Mumbai Court March 1998 Judgments
Texnomac Traders Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT256Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Three consignments of mace were imported on the ship MV Ial Governor at Kandla. The person shown as importer in the manifest did not come forward to clear the goods, and investigation by the Customs Department disclosed that they did not exist at the addresses shown. Therefore, the suppliers who had sent the three consignments sold the goods to the appellant before us. This appellant filed the bills of entry for clearance of the goods, after the import manifest was amended to show him as the importer. In the meantime, however, the Collector had passed orders on the notices issued to the persons first shown as the importers, and confiscated the goods. On appeal by this appellant, that order of confiscation was set aside by orders passed on 4th July, 1995 by this Tribunal. By that order the Tribunal also asked the Commissioner to adjudicate the matter afresh within two months in view of the perishable nature of the goods.2. The Commissioner passed this order after hearing the appella...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Bacchu Patil Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR71; 1998CriLJ3845; 1998(3)MhLj58
ORDERA.V. Savant, J.1. Heard Mr. Gavankar for the petitioner and Ms. Kantharia, A.P.P. for the respondents.2. Rule. By consent rule is made returnable forthwith and heard both sides.3. This petition demonstrates the wholly unsatisfactory manner in which the officers at the Thane Central Prison treat, not only the prisoners, but also the orders passed by this Court in respect of the important rights of the prisoners.4. The petitioner has been convicted by the Thane Sessions Court in Sessions Case No. 300 of 1982 on 29th July, 1983 when he was held guilty of the offence punishable under section 302 of I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer R.I. for life. Criminal Appeal No. 708 of 1983 was dismissed by this Court on 23rd September, 1986, It is mentioned before us that there was no appeal to the Apex Court.5. In December, 1997, the State Government tock a decision to remit the sentence of the petitioner which was in excess of 22 years of imprisonment. Since the petitioner was under an impression ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Lalchand Manakchand and Sons Vs. M/S. Vijay Enterprises and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR480
ORDERA.D. Mane, J.1. A short but important question is involved in this first appeal, as to whether the suit filed by the appellant-firm was within limitation on basis of open, mutual and current account of the respondent-firm after its dissolution.2. In order to appreciate this question we may refer to the facts of the case. For the sake of convenience, the appellant is referred as 'plaintiff' respondent No. 1-- firm and respondents 2 to 5, who were it's partners as 'defendants'.3. The plaintiff filed suit on 29-4-1983 to recover certain amount due on the foot of the account for the period from accounting year 1977-78 to 1981-82. The plaintiff alleged that it maintains accounts of different firms in it's account books. Advances made by the plaintiff to the defendants and repayments thereof, are debited and credited respectively in the accounts of the defendants in books of accounts maintained by the plaintiff. The balance, at the end of each accounting year was forwarded in the next y...
Tag this Judgment!Mr. Suresh Srinivasan Iyengar Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)386; 1999(2)ALLMR248; 1998BomCR(Cri)877
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. This order will dispose of Criminal Writ Petition Nos.12/98, 13/98,14/98, 15/98, 16/98, 17/98, 18/98, 29/98, 30/98, 31/98, 32/98, 33/98, 34/98and 35/98 as there is commonality of facts, parties and points of law inall the matters. For the sake of convenience, the facts have been takenfrom Criminal Writ Petition No.12 of 1998.2. This petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code hasbeen filed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 16th May 1997passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's 4th Court, Gir-gaum, Bombay in C.C. No. 297/S/96 whereby the application filed by thepetitioner for dropping the proceeding has been rejected. Briefly therelevant facts may be noted.3. The petitioner claims to be the non-Executive Director of the Companyknown as M/s Jay Harsh Holding and Services Pvt. Ltd. having its registeredoffice at Borivli (West), Mumbai, hereinafter referred to as 'RespondentNo.3'. The Respondent No.2 is a businessman having i...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Rajinder Kumar Sharma Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)791; 1998CriLJ3734
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. This is an application for anticipatory bail. It is stated that the applicant is the resident of New Delhi. He carries on business of gems and precious stones in the name and style of M/s. Chandra Gems for the last 10 years. He was approached by one Mr. Mahesh Ganatra, resident of Bombay, to start business of manufacturing plastic goods. The applicant was told by the said Ganatra that one Mr. Shantilal Jain of Bombay was interested in financing the manufacturing project. The applicant, therefore, got the licence to establish a small scale industry and obtained Certificate of Registration from the Department of Small Scale Industries, New Delhi. All these certificates obtained are not known to the applicant. According to the applicant, it was explained to the applicant by Mr. Ganatra that Shantilal Jain has good relations with some officers of the licencing authority. He was also assured that he will get the necessary import licence. The export was also to be done...
Tag this Judgment!Siddiqui Badlu Khan Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1998
Reported in: (1998)100BOMLR747
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Vide Judgment and order dated 18-6-1997 the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, in Sessions Case No. 1553 of 1994, convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated hereinafter :-(i) Under Section 452 IPC to undergo 3 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 1 month;(ii) Under Section 392 IPC to undergo 5 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1500/- in default to suffer R.I. for l'/2 months ; and(iii) Under Section 392 r/w 397 IPC to suffer 7 years R.I.The substantive sentences of the appellant were ordered to run concurrently.It may be mentioned that along with the appellant, co-accused Shaffik Ahmed Jamil Ahmed was also tried but in view of the infirmities found in the evidence against him, he was acquitted vide the impugned Judgment.2. In short, the prosecution case is that on 25.8.1994, at about 3 p.m. three unknown miscreants armed with choppers entered the jewellery shop of the informant Prakaschand Badama P.W. 6 an...
Tag this Judgment!Welding Rods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. (A)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT841Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the appellant was not a reroller and did not manufacture goods falling under Chapters 72 to 73 of the Central Excise Act and, therefore, deemed Modvat credit in terms of Government of India's Order F. No. 342/1/88-TRU, dated 12-7-1990 as amended would not be available on mild steel wire rods acquired by it.2. Appellant is absent and requests decision on merits. I have heard the departmental representative and perused the records.3. The appellant contends that there is no requirement in the Government of India's order that it should be a reroller. It manufactured wire rods falling under Chapter 72 which were converted into welding electrodes falling under Chapter 83.4. There is merit in the contention that before converting into electrodes, the appellant makes wire rods which were classifiable under Chapter 72. However, the appellant has not fulfilled the condition contained in the Ministry's letter dated ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Broach Textile Mills Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1998
Reported in: (1998)(62)ECC355
1. This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Vadodara, on a direction under Section 35-E (1) of the Central Excise Act 1944, from the Central Board of Excise & Customs, to apply to the Tribunal for testing the legality and propriety of the Order dt.21.3.96 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs Vadodara. The brief facts are that the Respondents are manufacturers of Cellulosic Spun Yarn falling under Chapter 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. 1985. They manufactured single spun yarn and cleared the same to independent buyers as well as to another unit of the respondents on payment of duty. It therefore appeared that the Respondents is having the facility for manufacture of doubled yarn falling under sub-heading 5506.21 and 5510.60 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. 1985. They were availing exemption under Notification No.35/95 for the manufacture of double yarn in their factory after paying duty on single yarn used for the manufacture of dou...
Tag this Judgment!Mipco Seamless Rings (Guj.) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1998
Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT396Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Appellants manufacture excisable goods seamless rings both unmachined and machined. On 5-10-1990 Central Excise Preventive Officers visited Appellants factory and found some rings packed in gunny bags lying outside Bonded Store Room (BSR). They were packed in 389 bags (22,788 nos.) with yellow labels and 403 bags contained 21,869 rings with red labels. Shri J.B. Sojitra, Company Secretary gave a statement on 9-10-1990 saying the rings found in gunny bags were those which were found unsuitable for manufacture of bearings being not as per customers specifications. The visually scrap rings were given red label and dimensionally defective rings bore yellow labels. He further stated that they followed a practice of storing such rings separately and at the time of sale of such rings they were weighed and accounted for in RG-1 record as scrap of iron and steel. The officers formally seized the rings for non-accountal in RG-1 on 3-1-1991.2. It was further noticed by the officers on scr...
Tag this Judgment!Pro Agro Seed Co. Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC340Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.298/94-BCH dated 26.4.1994 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. In this case, the refund claim filed by the appellants was rejected. The Ld. Counsel, Shri J.S. Agarwal appeared on behalf of the appellants submitted that the Assistant Collector of Customs before rejecting the refund claim had not granted any opportunity to substantiate the claim. He submitted that the Assistant Collector of Customs in the adjudicating order held that the appellants has failed to submit Original Triplicate Bill of Entry, Original Customs attested Invoice. He submitted that no notice to produce these documents was ever given to the appellants. He also submitted that in the Appeal Memorandum before the Collector of Customs which was reproduced in the impugned order that no finding was given on the issue raised by the appellants. He, therefore, prayed that the matter be remanded.2. Heard Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR appeared on beh...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »