Mumbai Court April 1998 Judgments
Smt. Corina Cotta Branganza Vs. State of Goa and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)BomCR891
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. By the present petition the petitioner is seeking to challenge the promotion of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to the post of Assistant Director of Tourism and further for direction to the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to determine the seniority of the petitioner in the grade of Assistant Planning Officer/ Assistant Tourist Officer from the date of 22-12-1979 stated to be the date of her initial appointment.2. The facts in brief relevant for the decision are that the petitioner initially joined the Government services sometime in the year 1964 in the Directorate of Fisheries and was absorbed in the Department of Information and Tourism as Information Assistant on 4-3-1968. She was confirmed in the post of Information Assistant with effect from 4-3-1970 by order dated 23-4-1970. The respondent No. 3 was appointed as Information Assistant on 9-2-1978. Whereas the respondent No. 4 was also appointed as Information Assistant on 6-3-1978. On 22-12-1979 the petitioner ...
Tag this Judgment!innovations Garment Ltd. Vs. Sarva Mazdoor Sangh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: [1998(79)FLR487]; (2000)IILLJ565Bom
Ashok Agrawal and R.P. Desai, JJ.1. By the impugned order, passed by the learned single Judge on December 10, 1997, certain interim orders are passed and the Industrial Court is directed to dispose of the Complaint within six months from the date of the order.2. It is clarified that the observations contained in the judgment passed by the learned single Judge are of a prima facie nature and the Industrial Court will be at liberty to dispose of the complaint on its own merit and in accordance with law without being influenced by the prima facie observations contained in the impugned order of the learned single Judge. Prayer made on behalf of the Appellant to withdraw the Appeal is granted.Appellant be issued a copy of this order authenticated by the Associate of this Court....
Tag this Judgment!Hitachi Zosen Corporation Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1998
Reported in: (1999)63TTJ(Mumbai)391
ORDERR. V. Easwar, J.M.The following grounds have been taken by the assessee in this appeal.' 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the assessee was not entitled to set-off of loss from one source of income against income from another source under the same head of income under section 70 of the Income Tax Act.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the assessee's entire income from fluorine recovery unit amounting to Rs. 304,964 was liable to tax at the rate of 40 per cent without deduction of loss of Rs. 168,569 suffered in the ONGC contract.'2. The assessee is a company incorporated in Japan. During the relevant accounting period, it had two contracts in India. One was a turnkey contract with ONGC and the other was for the provision of supervision services to SPIC. The assessing officer determined the loss from the ONGC contract at Rs. 1168,569 and the profi...
Tag this Judgment!Usha Ispat Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-28-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT470Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal arises out of denial of capital goods Modvat credit under Rule 57Q on Hot Metal ladle crane operated with controlling panel which is used for transferring the Hot Molten Metal in the Appellants factory from blast furnace to the mould for production of pig iron; on Steam Turbine used in the factory for generating power. And on D.P.Transmitter used as an equipment for checking the pressure of steam in the steam boiler which creates the steam and which also regulates the supply of steam to the Steam Turbine. Another item is Bear Coupling which is a part of the conveyor and is used to connect Gear Boxes and the Electric Motor. The conveyor is used for carrying the basic raw-materials during the course of manufacture.2. The Additional Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Kolhapur held that these articles are not eligible for capital goods Modvat credit as they have no direct relation to the manufacture of the final product and it cannot be said that they are used for pro...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Ishar Alloy and Steel Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-1998
Reported in: (1999)68ITD117(Mum.)
1. The assessee in this case is a limited company. Its previous year for this assessment year of 23 months ended on 31st March, 1989, The assessee-company had been carrying on the business of running a steel mill. During the relevant previous year, the assessee had undertaken a large scale expansion of its factory and as such, claimed to have constructed, purchased, installed and used building, plant and machinery at a substantial cost. It filed a return of income on 31st August, 1990, declaring a total income of Rs. 1,19,65,385. For arriving at this figure, the assessee had, inter alia, claimed depreciation on assets as under :(1) On office & factory building 26,29,246(2) On plant & machinery 1,81,30,363(3) On furniture, vehicles & office equipment 85,484 ------------ 2. The company had also claimed investment allowance on plant and machinery amounting to Rs. 1,08,79,252 in respect of the new unit. The AO completed the assessment on, 30th March, 1992, on an income of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Taneshwar Singh Chahal Vs. the Dean, Goa Dental College and Hospit ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR5; 1998(2)MhLj394
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. The petitioner by the present petition is seeking for a writ of mandamus against the respondents for admission to the Post-graduate Course i.e. M.D.S. Course in Goa Dental College and Hospital for the academic year 1998-99, without insisting upon the requirement of 10 years residency clause. The petitioner secured admission to the B.D.S. course at Goa Dental College and Hospital in the year 1991 pursuant to the selection in All India Examination conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi and completed the said course in January, 1996 after undergoing 4 years of study. Thereafter, the petitioner completed the compulsory internship of one year on 31-1-1997 and obtained permanent registration with the Goa State Dental Council on 14-2-1997, the registration number being A-233. The registration was renewed on 21-1-1998. The petitioner obtained highest total marks in the University Examination in B.D.S. Course and was awarded first rank a...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Vayaz Indian Pesticides Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-1998
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas255(Bom)
D.K. Deshmukh, J. 1. The petitioner-Vayaz Indian Pesticides Pvt. Ltd. has filed this petition for approval of the scheme of amalgamation. The only objection that has been received to this scheme is of J.P. Dave, hereinafter referred to as the objector. On behalf of the company, a preliminary objection has been raised to the consideration of objections filed by the objector. According to the petitioner, the objector has no locus standi to present any objection to the scheme of amalgamation because the objector has no interest in the petitioner-company. According to the petitioner, the objector was holding 840 shares in the petitioner-company. Out of these 840 shares, on January 8, 1993, he transferred 800 shares and on January 9, 1995, he transferred balance 40 shares and therefore, he does not have any interest in the company and, therefore, he is not entitled to file and maintain the objections. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, on January 8, 1993, 800 shares were trans...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Aimco Pesticides Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-1998
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas463(Bom)
D.K Deshmukh, J.1. This is a petition filed by the transferee-company for sanction to the scheme for amalgamation of three companies. There is only one objection filed by one Mr. J.P. Dave (hereinafter referred to as the objector). There are three objections raised by the objector to the scheme, viz. :(1) According' to the objector, he is a director of the petitioner-company and this scheme of amalgamation has been approved in the meeting of the board of directors which is not validly held.(2) He did not receive notice of the meeting of the company where the scheme of amalgamation was considered and approved by the general body of the company, though he was entitled to attend the meeting.(3) As in the memorandum of association of the company, it is not one of the objects of the company to amalgamate with other company, the transferee-company, i.e., the petitioner-company has no power to enter into the arrangement of amalgamation.2. So far as the first objection is concerned, according ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. U.S. Vitamins (i) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1998
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT393Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed by the department against the decision of the Collector (Appeals), Pune made in Order-in-Appeal No. P-345/93 dated 31-12-1993 whereunder he allowed the appeal of the respondent and set aside the Assistant Collector's order made in Order-in-Original F.No. V-ch-30 (18) RC-12/91/345, dated 18-8-1992.2. The facts of the case are that the respondent had received aluminium coil vide GP 1 No. 2541 dated 31-3-1990. The GP1 was issued in the name of M/s. India Foils (I) Ltd. who endorsed in the name of the appellant at Mumbai. The appellant in Mumbai endorsed the said GP1 in its own name at Lote Parshuram. The assessee cited before the Assistant Collector the decision of the Tribunal in S.B.S. Organics Pvt. Ltd. v.CCE -1990 (45) E.L.T. 701. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim.The Collector (Appeals) by the impugned order has held that since the endorsement is in respect of appellant's own unit, therefore he followed the judgment of the Tribunal in S.B.S. Organ...
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Forgings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1998
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT145Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These appeals are directed against the orders of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai captioned above. The appellants are manufacturing forged articles of steel and stainless steel falling under Chapter 73 of Central Excise Tariff Act. They are availing of Modvat credit facility under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules. They exported stainless steel Flanges (Tube & Pipe Fittings) falling under sub-heading 7307.00 of CETA under bond without payment of duty. They utilised the credit of duty paid on the inputs contained in the exported product for payment of duty on other forged products cleared for home consumption. Rule 57F(3) gives the facility to the manufacturers exporting the products on which Modvat credit has been taken. It provides that the credit of duty in respect of inputs used in the final products cleared for export under bond shall be allowed to be utilised towards payment of duty of excise on similar final products cleared for home consumption on ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »