Mumbai Court June 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.
Vijay T. Thakkar Vs. Commissioner of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-25-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT450Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant is aggrieved by the penalty of Rs. 25,000/- imposed on him under Section112 of the Customs Act by the Addl. Commissioner of Customs (P) in the impugned order. On 13-7-1990, the officers of the Rummaging and Intelligence Wing of the Bombay Customs Preventive examined the consignment of accompanied baggage at Jawaharlal Nehru Port arrived in the name of C.Abdulla. It consisted of dutiable and restricted goods like air conditioner, T.V., Music system, Washing machine, microwave oven etc. valued at Rs. 88,600/- cif. The goods were seized for action under the Customs Act. They were declared to contain used and household goods and personal effects and were to be cleared as unaccompanied baggage of Shri C. Abdulla. Earlier to this, on 11-7-1990 and 12-7-1990, statements of Shri Abdulla were obtained in which he stated that the unaccompanied baggage was despatched in his name by one K.K. Mukandan of Dubai to be cleared by the appellant and that the goods did not belong to him...
Orkay Industries Limited and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-25-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)BomCR415; 2000BomCR(Cri)14
ORDERS.N. Variava, J.1. By all these petitions the petitioners pray that the proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate Courts, under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, be quashed. In some of these petitions a prayer is also made that undertakings given by the concerned petitioners to those courts, to pay amounts, be also quashed and/or set aside. 2. Most of these petitions have been filed by Directors of two companies viz. Orkay Industries Limited and Atash Industries (India) Limited. In most of these petitions the concerned company is also a party. In some, it is a co-petitioner. In some, it is a respondent. In all these petitions common questions of law are raised. The main question raised before this Court is whether by virtue of section 536(2) read with section 441(2) of the Companies Act providing that all transfers made, after the commencement of winding up, will be void, any offence can be deemed to have been committed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrum...
Narendra G. Goradia (Huf) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-25-1998
Reported in: [1998]234ITR571(Bom)
B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion : 'Whether the Tribunal was right in treating part of the high Denomination notes as income of the assessee ?' 2. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1979-80. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family carrying on business of selling of coal and coke as commission agents. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1979-80, on demonetisation of the high denomination notes by the Demonetisation Ordinance, 1978, the assessee tendered Rs. 2 lakhs in such notes on January 19, 1978, for encashment. When called upon to explain the source of this amount, the assessee pointed out that there was sufficient cash balance in the cash book out of which the above amount was deposited. Though there was no dispute about the fact that the assessee had cash balance of...
Damodar Bhagwant Pande, Since Deceased, by Legal Representatives and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-25-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR591; (1999)101BOMLR396
D.D. Sinha, J.This civil revision application was listed before this Court for final hearing on 16.6.1998. The Counsel for the applicants made his submissions. However, since the Counsel for the non-applicants was absent, the matter was kept part heard and adjourned to 22.6.1998 as part heard. The matter could not be heard on 22nd, 23rd and 24th June, 1998 since it did not reach for hearing on those days and it remained part heard on all those days. When the matter is called out today for hearing, the Counsel for the non-applicants is absent. Hence, the matter is proceeded further on merits.2. Shri Khamborkar, the learned Counsel for the applicants, submitted that the present non-applicants filed Regular Civil Suit No. 32/70 for setting aside partition and re-determination of share of Narayan Bhagwant Pande. It is further submitted that the Trial Court decreed the suit on 4.5.1972. The learned Counsel submitted that original defendant Damodar Bhagwant Pande being aggrieved by the said ...
Om Siddharaj Co-operative Housing Society Limited Vs. the State of Mah ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-24-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR506
ORDERDr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this appeal the appellant Co-operative Housing Society seeks to challenge the order of the learned Single Judge dated 2nd March 1998 rejecting the writ petition of the appellant society against the order of the Minister of State (Co-operation) by which he allowed the revision application of the respondent No. 5 Pradeep Kamat and directed the appellant society to register the nomination of Mr. Kamat as nominee of the original member late Shri H.K. Desai.2. The material facts of the case, giving rise to this appeal, are as follows :The appellant is a Co-operative Housing Society. One of its members, Shri H.K. Desai, made a nomination on 7th December 1979 in favour of his wife Smt. Nalini. The said nomination was entered by the appellant society in its nomination register. On 15th June 1992, Mr. Desai sent another nomination in the prescribed form to the appellant society in favour of respondent No. 5 Shri Pradeep Kamat. Mr. Desai died on 15th July 1992. The ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1998
Reported in: (1999)(63)ECC625
1. The appeal has been filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Aurangabad against the order dt. 28.2.91 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. The facts are that respondents applied to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for transfer of Draw Die Petrol Tank which is a Die for machine trial to another party in Mumbai, who manufacture Press machine. The Draw Die Petrol Tank had been received by the Respondents under Chapter X Procedure of the Central Excise Rules under nil duty gate pass on 11.5.85. The Assistant Commissioner by his letter dt. 3.1.90 informed them that they cannot remove the draw die petrol tank under Rule 196BB of Central Excise Rules, because the goods have been received under Chapter X Procedure, and the Notification under which they were so received No. 167/79 had since been withdrawn. The appeal against the Assistant Commissioner's order was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) who held that once the goods are receiv...
Spa Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1998
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT197Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an application for dispensing with the pre-deposit of Rs. 96,882.62 which has been denied to the applicants as Modvat credit. The denial of the major part of the amount is on the ground that the applicants have taken Modvat credit on inputs received under invoices which were in the name of the loan licencees on whose behalf they were manufacturing the goods viz. P & P medicines and the loan licencee was referred to in the Notification No. 27/92-C.E. The ld. Counsel relied upon the Tribunal decision in the case of Gufic Chem Pvt. Ltd. v.C.C.E., Belgaum -1998 (104) E.L.T. 119 (Tribunal), wherein on identical circumstances, the Tribunal has held that once it is found that Notification No. 27/92 envisages that the goods being manufactured in the appellants' factory were for the loan licensee, there is no reason why the invoice received in the name of the principal manufacturer should not be taken as acceptable documents in terms of Rule 57G for Modvat purposes.2. After hear...
Corniche Holdings Inc Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1998
Reported in: (1999)(106)ELT547Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the goods imported by the appellant consisting of equipment such as merry-go-round and to be used in an amusement park are entitled to the benefit of Notification 133/91-Cus., dated 17th September, 1991.Appellant claimed benefit of the Notification on importation of these goods which were provisionally released pending examination of the issue. Subsequently, in the order impugned in the appeal, Collector has held that the condition in the Notification subject to which the goods were exempted from duty were not fulfilled and hence denied the benefit of exemption and demanded duty. He has also ordered confiscation of the goods with an option to redeem them on payment of fine and imposed penalty on the appellant.2. The Notification exempted roundabouts, swings and other fair grounds amusement equipment, their parts and accessories when imported into India for setting up of amusement parks from basic duty in excess of 45% ad valo...
M.P. Steel Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT331Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appellant imported a ship MV "Olinda" at Alang for being broken up into scrap. There was a question raised as to whether, for calculating the light displacement tonnage (LDT for short) of the vessel for purpose of assessment, permanent ballast was to be included or not. It appears that there was some correspondence between the Assistant Collector and the Collector. The Collector, in his letter dated 25th March, 1992 to the Assistant Collector indicated that the LDT should be considered to be inclusive of permanent ballast. On this basis, the Superintendent of Central Excise at Alang wrote to the appellant that the Collector had decided the issue and ordered assessment of the goods to duty by including the weight of permanent ballast and ordered encashment of bank guarantee and that proper action being taken. The order of the Collector is in appeal before us.2. The preliminary objection of the Departmental Representative is that the order of the assessment is that of the Superintend...
Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1998
Reported in: (1999)(108)ELT247Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Since we find that the issue - Classification of rubberised/calendered dipped fabrics involved in these appeals is covered by precedent decisions of the Tribunal, after hearing both the sides, we grant stay and with, the consent of both the parties, we take up the appeals for disposal.2. The appellants manufacture tyres falling under Chapter 40 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The issue in these appeals relates to levy of additional Excise duty on the rubberised/calendered dipped fabrics cleared by the appellants for captive consumption. The appellants had claimed classification of these goods under Heading 59.05 covering rubberised textile fabrics other than those of Heading 59.02.Proceedings were initiated against the appellants for classifying the goods under 59.02 which covers tyre cord fabrics of high tenacity yarn of polyamides polyesters or viscose rayon, and the sub -heading 5902.10 covers such fabrics of polyamides.3. The ld. Sr. Counsel Shri A. Hidayatullah sub mitted be...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »