75)LC749Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The learned Advocate for the appellants has sent a letter dated 6.2.1998 which mentions inter alia that these appeals arise out of a common Order-in-Original dated 20.12.1993 passed by the Collector of Customs against M/s. Gujarat Imaging and Research Institute and its partners. Dr. Ambubhai T. Patel is one of the partners on whom penalty has been imposed. The appeal of M/s. Gujarat Imaging and Research Institute has already been disposed of vide Tribunal's Order No.C/393/95-B2 dated 6.10.1995 . By this order, the Tribunal has set side the Order-in-Original holding that the benefit of Customs Notification in respect of equipments imported by M/s. Gujarat Imaging and Research Institute was available to the Importer and penalty was not imposable. Against the said order, the Union of India have filed an appeal with an application for condonation of delay. This application is pending decision before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.2. The Id. DR explained that the impugned order was passed ag...
Smt. Neeta NitIn Bhanushali Vs. Competent Authority
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1998
Reported in: (1998)233ITR31(Mum.)
1. The appellant is aggrieved by the order of the Competent Authority, Bombay (now Mumbai), made under section 68F(2) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS), dated March 20, 1997, confirming the notice/order dated February 26, 1997, issued by the Senior Inspector of Police, Narcotics Cell, C.B., C.I.D., under section 68F, whereby the properties mentioned in the order were directed to be frozen.2. The appellant is the wife of Nitin Khimji Bhanushali. One lqbal Memon alias lqbal Mirchi was detained by an order dated September 2, 1994, issued under the provisions of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PITNDPS), which was neither revoked nor quashed by any court of competent jurisdiction. The Senior Inspector, Narcotics Cell, in exercise of the powers conferred on him under sections 68E and 68F(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, issued notice/order dated February 26, 1997, freez...
Vyankappa Narayan Patki and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Se ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR462; 1998(3)BomCR308
ORDERA.V. Savant, J.1. Heard all the learned Counsel; Shri Deo for the petitioners, Shri C.J. Sawant, Advocate General with Smt. S.S. Gokhale, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Shri R.A. Rodriques for respondent No. 3 and Shri V.D. Govilkar with Smt. J.A. Sarkhot for respondent No. 4. In this petition the question which arises for our consideration is whether the tuition fees fixed by the State Government for the students of the medical colleges in the State of Maharashtra under Govt. Resolution dated 17th July, 1997 is arbitrary and, therefore, hit by provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or whether the said Resolution is illegal being contrary to the provisions of any enactment or rules made thereunder.2. The petition has been filed by a member of the Maharashtra Legislative Council and 60 students taking education for M.B.B.S. course in the Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Karad, District Satara, which is a private Medical College and which is represented bef...
Laxmidas Morarji, Since Deceased by His Legal Heirs and Others and Jam ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR724; 1998(1)BomCR712
ORDERD.K. Deshmukh, J. 1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 23rd October 1986 passed by the Division Bench of the Small Causes Court at Bombay in Appeal No. 74 of 1978. That appeal was filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 2nd July, 1977 passed by the Small Causes Court at Bombay in R.A.E. and R. Suit No. 310/2406 of 1967. That civil suit was initially filed by the present respondent No. 6 - Salehbhai for recovery of possession of flat No. 2-B on the second floor of the building known as Mahomedaly Mansion, 241, Princess Street, Bombay. However, thereafter, the original petitioner - Laxmidas of whom the present petitioners are the legal representatives was joined as co-plaintiff because the premises were assigned to him by the original plaintiff. It was claimed in the suit that the suit premises were let out to one Dhanbai Batliwala as a monthly tenant, that she died on 12th December 1963 without leaving any heir behind. The executors of the Will...
Gurappa Basappa Byakod and Others Vs. Sunita Subhash Chandra Bubane
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-11-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR895
ORDERD.K. Deshmukh, J. 1. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge the order dated 22-9-1986, passed by the 4th Addl. District Judge, Solapur in Civil Appeal No. 662/1984. That appeal was filed by the respondent, challenging the order dated 27-3-1984, passed by the 5th Joint Civil Judge, J.D., Solapur in Reg. Civil Suit No. 328/1979. That civil suit was filed by the respondent claiming that she is owner of the suit premises, Municipal House No. 13-B situated at Railway Lines at Sholapur and that the petitioner is tenant of one room in the suit house. The landlady sought decree of eviction against tenant on the ground that the tenant is not ready and willing to pay the rent. The suit was, however, dismissed by the trial Court. In the appeal filed by the landlady, the Appellate Court reversed the findings recorded by the trial Court and passed a decree of eviction against the tenant under section 12(3)(b) of the Act. It is this decr...
Pravinchandra Hemchand Vs. Choksey Ambalal Amirchand and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR893
ORDERD.K. Deshmukh, J. 1. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Division Bench of Small Causes Court at Bombay dated 23rd April, 1986 in Appeal No. 180 of 1985. That appeal was filed by the respondents challenging the judgment and decree dated 16th February, 1985 passed by the Single Judge of the Small Causes Court at Bombay in R.A.E. Suit No. 2108 of 1973. That suit was filed by the petitioners claiming therein that he is owner of the building known as 'Prakash Bhuvan' situated at 23/25, 2nd Agiary Lane, Behind Bank of India Building, Bombay-2 and that defendant No. 1 Choksey Ambalal Amichand was a tenant of a shop on the ground floor of that building. It was alleged that the defendant No. 1 tenant created sub-tenancy in favour of defendant No. 2-Damodar Soni. A decree of possession was therefore sought against the tenant on the ground of sub-letting. There were other grounds also urged. However, it app...
Balkisan Manekchand Zaver and others Vs. Jalgaon People's Co-operative ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR689; 1998(3)BomCR70; (1998)1BOMLR279; 1998(2)MhLj147
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. The present petitioners are sons of Manekchand Zavar, who was a borrower of respondent No. 1 - Bank and he died on 20-8-1952. An award came to be passed on 20-12-1953 for recovery of Rs. 12.195/- {with principal amount of Rs. 10,000/- and interest of Rs. 2,195/-) under section 54 of the Bombay Cooperative Societies Act, 1925 against the present petitioners. On 14-4-1957 the respondent No. 1 obtained a certificate of execution under section 59(1)(b) of the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to the Old Act for short). Consequently on 15-7-1961, the Collector, Jalgaon issued certificate of transfer under section 59-A(1) of the old Act in respect of agricultural land belonging to the petitioners and admeasuring 11 acres, 18 gunthas in S. No. 242 (Gat No. 403) of village Paldhi, Taluka Erandol, District Jalgaon for partial satisfaction of Rs. 8,000/- out of the total Award of Rs. 1 2.195/-. The said land came to be transferred to respond...
Miss Pinky N. Hotchandani Vs. M/S. Daya Builders and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR902
ORDERP.S. Patankar, J.1. This Notice of Motion is taken out by the plaintiff praying for appointment of the Court Receiver and for injunction during the pendency of the suit.2. The suit is filed for specific performance of the agreement entered into under letter of allotment dated 7-5-1989 and 27-5-1989 and revised on 27-3-1990, in respect of Flat No. 2, B-Wing, Daya Sarita, Gokuldham, Malad (East), Bombay 400 063.3. The defendant No. 1 is a firm of developers and builders. Defendant Nos. 2 to 6 are partners thereof. Defendant Nos. 7 to 10 are owners of the plot of land on which the building Daya Sarita was to be built.4. The plaintiff booked flat No. 2 admeasuring about 560 sq. it. on 27-5-1989. Consideration agreed was fixed at Rs. 3,30,555/-. It was subsequently revised to Rs. 3,36,560/-in view of increase in area. However it was shown as Rs. 2,06.250/- (Rs. 1,37,500/- for flat and Rs.68,750/- for extra-amenities) in the original letter of allotment dated 27-5-1989. According to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »