Mumbai Court March 1998 Judgments
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!Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Bralco Metal Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1998
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT453Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai has filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) captioned above which is reproduced below : " The Assistant Collector of Central Excise in his impugned order had disallowed the deemed credit taken by the appellant company on copper wire bars on the ground that these are not included in terms of Order No. 342/I/TRU, dated 1-6-1989 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance. Hence, this appeal. The letter No. 342/ I/TRU, dated 1-6-1989 of the Ministry of Finance mentions at sr. no. 4 refined copper and copper alloy unwrought under Heading 74.03 of the Central Excise Tariff. Heading 74.03 of the tariff includes sub-heading 7403.12, which is for wire bars. Hence I am unable to understand the Assistant Collector's objection. As long as the goods are unwrought wire bars, Heading 7403.12 would apply. There is no reason why it should have been held to be ineligible for deemed credit. The order of the Assist...
Tag this Judgment!Sterling Tyre and Rubber Co. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC342Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appellant, engaged in the activity of resoling motor vehicle tyres, manufactures Cushion Compound and uses the same in the manufacture of Tread Rubber which, in turn, is used in retreading activity. Cushion Compound and tread rubber being excisable goods, appellant was filing classification lists and price lists from time to time. Appellant was enjoying the benefit of Notification 208/72 in regard to Cushion Compound and benefit of Notification 85/85 in regard to tread rubber.Notification 85/85 exempted first clearances of value up to 7.5 lacs wholly and provided graded exemption for the value of clearances beyond the limit. Appellant did not pay duty on tread rubber on the ground that the value of clearances of each year did not exceed Rs. 7.5 lacs.The dispute in the appeal relates to the period April, 1984 to February, 1986. In the price list filed by the appellant for tread rubber adopting the formula under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975, the appella...
Tag this Judgment!Richardson and Cruddas Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC54Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appellant is a Government of India Undertaking and as per directions of the Supreme Court in O.N.G.C. case as clarified in 1990 (70) ELT 45 (SC) : 1995 (58) ECR 241 (SC)is required to move the Committee of Secretaries for clearance. When the appeal came up for hearing on 29.9.1997 we made this aspect clear and adjourned the appeal to 30.12.1997 indicating that the appeal would be liable to be dismissed for want of the requirement of clearance. On 30.12.1997 the appellant was absent and the appeal was adjourned to today. Notice of hearing has been issued to the appellant. Appellant is absent and there is no representation. Appellant has not cared to inform the Tribunal whether Committee of Secretaries has been moved in the matter. In these circumstances we dismiss the appeal for default, with liberty to seek restoration after moving the Committee for clearance and its deliberations are over....
Tag this Judgment!Cce Vs. Parle Products (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC55Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Respondent is absent in spite of notice. We have heard Shri M. Ali, JDR and perused the papers.2. The dispute relates to the includibility in the assessable value of the cost of special packing material used in packing biscuits and confectionery supplied to canteen stores department by the appellant.Goods are packed generally in tins or polybags. Goods to be supplied to canteen stores department, at the request of the buyer, were to be packed in tins and polybags and then in 7-ply cardboard boxes. The Assistant Collector passed an order including the cost of 7-ply cardboard boxes in the assessable value. Collector (Appeals) set aside this order. Department, being aggrieved, has filed the present appeal.3. From the facts available on record it is clear that 7 ply cardboard boxes were used only at the instance of the particular buyer and were not being used generally for the purpose of wholesale trade at the factory gate. In the assessee's own case we have held that the cost of these...
Tag this Judgment!Gee Aar Lamocoat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1998
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT273Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The application is for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 5.2 lakhs on the ground that the product manufactured by the applicant is self-adhesive plates, sheet, etc. classifiable under Heading 39.19 of the Tariff Act and not as claimed and approved earlier under Heading 39.20.2. The Advocate for the applicant says that the goods for the present case containing a sheet of plastic. Therefore he said that they are most specifically classifiable under Heading 39.20 which covers laminated or supported sheets. He further says that similar products manufactured by other manufacturers M/s. Garware Plastics and Polysters Ltd. and M/s. Deluxe Lamination have been classified under Heading 39.20. He further contends that the goods cannot be struck to the surface by finger pressure which is the requirement in the HSN Explanatory Notes for them to be classified under Heading 39.20. He says that the classification list under which the clearances were made was approved on 1-3-1993 whereas the fi...
Tag this Judgment!The Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Limited Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Bom305; 1998(3)BomCR471; (1998)3BOMLR677; [1999]98CompCas241(Bom); 1998(3)MhLj602
ORDERY.S. Jahagirdar, J.1. This petition under the provisions of sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, (for short the 'Act') is filed by the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'ICICI'), with a prayer to sanction the arrangement as embodied in the scheme of amalgamation annexed at Exhibit 'E' to the petition and for a declaration that the said scheme be binding on the parties concerned including equity shareholders, convertible debentureholders, 9.3% redeemable preference shareholders and 9.5% redeemable preference shareholders and creditors of the petitioner- company and all classes ofshareholders and creditors of transferor company.2. The transferor company, as referred to in the prayer, is I.T.C. Classic Finance Ltd.3. It is alleged in the petition that the Board of Directors of the petitioner- company approved the scheme on 1st of December 1997. Company Application No. 620 of 1997 was filed on 4th of December 1997 to ...
Tag this Judgment!Keshav Bablo Gawde and Others Vs. Ramakant Khandeparkar and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR391; 1998(3)BomCR883
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. These petitions have arisen on account o( same judgment passed by the Administrative Tribunal in Mundkar Revision Appln. No. 78/89. Writ Petition No. 307/92 is filed by a mundkar and Writ Petition No. 390/92 is filed by the landlord. The landlord had filed a civil suit for eviction of Keshav Bablo Gawde and in that suit, Keshav Gawde had taken the plea that he along with his 4 brothers were occupying the house as mundkars. Accordingly, the Civil Court had referred the issue of Mundkarship to the Mamlatdar. Before the Mamlatdar, the landlord Ramakant Khandeparkar had submitted that due to floods, he had offered to the Government his land lying at higher level for being divided into plots to be allotted to the occupants of the house who were affected due to flood and that accordingly, the family of Keshav Gawde and his brothers were jointly given 5 plots in Survey No. 67/1; that though his other brothers had shifted from the house, Keshav Gawde did not shift. The Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Regional Director of Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. O.H. Ba ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR690; [1998(79)FLR978]
ORDERA.B. Palkar, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the Regional Director of Employees State Insurance Corporation who was original opposite party before the learned Judge of Employees Insurance Court, Bombay, in an application bearing No. 79 of 1976 under the Employees State Insurance Act, which was disposed of by an order dated 29-12-1981. By the impugned order, the learned Judge has held that the Applicant and the other concern namely Bagamal Knitting Industries are one and the same concern and constituted a composite unit and were liable to pay contribution to the Employees State Insurance. However, in the said order the learned Judge has specifically excluded the period between 1-1-1973 to 12-1-1994 holding that the Corporation was entitled to recover contribution for the aforesaid period and this appeal is preferred only to challenge the aforesaid part of the order. 2. In this Court Mr. M.V. Jaykar learned Counsel appeared for the Appellant Corporation, The learned Advocate appearing...
Tag this Judgment!State of Goa, Through the Public Prosecutor Vs. Ganesh Rajaram Kadam
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR857
ORDERN.J. Pandya, J.1. This Appeal is field by the State against the order of acquittal that came to be passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Goa, in Sessions Case No.19/94 on 28th May, 1996.2. The accused/respondent was facing charge of murder in connection with the death of one Harishchandra Naik. Originally, the case of the prosecution was that the accused was hired by another person, one Pandurang Babu Naik and was in fact paid Rs. 1, 00, 000/- to do away with Harishchandra Naik as Pandurang and Harishchandra had enmity. They were brothers.3. During the course of the trial, so far as the said theory of conspiracy and payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- is concerned, nothing could be brought out and, in fact, the said person Pandurang Babu who was originally joined as accused No. 2 was discharged. This left only the accused/respondent facing the charge of murder.4. So far as the details of the incident are concerned, it is the case of the prosecution that on 10th January, 1994 at about ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »