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.
Cc Vs. G.M. Mittal Stainless Steel Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1998
Reported in: (1999)(80)LC585Tri(Mum.)bai
2. The respondents herein imported certain goods namely ferro nickel ingots. The bill of entry was filed for the same on 14 February, 1984.The goods were assessed and cleared after payment of duty. It appears that within six months, a less charge demand was issued by the Customs Authorities indicating that there has been short payment of customs duty to the tune of Rs. 10,675/-. Before confirmation the same, the respondents requested for personal hearing. It was fixed for 13.9.1993 which was attended by the respondent who requested for more time which was not allowed by the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the aforesaid demand.3. In appeal before the Lower Appellate Authority, the respondents, inter alia, contended that they had filed a Bill of Entry for home consumption on 14th Feb., 1984; the rate of duty in force as on 14th Feb., 1988 would be applicable in their case. Therefore, there was no justification for demanding Special Excise Duty which was made...
M.P. Electricity Board Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1998
Reported in: (1999)(80)LC692Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the order in appeal dated 10.2.1993 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay.2. In this case the refund claim of Rs. 39,424/- filed by the appellant was rejected.3. Brief facts of the case are that appellant made an import of consignment of spare parts of Hydrogen Compressor for power house. The appellant filed the bill of entry and the same was assessed and duty amounting to Rs. 9,12,485/- was paid by the appellant. Thereafter the appellant filed the refund claim of Rs. 39,424/- on the ground that item No. 44 of the invoice has not been received by the appellant and the same was short shipped. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim. Thereafter the appellant filed the appeal and the same was rejected.4. Ld. counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the goods were found short when the goods were examined at the site. He submits that thereafter the supplier supplied the goods short supplied free of cost.He theref...
Mr. Krishnakant Mulashankar Vyas Vs. Mrs. Reena Krishna Vyas and Anoth ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Bom127; 1999(2)ALLMR103; 1999(1)BomCR626; II(1999)DMC221; 1999(1)MhLj388
ORDERA.P. Shah, J.1. Whether the wife can be denied maintenance pendente lite under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 only on the ground that her marriage with her husband is the second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage and the same is void under section 11 read with section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act and whether such a wife is also disentitled from claiming interim maintenance in proceedings under section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 are the questions which fell for consideration in this review petition.2. Very few facts are necessary for appreciation of the controversy arising in this petition. Both the principal parties namely the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 are Hindus governed by Hindu law. The case of the respondent No. 1 is that she was married to the petitioner according to the Hindu vedic rites on 29th June, 1986 in a temple at Ulhasnagar and that the respondent No. 2 is their daughter born from the marriage. The re...
Ms. Alka Arun Pagare Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)ALLMR603; 1999(1)BomCR856; 1999(1)MhLj874
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. Civil Application No. 455/98 for intervention is allowed. Rule. With the consent of the parties, Rule made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner has passed H.S.C. examination and scored 60 % marks. In response to the advertisement published by the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on 13/6/98 for admissions to the first year Diploma in Education Course, the petitioner submitted her application for being considered for admission against a seat reserved in the management quota. The said advertisement further stated that the candidates seeking admissions should have secured minimum 40 per cent marks in the 12th Std. and should belong to the Christian religion. It further stated that along with the admission form, a zerox copy of the marks memo of 12th Std., and a copy of School Leaving Certificate should be annexed. The petitioner states that she had complied with the requirements as stated in the advertisement and she bel...
Bharat Wire Mfg. Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1998
Reported in: 1998LC771(Bombay); 1998(104)ELT329(Bom)
1. By this writ petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai (Exh. L to the Petition),by which the petitioners have been directed to deposit the full amount of duty as a pre-condition for admission of the appeal.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties, who are agreed that this writ petition can be finally disposed of at this stage itself. Hence, Rule, returnable forthwith. The respondents waive service. By consent, this writ petition is taken on board for hearing.3. Heard Mr. S.N. Kantawala, learned Counsel for the petitioners, who submits that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the order of this Court in the case of the petitioners themselves, in respect of earlier period, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) should not have directed the petitioners to pay the full amount of duty as a pre-condition for admission of the appeal. According to the learned Counsel, the highest amount they should ha...
Annasaheb Ramchandra Kunnure Vs. Mrs. Parvati Parihar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ161
T.K. Chandra Shekhara Das, J.1. The petitioner had filed a complaint before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Kurla, Bombay in Case No. 40/89 wherein according to the petitioner, an offence under Sections 191, 192 and 193 IPC was disclosed. After examining the complainant and verification on oath, the Magistrate has chosen to issue summons only under Sections 191 and 192 of the I.P.C. The Petitioner approached this Court with a grievance that the learned Magistrate ought to have issued summons Under Section 193 also, which is a punishment section. I have gone through the complaint. Prima facie as observed by the Magistrate, an offence of Section 191, 192 and 193 is disclosed. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Gole submits that it was an error on the part of the Magistrate to exclude the Section 193 while issuing the process. Therefore the order passed by the Magistrate dated 1-6-1989 excluding the offence under Section 193 of I.P.C. while issuin...
Cce Vs. Great Oasis Enterprises (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-1998
Reported in: (1999)(82)LC629Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondents herein are engaged inter alia in the manufacture of biscuits on job work basis as per the agreement entered into between them and M/s Britannia Industries Ltd., Bombay. They are paid conversion charges which include processing cost, expenses and profit.Vide order dated 6.8.1990, the Assistant Collector rejected the Price list No. 1 of 1989-90 filed in Proforma VII by the respondents based on the cost of raw material and conversion charges including processing charges and respondents profit and he ordered that they should file a price list declaring the selling price of M/s Britannia Industries including their profit (profit of M/s Britannia Industries Ltd.).2. The lower Appellate Authority, applied the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ujagar Prints v. Union of India reported in 1989 (39) ELT 493 : 1989 (21) ECR 1 (SC) : ECR C 1347 SC wherein it was held that processing expenses cost and charges plus his profit form part of the assessable value bu...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Spring Fasteners
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT115Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - V has filed this appeal against the impugned order captioned above of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Mumbai. The Respondents manufacture goods falling under Chapter 73 and 87 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are availing of Modvat credit under Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules. Some of the goods supplied by the Respondents were rejected by their customers being defective and the rejected goods were brought back to the factory and were used in the manufacture of final products which the respondents cleared again on payment of duty. The show cause notice was issued to the respondents on the ground that they have taken credit on their rejected final products which were not their inputs.The demand for duty on this account of Rs. 55,028.28 was confirmed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise who also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,000/- on the respondents. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal against the ...
Hasmukhlal N. Shah Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-1998
Reported in: (1998)(104)ELT775Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Each of these appeals is against the common order confiscating under Clause (d) of Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 a consignment of Cassia imported by each of the appellants and imposing of penalty on each of them under Section 112.2. The facts which are not in dispute are as follows : Each of the consignments was being shipped from Singapore and arrived at Bornbay on 4-1-1989 on board "Orient Express" which sailed from Dubai earlier. The cargo was brought to Dubai from Singapore by the vessel "Tokyo Bridge".This ship left Singapore on 14-11-1988, went on to Japanese ports and returned to Singapore on 8th December. She left Singapore thereafter and went on to Dubai. On this voyage she was carrying the cargo in question. Each of the bills of lading is dated 4-11-1988. The certificate dated 11-8-1989 issued by the sales executive of P & O at Singapore with regard to each of these consignments landed after giving the details of container numbers and bill of entry etc. "This i...
Dnyanoba Deorao Ugle and Others Vs. Shaikh HussaIn (Deceased) Though L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-1998
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR11
ORDERR.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard, Mr.V.D. Salunke, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Suresh Kulkarni, Advocate for the respondents. 2. The facts of the case in brief are as under. 3. The subject-matter of a petition in Survey No. 45 admeasuring 8.36 acres now gut No. 72 and Survey No. 29 admeasuring 12.36 acres now gut No. 59 situated at village Rajegaon, Tq. Ambad, District Jalna. This land was owned by one Sakharam Bhimrao Deshpande. The respondent was the tenant of the said land. He sold the lands to Shivaji Raosaheb Deshmukh and Mandakini w/o Dattaji Deshmukh by sale deed dated 7-5-1966 copies of which are filed at Exhibit 'C'. Both these lands were thereafter purchased by the present petitioners on 26-2-1968 vide sale deeds at Exhibit 'D' for a sum of Rs. 30,000/- in all. It appears from the record that the original tenant was one Sk. Hussain s/o Sk. Farid and after his death during the proceedings his LRs. have been brought on record. 4. The original tenant filed application on...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »