Mumbai Court August 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.
Corrosion Control Services (Mumbai) (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: [2000]70ITD109(Mum)
ORDERVimal Gandhi, VP This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 1988-89 is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) upholding addition of retention money of Rs. 22,09,010.2. The assessee's line of business is to find out whether connections of gas pipes are properly made and this is done through some sort of NDT X-Ray machines. The assessee carried above work as sub-contractor for Spic Capag NKK Toyo Consortium as per agreement dated 21-6-1986. Similar work was also carried for Dodsal Pvt. Ltd. on the terms and conditions specified in the agreement dated 7-8-1986. The main contractors laid pipelines for the Gas Authority of India (GAIL). The above documents contain scope of work and terms of payment. In the agreement dated 21-6-1986, it is provided that the assessee would raise monthly invoices in respect of services rendered on the contractor for payments. Out of the bill amount 5 per cent retention money would be deducted which will be released as follows :-...
Desai Electronics P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: (1999)(110)ELT817Tri(Mum.)bai
2. The Commissioner (Adjudication), Mumbai was designated as the adjudicating authority in respect of these six notices issued to the assessees and other persons located at Pune. After some correspondence date of hearing before the Commissioner was fixed for 4-12-1997. By letter dated 1-12-1997 the Managing Director of M/s. Desai Electronics Pvt. Ltd. wrote to the Superintendent (Adjudication) advising him that Shri Rohan Shah, Advocate, will appear and would get in touch with him.Shri Rohan Shah tells us that he requested the Superintendent (Adjudication) on 3-12-1997, the day before the hearing for another date on the ground that he had a matter before the Tribunal on that day, and suggested three possible dates on which he was free. The Superintendent promised to get back to him. However no further hearing was posted and order has been passed ex parte.3. The Commissioner may be right when he says numerous opportunities earlier have been given for the hearing. However the notices, i...
Trinetra Texturisers P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: (1998)LC13Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 66.87 lakhs and penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs on the assessee and Rs. 5 lakhs on its director.2. The Advocate for the applicant says that demand for duty is on three grounds. The first is that production of texturised yarn cleared without payment of duty calculated on the basis of triplicate copies of labels of packing slips which were found in the assessee's factory, the quantities of which were not entered in the RG 1 register. It is contended that labels did not bear any relation to the actual quantity of goods contained in the packing cases and that they were maintained at the stage of packing; often the goods were repacked. There are cases where although there are no labels, there are entries in the RG 1 register. The second is on the basis of two registers maintained by workmen. The duty of Rs. 18.50 lakhs relates again to the production of texturised yarn. It is contended that these registers were maintained by workmen in order t...
Mahesh Bhalchandra Thakur Vs. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Com ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR527; 1999(2)BomCR197
ORDERA.D. Mane, J.1. Rule. On request of learned Counsel for the respective parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith.2. There is clear infirmity in the decision of the Caste Scrutiny Committee, which is impugned in this writ petition. The committee, constituted as Caste Scrutiny Committee consists of three members and it is incumbent that hearing to the candidate should be given by the committee comprising of three members. In this case, however, only one member was present at the time when the petitioner was heard and interviewed, in support of his social status claim. The decision rejecting claim of the petitioner was, however, merely signed by three members committee, though they had not heard the matter as a committee sitting together and applied their mind collectively which is eventually implied when persons more than one forms a committee. It is thus clear that there is material defect which goes to the root of the question in considering the social status claim of the petitio...
M/S. Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Ltd. and Others Vs. Ravindranath ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: 1999(4)BomCR809
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. This is an appeal against order dated 25th June, 1998, passed in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 62/98/II in Special Civil Suit No. 37/98/II by IInd Additional Civil Judge. Sr. Division at Margao. By the impugned Order, the trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the appellants for temporary injunction against the respondents.2. The appellants have filed a suit seeking the relief of permanent injunction to restrain the respondents from conducting the business activities similar to those of the appellants and in breach of Clause 4 of the appointment letter dated 13th July, 1995, and further for direction to pay an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- with interest as well as an amount of Rs. 1,46,686/ - with interest and for damages to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- with interest. The appellants also filed an application for temporary injunction along with the suit. The appellants filed the said suit on 20th February, 1998. After service of the summons on...
Eknath Nana Shinde Vs. Shankarappa Chanbasappa Shindgi and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Bom22; 1998(4)ALLMR3; 1998(4)BomCR490; (1999)1BOMLR650; 1999(1)MhLj381
ORDERA.V. Savant, J.1. Heard both the learned Counsel, Shri Sali for the petitioner and Shri Mengane for respondent No. 2, None appears for respondent No. 1, though served.2. This petition demonstrates the highly objectionable manner in which the claim of an accident victim was sought to be defeated by the respondents, obviously acting in collusion with some revenue officer, as will be evident from the facts set out below. What has been challenged in this petition is the Order dated 8th February 1989 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solapur, (for short, 'Tribunal') below Exhibit-23 in M.A.C.P. Darkhast No. 11 of 1986. The relevant facts are as under :-3. The petitioner was working as a clerk in the Postal Department at the Kasba Peth Post Office in Pune. On 4th October 1978, he went to his friend Shelar at Chinchwad, near Pune. While returning, at about 1 a.m. on 5th October 1978 the auto-rickshaw in which he was travelling was hit by a truck belonging to the first respond...
Ramesh Mahadeo Sawant Vs. Daulatrao Lembe and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR518; 1998(3)MhLj229
ORDERT.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. This writ petition has come up for hearing on 4-8-1998. The Counsel for the petitioner was absent. The A.P.P. Smt. Usha Kejariwal appeared lor the State. Hence the case was adjourned (or today as part-heard. Today also, when the matter came up before the Court, the Counsel for the petitioner was absent. So I decided to proceed with the matter in the absence of the petitioner or his Counsel. I heard A.P.P. Smt. Usha Kejariwal.2. The petitioner challenges in this writ petition, the order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 40th Court, Girgaum, Bombay on 31-7-1990 in Case No. 34/89, where the first respondent was implicated for the offences punishable under sections 457, 427 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. The lower Court by the impugned order dismissed the complaint filed by the petitioner for want of sanction under section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code.3. The allegation made by the petitioner in the complaint was that while ...
Cce Vs. Nova and Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1998
Reported in: (1999)(80)LC94Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Respondent, engaged in the manufacture of cosmetics and toilet preparations, filed price lists and on approval of the same, cleared the goods on payment of appropriate duty on the approved prices.Subsequently, four show cause notices dated 27.10.1983, 30.11.1983, 15.6.1984 and 7.12.1984 were issued stating that over and above the approved prices, respondents had collected additional amounts by way of debit notes and collection of such extra amounts had been suppressed from the Department and not declared in the price lists and proposing demand of differential duty on the element of extra consideration The demand was proposed in respect of the period from April, 1981 to March, 1983, April to September, 1983, September 1983 to April, 1984 and May to September, 1984 respectively. Replying to the notices, respondent stated that the extra amounts were either in regard to freight or in regard to cost of secondary packing supplied at the option of buyers and hence these extra amounts cann...
Pfizer Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1998
Reported in: (2002)(0)ELT0Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the liability to duty of "sugar syrup" manufactured by the appellant for use in the manufacture by it of cough syrup. It consists of a mixture of purified water, sugar, sodium saccharin, sodium citrate, sodium benzoate and sorbitol. The entire quantity of this commodity is used in the manufacture of sugar syrup in a continuous process. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has held the product to be sugar syrup classifiable under Heading 17.02 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, and invoking the extended period contained in the proviso to Section 11A of the Act demanded duty on the quantity produced between December, 1991 and September, 1996. She has also imposed penalty under Section 11AC and demanded interest under Section 11 AD of the Act.2. The order is challenged first on the ground that it has not been shown that the product is marketable there being no buyer for the goods. They could not in any case be sold witho...
Vandana Dyeing Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1998
Reported in: (1999)(63)ECC45
1. The appellant Vandana Dyeing Pvt. Ltd. are engaged in processing of manmade fabrics given by various customers. Appellant V.R. Pungunar is its director. On 15/2/1989 the Central Excise Officers of Mumbai II Commissionerate intercepted a vehicle carrying certain quantity of processed suiting fabrics and the officers brought the vehicle to the appellants factory from where the goods had been loaded. On a check of their stock and accounts, the officers seized the fabric for action under Central Excise Rules, as they believed that there was misdeclaration of the weight of the fabric to evade duty. As a follow up, on 17.2.1989 the officers of Mumbai III Commissionerate visited appellants factory and on verification of stock and accounts, found a quantity of manmade fabric for which the declaration as required under the Statute, was not made.2. Verification of the declartations filed and the investigations carried out with the merchant manufacturers, sending the grey fabrics to the asses...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »