Mumbai Court March 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.
Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1999
Reported in: (2000)(88)LC708Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty totalling Rs. 3.22 crores approx. The advocate for the applicant states that duty has been demanded on various grounds. The major portion of Rs. 2.72 crores has been demanded on inputs which were imported by M/s. Bharat Shell Ltd. and given to the applicant for manufacture on job work of lubricating oil. Credit has been denied on the ground that import was by a person other than the applicant. He contends that there is nothing in the rule to prevent credit to be taken in a situation and that the requirement of duty being paid on the input, which is shown to have utilized in the manufacture of finished dutiable product has been fulfilled. The remaining sums has been objected on grounds briefly that the address of the head office and not the factory is mentioned in invoice (involving Rs. 16.52 lakhs); job worker's address and not applicants is mentioned in the invoice (Rs. 7.23 lakhs); credit taken on photocopy of duty paying document ...
Twincity Glass Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1999
Reported in: (1999)(83)LC514Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the impugned order, the Additional Collector had confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 1900/- as basic + Rs. 95 as special excise duty on the 500 kg of glass tubes cleared without payment of duty. He also demanded duty amounting to Rs. 1,81,235.64 recovered by the assessees by issuing debit notes on their customers. A penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on the assessees. He also confiscated the goods valued at Rs. 9,04,750/- and allowed them to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 2.5 lac. A penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed on Shri Bhuvanesh Chandra, Joint Director of the appellant company.2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that a show cause notice was issued to the appellants asking them to explain as to why the duty should not be demanded on 500 kgs of glass tubes valued at Rs. 4,750.-, why duty amounting to Rs. 1,81,235.64 should not be demanded as additional amount of duty for the value of Rs. 4,44,733.73 recovered by the assessees issuing debit notes to their custom...
Smt. Laxmibai A. Wagle Since Deceased Through Legal Representative and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALLMR52; 1999(3)BomCR691; 2000(1)MhLj637
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonkar, J.1. This is a petition by Laxmibai A. Wagle (now deceased through her legal representatives), challenging the validity of a notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, praying for quashing the said notice and an order of prohibition preventing the respondent Income Tax authorities from proceeding in furtherance of the said notice. The petitioner assessed as an individual for the purpose of Income Tax and Wealth Tax, is also a partner in a partnership firm M/s A.G. Wagle. She owns various properties including agricultural land at Sanco Alois (Goa), bearing Matriz Nos. 510 and 512. She had shown in her returns for the assessment year 1984-85 that she has received a sum of Rs. 1,98,625/-from M/s. Zuari Agro Chemicals Ltd., in consideration of water drawn by them from the agricultural land of the petitioner. A note explaining the exemption of this amount from tax liability was appended to both statements of wealth and income submitted by her. Note...
Hukamichand H. Intodia @jaIn Vs. Commr. of Customs (Prev.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)LC191Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Application is for waiver of deposit of Rs. 3.50 lakhs imposed on the applicant following the seizure of foreign currency valued at Rs, 40.76 lakhs approx from him.2. Advocate for the applicant does not dispute the recovery of the currency from him. He says that he was only a carrier who was paid a meagre amount for this purpose. Among the two statements in which the applicant said that he had brought the amount was obtained by selling the gold purchased by him one was retracted on the next and one on the same day. Applicant has no property. He has a small shop from which he gets a monthly income of Rs. 5,000/- out of which he has to look after eight persons.3. The Departmental Representative points out to the applicant's earlier history and says that sizeable amount of currency involved disproves the applicant's plea of financial hardship.4. It is not possible at this stage to determine whether the applicant's statements were voluntary or not. Going by the dicta laid down by the S...
Shri Vassudev Nene and Others Vs. Shri Dattatraya Raghunath Jog
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR193; 1999(3)BomCR684
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. This is a revision application against the Order dated 31st October, 1998 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 69/92 by the Addl. District Judge, Mapusa. By the impugned order, the lower Appellate Court has allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein against the order of the trial Court and has restrained the petitioner and their agents from disturbing the possession of the respondent over the suit property pending disposal of the suit. The trial Court by its Order dated 24-4-1992 passed in Civil Misc. Application No. 12/92 in Regular Civil Suit No. 7/92 had dismissed the application of the respondent herein.2. The matter pertains to the property bearing Survey No. 9/1 in the village of Sonal in Sattari Taluka and admittedly belonging to the family of Kamat from Sanquelim. The property comprises of arecanut trees, coconut trees, mango trees and other fruit bearing trees besides cashew grove, rubber plantation, sugarcane plantation and other jungle trees...
Boi Finance Limited Vs. Padma Alloy Casting Private Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Bom340; 1999(3)ALLMR376; 1999(4)BomCR218; (1999)2BOMLR744
ORDERF.I. Rebello, J.1. Plaintiffs in the present summary suit have applied for summons for judgment on the ground that there are no triable issues arising from the defences taken by the defendants and consequently suit be decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. In the present summary suit, the defendant No. 1 company have not applied for leave to defend. However, defendants Nos. 2 and 3 who are said to be guarantors have so applied. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 have pointed out that there is no written agreement by the defendant with the plaintiff and at any rate the receipt issued by defendant No. 1 is not an agreement based on which a summary suit could have been filed nor was the receipt properly stamped and consequently inadmissible in evidence. It is, therefore, contended that leave to defend should also be granted in favour of defendant No. 1. The Court, it is pointed out, must also prima facie, come to the conclusion that the suit is maintainable as a summary suit even though defendant...
Smt. Aftari Begum Gani Shaikh Vs. R.D. Tyagi and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)BomCR820; 1999BomCR(Cri)820
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner who is the mother of the detenu MohammedMushtafq Abdul Gani Shaikh has impugned the detention order dated 4th November 1996 passed by the 1st respondent, the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, detaining the detenu under section 3(2) of the National Security Act. The detention order dated 4th November 1996 along with the grounds of detention bearing the same date was served on the detenu on 29-5-1998.2. We have heard Mr. C.K. Talekar for the petitioner and Mr. S.R. Borulkar for respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 4. Mr. H.V. Mehta, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3 is absent.3. Since, in our view, this petition deserves to be allowed on ground 8(q) and for the adjudication of the said ground a reference to the prejudicial activities of the detenu contained in grounds of detention is not necessary, we are not adverting to them.Ground 8(q), in short, is that on or about 17-6-1998 a representa...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Radio Talkies
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: [1999]238ITR872(Bom)
1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench, Mumbai, has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the Revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the retrenchment compensation paid to the ex-employees was incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the sale of the property of the business of the assessee allowable under Section 48(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The material facts giving rise to this reference are as under : The asses-see, who was carrying on the business of exhibiting films, closed its business in March, 1972, and the property consisting of land and building was sold. The assessment which was originally made on September 18, 1978, was set aside and fresh assessment was made. The Income-tax Officer, who was asked to make a fresh assessment, referred the matter for valuation of t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K. Balasubramaniam
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: [1999]238ITR785(Bom)
B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, to this court for opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amount of house rent allowance received by the assessee from his employer to each of the accounting years relevant to the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82 was not liable to be included in the total income of the assessee for those two assessment years under Section 10(13A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee resided in his own house in those two years ?'2. The assessee is an individual. The assessment years involved in this reference are 1980-81 and 1981-82, the relevant accounting years being the years ended on March 31, 1980, and March 31, 1981, respectively. In each of these two accounting years, the assessee recei...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Madhav Dagdu Bhonsale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4137
ORDERS.S. Parkar, J.1. The State has sought revision of the order dated 1lth August 1992 passed by the Special Judge, Thane in Special Case No. 1 of 1989 whereby the respondent accused was discharged for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 419, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC read with Section 5(1)(c) and 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act by dropping the prosecution against him.2. The respondent accused is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences during the period between 1-11-83 to 28th February, 1984 when he was working as Superintending Engineer with the Government of Maharashtra. He retired from the service on 29-2-1984 and thereafter FIR was lodged against him on 1lth June, 1985. After the completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was submitted in the Court of the Special Judge, Thane on 13th January, 1989 against the respondent. The cognizance was taken and the process was issued against the respondent.3. The respondent-accused thereafter made an appli...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »