Mumbai Court November 1999 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.
State of Maharashtra and ors. Vs. Ganesh Narayan Gadekar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ690Bom
ORDERD.K. Deshmukh, J. 1. By this appeal, the appellants challenge the judgment dated July 3/4, 1980 given by the learned single Judge of this Court in Miscellaneous Petition No. 656 of 1976. That petition was filed by the petitioners, who were employees of the respondents Nos. 2 & 3 to the original petition, challenging the rules framed by the respondents Nos. 2 & 3 governing the conditions of service of their employees. The petitioners were initially in the service of the Government of Maharashtra. However, after the formation of 2nd and 3rd respondents, they were absorbed in the service of the respondents Nos. 2 & 3. At that time, the Government of Maharashtra had issued a resolution that on their absorption by the 2nd and 3rd respondents, their conditions of service would be governed by the rules and regulations of the respondents Nos. 2 and 3. However, those terms shall not be less favourable than their existing terms and conditions of service. It was the case of the petitioners t...
Zee Telefilm Limited Vs. Aalia Productions and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-24-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR260; 2000(2)BomCR251
ORDERR. M. Lodha, J.1. By this action initiated by the plaintiffs it is prayed that the plaintiffs be declared the assignees and owners of all copyrights in the program/tele serial 'INDIA'S MOST WANTED' comprising episodes 1 to 65 already produced and also the further episodes 66 to 104 and that all such copyrights vest in the plaintiffs to the exclusion of any one else in respect of all episodes of the said program which have been produced and which are to be produced in the future. In the alternative to the said prayer, the plaintiffs have prayed that in respect of episodes 66 to 104 of the said program it be declared that all copyright therein vest in the plaintiffs as assignees/owners thereof immediately upon the said episodes coming into existence and that assignment agreement Exhibit 'B' read with the addendum Exhibit 'C' between the plaintiffs and the defendants assigning in favour of plaintiffs all rights in respect of the program 'INDIA'S MOST WANTED', inter alia comprising ep...
Veg. Oils Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT643Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Veg. Oils Ltd. (Later named as M/s. Godrej Foods Ltd. the present appellants) were obtaining oil by crushing oil seeds and also by solvent extraction methods/On 13-11-1984, the jurisdictional Supdt.of Central Excise wrot a letter to them that in terms of Vegetable Oil Cess Act, 1983, cess was leviable not only on the first variety of oil but also on the oil produced by solvent extraction method. The matter thereafter went to Bombay High Court. Among other directions, the High Court directed the jurisdictional officers to adjudicate the issue with reference to law. Accordingly, a representation was made to the Commissioner, Cen. Excise, Mumbai-I. Before him the citation of the Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Bhasir Oil Mills v. U.O.I. - 1990 (47) E.L.T. 305 was made. The Commissioner, however, held that the produce Cess Act, 1966 which was the forerunner of the concerned Act permitted cess to be levied on the solvant extracted oil also. He stated that there was no rea...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Amal Rasayan Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT580Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal from revenue was argued by Shri Patwari. The respondent were represented by Shri Mayur Shroff, Advocate.2. The Commissioner Central Excise, Vadodara vide the impugned order disposed of 4 show cause notices, in which the common allegation was made that "financial charges" at the rate of 2.31% collected by the assessee from the customers under their invoice over and above the approved price, were includible in the assessable value of the goods.The extended period was also invoked in one of the 4 show cause notices that is dated 2-8-1995. Before the Commissioner the assessee cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of GOI v. MRF -1995 (77) E.L.T. 433 in which it was held that interest on receivables was a deductible item. The Commissioner examined this claim and also various invoices and credit notes cited before him. His specific findings are as below: "I verified the invoices of the relevant period and I observed that the asessee charged and collected the amou...
Commissioner of C.Ex. Vs. National Tubes
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT716Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals filed by the revenue have the same facts and arise out of the same impugned order. They are therefore being disposed of together in this single order.2. The respondent assessees were engaged in redrawing of copper and copper alloy tubes and pipes. Such activity was declared to be amounting to manufacture by virtue of Note 2 under Chapter 74 introduced on 27-9-1991. On that date these two respondents had fully finished stock of such redrawn tubes. Duty was demanded at the time of their clearance. These goods were later cleared without payment of duty. In two separate orders, duty was confirmed against these two assessees. In the single order-in-Appeal dealing with both the assessees, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that, where the goods were manufactured prior to the date of which the activity was deemed to amount to manufacture, should not attract levy of duty. On this ground he set aside the lower orders resulting in the present appeals.3. We find this issue to b...
Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT391Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue in this appeal is whether charges incurred by the assessee in bending of the bars while loading are addable to the assessable value.2. The appellant say that this is a post manufacturing activity undertaken only for safe transportation. It is claimed that the bars are about 40 feet long and cannot be transported unless they are bent.It is claimed that the recipient have to spend money for unbending the bars. On this ground exclusion is claimed.3. We have carefully considered the submissions. Any item of expenditure, which goes to improve the marketability of the product is to be included when computing the assessable value. Bending of the bars is a process ancillary to make the product marketable. Therefore there is no reason why that cost should not be included in the assessable value. This appeal therefore fails....
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Golden Plastic Company
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT703Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal from the Revenue was argued by Shri B.K. Choubey, JDR.Shri Naresh Thakkar, advocate appeared for the respondent and agreed to file memo of appearance followed by vakalatanama.2. M/s. Golden Plastic Company filed a Bill of Entry on 5-1-1995 for importation of 208 MT. of HDPE granules Y-310 A. The value declared was US $ 510 PMT. The Customs observed that there was a contemporaneous import of the same grade of plastic at the same place of import supplied by the same Corporation at the price of US $ 820 PMT. That consignment weighed 48 MT. A computer print out was also cited wherein the same goods were imported at the price of US $ 940 PMT. The importers claimed that the prices were in terms of a contract dated November, 1994 between the importers and M/s. Gujarat State Export Corporation who had earlier in June, 1994 entered into a contract with M/s. G.A. International, Dubai for supply of 1500 MT at the rate of US $ 510 PMT. The importers cited bills of entry showing cle...
S. Patnaik Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT502Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals arise out of the same impugned order and are therefore, being disposed of by this single order.2. M/s. HMG Industries Ltd. were the importers. Dr. S. Patnaik was the Director of the importing company. Two consignments of 'Microsphere Polyvinylidene Chloride' were imported. The classification suggested was under Chapter Heading 3809.91. Both the Bs/E were provisionally assessed after drawing samples and after examining the technical literature. The assessment was pending finalisation. Pursuant to a search, show cause notice dated 21-12-1992 was issued alleging that goods were liable to classification under Chapter Heading 3904.50 and that the importers had deliberately misclassified the goods under Chapter 3809.91. Allegations were also made as to confiscation of goods and also levy of penalty. The Commissioner vide his order dated 25-7-1994 ordered final assessment under Chapter Heading 3904.50 and directed payment of differential duty and imposed penalty of Rs. 1...
Shri Prabhakar S/O Gopalrao Waikar Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR333; 2000(1)BomCR909; 2000(1)MhLj248
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. The petitioner has brought in question the order of termination of his service dt. 16-1-1985 passed by invoking Rule 62 of the Service Rules applicable to him. 2. The petitioner came to be appointed as Manager of a Workshop started by M/s Godawari Garments Ltd. respondent No. 2 which is a subsidiary of respondent No. 3, Marathwada Development Corporation Ltd. (a State Undertaking). This appointment order was issued on 24-2-76, on a consolidated salary of Rs. 700/- per month and on probation of one year. He came to be transferred from Latur to Nanded, as Production Manager of Godawari Garment's Sales Division on 11-12-1977; deputed to Kinwat Roofing Tiles Ltd. in the year 1981 as Works Manager on temporary basis; as Store Keeper at Central Stores in 1982; as Centre-in-charge at Pishor in 1983 and finally, by letter dt. 7-1-1984, he was brought back to Aurangabad, as Centre-in-charge-Cum-Cutter. The petitioner was on leave in the month of May 1984 on the ground...
Jer Rutton Kavasmaneck and Others Vs. Gharda Chemicals Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR280; 2000(2)BomCR56; (2000)1BOMLR553; [2001]106CompCas25(Bom); 2000(3)MhLj320
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. The respondent No. 1, Gharda Chemicals Limited 'Company' for short) is a Company originally incorporated on March 6, 1967 as a Private Limited Company by shares. From August 17, 1988, it has become a deemed public company by shares by virtue of section 43-A of the Companies Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The petitioners among themselves hold approximately 27 per cent of the shares. The remaining 73 per cent of the shares are held by respondent Nos. 2 to 13. The company petition has been filed under sections 397 and 398 for appropriate reliefs under sections 402 and 403 of the Act. Thereafter the petition has been amended under orders of this Court in Company Application No. 77 of 1991. Further amendments are also sought in Application Nos. 130 of 1993 and 658 of 1999. A number of other applications have also been filed for various other reliefs including declaration of dividend. An application has also been filed by respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 un...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »