Mumbai Court March 1999 Judgments

Monito Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)LC212Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of goods described as parts of fuel injection equipment and overhaul kit. The importer claimed classification of these goods under Heading 8409.99, i.e., parts suitable for use solely or principally with the engines of Heading 84.07 or 84.08 which are respectively for spark-ignition reciprocating or rotary internal combustion piston engines. The Assistant Commissioner did not accept this classification.He classified the rubber buffer under Heading 4016.99, nylon rings under Heading 3926.90 and overhaul kits by applying Section 19 of the Act under Heading 8485.90 at the rate of 50% duty and classified spring under 7320.90 and shaftseal, oil and others under Heading 8485.90. On appeal from this order the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the classification except for nylon rings which he said should be classified under the appropriate head. Hence these appeals.2. Oral arguments before us were made by Mr. Jitendra Shah...

Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)LC218Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Commissioner in the impugned order confirmed Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 21,66,404.32 under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules,1944 read with Section 11A(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He also imposed a penalty of the same amount under Rule 173Q(1) of the rules read with Section 11 AC of the Act. He also directed the assessee to pay the interest as provided by law in the event of delay in making the payment so ordered. Against this order the assessee has filed an appeal and the present application seeking waiver of deposit of the sums as also stay of recovery thereof.2. We have heard Shri B.N. Rangwani, Consultant for the applicants and Shri G.B. Yadav, for the Revenue.3. The assessee had cleared certain quantity of levy sugar on payment of duty during the period 1974-75 to 1979-80. The ex-factory price of such levy sugar was fixed by the Union Government. The fixation of prices of levy sugar in terms of Section 3(3)(c) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 we...

Duphar Interfran Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(83)LC300Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-appeal dated 21.3.1990 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. In this case, the refund claim filed by the appellant was rejected on the ground that the appellant had not filed any appeal against approval of classification list and duty was not paid under protest.3. Brief facts of this case are that appellant filed classification list in respect of their product "Vitamin D-3" (animal feed grade) claiming classification under tariff sub-heading 2302.00 of the Central Excise Tariff. The said classification list was returned by the revenue and the appellant was directed to file a classification list under tariff heading 2936.00 of the Central Excise Tariff. The appellant filed a classification list as directed by the Revenue and along with classification list the appellant had written to the Revenue that the product is a animal feed concentrate and is exempted under notification no. 285/86-CE and clearing the ...

D. A. Patel Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Assessing Officer dated 31-7-1997 passed under section 158BC(c) of the Income-tax Act for the block period 1-4-1986 to 15-7-1996.2. Late Shri A. K. Patel and his group were mainly engaged in the business of automobile spare parts and in electronic goods, financing etc. He was the director of certain companies which are given by the Assessing Officer in page 2 of his order.3. The Assessing Officer mentioned that a search action was conducted at the residential and business premises of the late Shri A. K. Patel on an allegation that his group advanced unaccounted loans on hundies to Shri C. D. Shah group of cases which were engaged in the business of real estate and building construction. The search was conducted on 15th and 16th of July, 1996. Simultaneously, a search was conducted at the premises of Shri C. D. Shah also. In the course of the search, 34 hundies of various dates and amounts were found aggregating to Rs. 1,61,72,000. Th...

industrial Credit and Development Syndicate Limited and Others Vs. Kha ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(2)ALLMR287; 1999(2)BomCR729; (1999)2BOMLR449; 1999(2)MhLj317

ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1. In the present Chamber Summons, which is taken outby the defendants following main reliefs are prayed for:-'That this Honourable Court be pleased to discharge the Court Receiver, High Court, Mumbai, who has been appointed Receiver of the properties bearing Plot No. 159 and 169 more particularly described in Exhibit 'E' to the plaint since the Consent Decree dated 9-1-80 have become unexecutable being barred by law of limitation and that the Court Receiver be directed to hand over possession of the said properties to the defendants after removal of all the encroachment and illegal construction on the said properties;(b) That the plaintiffs' assignees be directed to refund to the defendants the amount of Rs. 7,56,000/- or in the alternative, the Consent Decree dated 9-1-80 may be marked fully satisfied and the Decree holder may be ordered to refund a sum of Rs.4,35,984/- to the defendants being the amount paid in excess over and above of the decretal dues;(c) That ...

Shri Uttam Pednekar (Since Deceased Through His Legal Representative a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2000Bom178; 1999(3)BomCR622

ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonkar, J.1. This Letters Patent appeal challenges the order of a learned Single Judge of this Court (R.K. Batta, J.) in Writ Petition No. 430/1992 (reported in 1997 (2) G.L.T. 303) which holds that registration of mundkar under section 29 of Goa, Daman & Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975 pertains to villages only and the provision does not extend to the dwelling houses which fall within the Municipal limits. 2. The appellant who claims to be a mundkar, filed an application before the Mamlatdar of Bardez Taluka under section 29 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975 (hereinafter called as 'the Mundkar Act' for the purpose of brevity) praying that he be registered in the Register of Mundkars for a dwelling house situated in the property of the opponent, alleged to be a bhatkar, described in Chalta Nos. 59 and 60, P.T. Sheet No. 122 of City Survey Mapusa. There is no dispute that the property is within the jurisdiction of ...

Burondi Karjgaon Lodghar Panchkroshi Shikshan Sanstha and Others Vs. S ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(2)ALLMR301; 1999(4)BomCR294; 1999(2)MhLj779

ORDERT.K. Chandra Shekhara Das, J.1. First petitioner is a Manager of the V.K. Joshi, High School & Jr. College, Karajgaon Tal. Dapoli, Dist. Ratnagiri and the second petitioner is a Head Master of the said High School and third petitioner, who was appointed as a Supervisor, was subsequently put in charge of the Head Master. On a complaint made by the first respondent against the 2nd petitioner and 3rd petitioner who are working in the school as teachers, there is a dispute about the seniority between themselves. According to the seniority maintained in the school by the management, the petitioner No. 3 is senior to the respondent No. 1. When the management made promotion to the post of supervisor, following the seniority which is in force, the first respondent approached the school tribunal. The school tribunal by the order dated 17-10-1997 has held that the respondent No. 1 is senior to the petitioner No. 3 and therefore, the respondent No. 1 is entitled to be promoted as supervisor ...

Shri Shantaram Balu Kasare Vs. Shri R.H. Mendonca, Commissioner of Pol ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(5)BomCR552; 1999BomCR(Cri)552

ORDERSmt. Ranjana Desai, J.1. One Shantaram Balu Kasare father of the detenu Prashant Ajay Shantaram Kasare, has filed the present petition challenging the order of detention dated 11-3-1998 issued under the provisions of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981. By the said order, the detenu Prashant Ajay Shantaram Kasare has been detained under the provisions of the said Act with a view to preventing him from acting in anymanner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The order of detention dated 11-3-1998 and the grounds of detention bearing the same date were served on the detenu on 13-5-98 along with the marathi translations.2. The order of detention is passed on the basis of C.R. No. 268 of 1997 under sections 324, 427, 34 I.P.C. C.R. No. 296 of 1997 under sections 326, 34 I.P.C. and two in-camera statements.3. Mr. Tripathi learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the impu...

Rishi Packers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT1110Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These three (Appeals) arise out of the same impugned order and are therefore, disposed of vide this common single order.2. The appellant assessees factory was visited by the Jurisdictional Officers. The officers notice unrecorded stock of final goods kept in the BSR. These goods were confiscated, but permitted redemption on payment of fine. The officers also found final goods stored outside the BSR. These goods were seized. The Collector in the impugned order found that the goods were waste and directed recovery of Modvat credit taken in the inputs contained in such waste. The officers found certain shortages and excesses in the raw materials. Excess was found in LDPE granules as well as M.G. Kraft Paper. The Collector in the impugned order did not accept the arguments on the excesses but refrained from making any order in the absence of any proposal in the show cause notice. Shortages were found in raw materials namely LDPE granules and printing ink. In his deliberations, the Coll...

Pearl Soap Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(65)ECC200

1. The appellants manufacture soaps. They received duty paid wrappers as inputs, on which Modvat credit was taken by them. These wrappers, although identical in appearance and functions, were classified variously by the manufactures thereof. Notification No. 177/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986 as amended, notified certain goods for the purpose of availment of credit of duty under Modvat. In permitting the duty paid on the inputs to be utilised in its entirety in credit being taken, certain exceptions were made. Vide a proviso, the credit of duty on paper and paper board was restricted to Rs. 800/- PMT or the actual duty paid whichever was less. This restriction did not apply in the case of certain nominated varieties of paper and paper board. On this count there is no dispute in this appeal. It is admitted that the sub-headings shown as exception to the ceiling prescribed in the proviso are not those under which the inputs in the present case were cleared.2. The Government issued certain exec...