Mumbai Court July 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.
Airol Cargo Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)CENCUS857
1. The application for early hearing is listed today. Advocate for the applicant stated that he did not wish to press for early hearing but instead prays that the application for stay of the impugned order may be taken up. With the consent of the departmental representative, stay application is listed and heard.2. The application is for stay of operation of the order of the Commissioner suspending, under Regulation 21(2) of the Custom House Agents Regulations, 1984, the Customs House Agent's licence issued to the applicant.3. Advocate for the applicant explains that the applicant has been engaged by M/s. Sidh Seva Exports for clearance through the Sahar International Airport of consignments of garments imported by it.Garments were manufactured in Italy and consigned to Mumbai by M/s. A1 Jamaheer Trading, Dubai. In the course of investigation into undervaluation of the garments, the applicant's office was searched and various files seized. In one of these files, an invoice of the Itali...
Naresh A. Shah and ors. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (1999)(85)LC302Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These three applications arise out of the same common order and are therefore dealt with in this single order.2. The facts as narrated in the proceedings are as below. Shri MD Ganatra, one of the applicants, persuaded Nandlal Khemani, another applicant, to apply for advance licences. On receipt, these licences were sold to one Minesh Shah through two brokers namely Naresh Shah and M. Ganatra. Some goods were imported under the licences by Minesh Shah and were sold in the market. The documentation of purchases and the clearance of goods through Customs were however in the name of Nandlal Khemani, a proprietary concern named as M/s. Nandlal Shivlaldas. After recording the statements of the concerned persons Show Cause Notice was issued alleging that the goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) and also under Section 111(0) of the Customs Act, 1962, that the duty on the goods cleared duty free was liable to be recovered; that the interest on the Customs duty short levied...
Pearl Soap Co. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (1999)(85)LC554Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant, Pearl Soap Co., manufactures, out of raw material supplied by Wipro Ltd., soap which it returns to the latter. It cleared for the purposes of payment of duty, the value of the soap has been total of the cost of raw material, its manufacturing charges and profit earned by it. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Assistant Commissioner that the price at which Wipro sells the goods to its dealers. Hence this appeal.2. The reasoning advanced by the Assistant Commissioner, which the Commissioner (Appeals) accepts, is that since there is no sale of soap by the appellant to Wipro, the relationship between the two is of agent and principal and therefore Wipro is the manufacturer. This reasoning was adopted in his argument by the departmental representative.3. We are unable to appreciate this reasoning. The fact that there is no sale of goods between the two parties does not render relationship as being one of agent ...
Silfer Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT1044Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant is absent and unrepresented and requests decision on the basis of written submission.2. The issue for consideration in this appeal is the quantum of redemption fine in lieu of confiscation under Clause (d) of Section 111 of the Act of ball bearings of Hungarian and Bulgarian origin, which have been ordered to be confiscated. The Tribunal, in its order dated 20-7-1988, in appeal filed against the earlier order of the Collector ordering absolute confiscation, while upholding the liability to confiscation, remanded the matter to the Collector for deciding whether an option should be given on redemption fine. The Collector thereupon passed fresh orders. The Tribunal set aside that order and sent the matter back for considering clearance on suitable fine in lieu of confiscation. The Tribunal's two earlier orders were concerned with goods imported by two persons, one appellant presently before us, and M/s. Elecon Engineering Ltd. In the order now impugned before us, the Col...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Okasa Limited
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT127Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is a department's appeal against the impugned Order No.NK(446)/1063/94, dated 13-12-1994, praying for setting aside the same, and to allow the appeal is recover/reverse Modvat credit amount of Rs. 25,183/-.2. The facts of the case in brief are that respondent manufactures P&P medicine following under Chapter 30 of Tariff Act, 1985, and avail Modvat credit on the inputs glass bottles. Respondent was issuing more numbers of bottles from stores, than the batch size to ensure continuity in production after the completion of process, excess were being sent back, and there were some chances of breakages of the bottles during the manufacture of final product. Superintendent issued show cause notice on 1-7-1992 to the respondent to show cause why Modvat credit availed should not be recovered under Rule 57-1 of Central Excise Rules. Respondent replied it on 8-7-1992, contending it need not reverse Modvat as breakage was during the manufacture, as per the Ministry of Finance letter ...
Deepak Electronics Ltd. and anr. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (1999)(85)LC629Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the order of the Tribunal on the appellant's appeal, the Tribunal had confirmed the finding of the department that the value of the jumbo rolls of video tape imported by the appellant was under-declared and that it ought to be the value at which the goods were imported by another importer Hariram Govindram (HG for short).2. The importer appealed to the Supreme Court from the Tribunal's order. The Supreme Court in its order accepted the contention of the appellant before it that its submission before the Tribunal that because of the difference in weight there was a difference in price between the two sets of goods and the two therefore cannot be considered to be identical had not been considered. It therefore sent the matter back to the Tribunal for justice. This matter is thus now before us.3. The advocate for the appellant contends that the goods imported by HG weighed at 64.81 kg. per roll whereas the goods imported by the appellant weighed 22.68 kg. He contends that the weigh...
Uniflex Cables Limited Vs. Mansingh Hanutmal Baid and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)BomCR485; (1999)3BOMLR158
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. The plaintiff has filed this suit seeking the following reliefs:(a) A declaration to the effect that defendant No. 13 who acted as an Arbitrator in the arbitration proceedings and reference before him in the matter of the disputes and differences amongst defendant Nos. 1 to 12 had no right, power or jurisdiction to pass any award in respect of the properties of the plaintiffs including the suit premises being the area admeasuring 1150 sq.ft. forming part of the office premises on the first floor of the building Sagar Bhavan situate at 147, Princess Street, Mumbai-400 002 which were in the possession, use and occupation of the plaintiffs as tenants. (b) A declaration to the effect that the decree passed on 14th October, 1996 in Arbitration Petition No. 180 of 1996 to the extent of the properties of the plaintiffs is null and void and liable to be set aside to that extent. (c) A declaration that defendant No. 14 has wrongly taken possession of the suit premises des...
Shankarbhai Babubhai Patel Vs. Shri Sanat Kaul and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR64; 2000BomCR(Cri)64; (2000)1BOMLR757; 1999(3)MhLj69
ORDERN.J. Pandya, J.1. The detention order came to be passed by the Detaining Authority of the Union Territory on 17-2-99 and on 18-2-99 a communication was issued by the said Detaining Authority containing the grounds of detention, which was served on the detenu on or about 24-2-99. Thereafter on or about 25-2-99 an order was issued by respondent No. 1 wherein it was stated that the respondent No. 1 satisfied that the detenu was acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of Public Order and that therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 3(3) of the said P.A.S.A Act the respondent No. 1 approved the said order of detention. The said order was served on the detenu on 29-2-99.2. Being aggrieved by the said order of detention and the grounds on which it is purported to have been issued, the petitioner, who is the brother of the detenu Ishwarbhai Babubai Patel, has filed this petition challenging the said detention order and its validity.3. It is an accepted posit...
Kishan Baraku Thakare Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR62; 2000BomCR(Cri)62; 1999CriLJ4242
ORDERN.J. Pandya, J.1. This is an appeal filed by original accused No. 2 against the Judgment and Order dated 24th August 1994 passed by the Vth Assistant Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No. 209 of 1994. The two accused were facing charge under section 376(2)(g) as also under section 506 read with section 34 of I.P.C. The victim of the incident was one Bebi Janu Bhala, aged about 15 years, admitted in VII standard. The incident is said to have been taken place on 28-10-1993 on Ranvihir-Dolkhamb Road which was her usual way of reaching the school. When she came near a place known as Mothi-Khori, two unknown persons caught her and forcibly took her by the side of the road at some distance and one after other committed rape on her.2. The said vicinity was rural where she washed her clothes and went to her school. There she contacted her teacher one Mr. Bondre and narrated the incident to him. The said teacher advised her to go to police station. She, therefore, went to Dolkhamb Pol...
Gandhi Trading Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)518CTR(Bom)512; [1999]239ITR337(Bom)
1. By this writ petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the provisional attachment of their (i) bank account and F.D.Rs. with the State Bank of India and the American Express Bank, Bombay, (ii) office premises situated at Mehta House, Chowpaty, Bombay-400 007, and (iii) residential flat situated at Fionika, Walkeshwar, Bombay-400 006, by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 7(2), Mumbai, under Section 281B ofthe Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), vide order dated April 5, 1999. The petitioners contend that the impugned orders of attachment under Section 281 B of the Act are unlawful, unconstitutional, ultra vires, without authority of law, passed without due application of mind and are patently bad in law, misconceived and vitiated. It is prayed that these orders be set aside and quashed.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule returnable after eight weeks. Respondents waive service.3. Heard Mr. F. B. Andhyrajina, learned counsel for the petitioners, on the...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »