Mumbai Court August 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.
Prashant Sawarmal Agrawal Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2115
J.N. Patel, J.1. The petitioner seeks quashing of his prosecution for having committed offences under Section 17, 19 and 43 of the Maharashtra Raw Cotton (Procurement, Processing and Marketing) Act 1971 (for short Raw Cotton Act).2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is an agriculturist and cotton grower and owns agricultural land in Tahsil Arvi, district Wardha. The petitioner was transporting the raw cotton on 24-11-1995 in a Truck No. MTC 7161 to Pandhurna; the truck was intercepted by police at a distance of 6 k.m. from Talegaon on National High Way No. 6 and the police seized the cotton and registered offence vide crime No. 786/94 against the petitioner for having committed offences under Section 17, 19 and 43 of the Raw Cotton Act at police station Arvi. The raw cotton seized by the police came to be sold to the Maharashtra State Co-operative Cotton Growers Federation, Arvi after obtaining orders from the trial Court and the sales proceeds were deposited in the Court and ch...
Sidhseva Exports Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1999
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT589Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This Misc. application was argued by Shri Vipin Kumar Jain. The background of the filing of the application is as follows : The Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) Mumbai in his order reassessed the value of certain goods imported by M/s. Sidhseva Exports and confirmed the differential duty of Rs. 17,44,735/-. He ordered confiscation of some other goods but permitted its redemption on payment of appropriate fine. He imposed penalty on M/s. Sidhseva Exports. During the proceedings, M/s. Sidhseva Exports had voluntarily deposited an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs. They had also executed a bond with Bank Guarantee for Rs. 32,88,000/-. The Commissioner appropriated the deposit made towards the duty payable and apportioned the remaining to payment of duty and penalty. The remainder of the fine and penalty was directed to be apportioned from the Bank Guarantee. Towards this purpose, his order directed enforcement of the Bank Guarantee. This order dated 26-3-1999 was issued on 20-7-1999 and was recei...
Flat Products Equipments (i) Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1999
Reported in: (2000)LC609Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant manufactures metal rolling mills and "galvanising lines". Rolling mills were, at the relevant time, classifiable under Heading 8455.00 of the Central Excise Tariff, and galvanising lines under Heading 8479.00. Relevant entries are reproduced below :-8455.10 All goods other than parts 10%8455.90 Parts 15%84.79 Machines and mechanical appliances having in- dividual functions, not specified or included8479.10 All goods other than parts 10%8479.90 Parts 15% Upto 15th March, 1995 the rate of duty applicable to sub-heading 10 and sub-heading 90 in each of the heading was the same -10%. With effect from that date, parts, classifiable under sub-heading 90 became liable to a higher rate of duty. Subsequent to this date, the appellant cleared rolling mills and galvanising lines under sub-heading 10 at the lower rate of duty. Notices were issued on the basis that what was cleared was parts liable to duty @ 15% and demanding their duty.Appellant took the stand that what it contra...
Umashankar Somani Industrial Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1999
Reported in: (2000)(89)LC282Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant imported two consignments, one consisting of 16 second hand looms and the other of 14 second hand looms. The consignment of 16 looms was declared to have a value of DM 1.84 lacs FOB and the other DM 1.26 lacs FOB. The Chartered Engineer's certificates produced for each of the consignment supported the value furnished by the appellant.Examination of the goods indicated the presence in these consignments of additional looms and other spare parts totally valued at Rs. 3.65 lacs. The importer waived issue of written show cause notice. It is not disputed that he was communicated the intention of the department to increase the value of the goods in each of the consignment from DM 1.84 lacs to DM 3.94 lacs in the case of the first consignment and DM 1.26 lacs to DM 2.38 lacs approx. in the case of the second consignment.Confiscation of all the goods under Clause (d) and (m) of Section 111 of the Act and penalty was proposed. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Collector...
Vardhaman Polymer Indus. and ors. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1999
Reported in: (2000)(88)LC801Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Vardhman Polymer Industries were a small scale manufacturer making plastic moulded parts for domestic mixer. They were not licensed under the Central Excise law nor had they filed any declaration claiming the benefit of any Notification. On receipt of intelligence, their premises were searched. It was found that in a majority of cases, the goods were delivered under "kachha delivery challan". Goods totally valued at Rs. 7,61,406 were seized. Accounts of the manufacturers were also seized. Statements of concerned partners and buyers were recorded.At the conclusion of the investigations, show cause notice dated 19.4.1993 was issued. It was alleged that duty amounting to Rs. 30,30,170/- was short levied on account of goods clandestinely cleared by M/s. Vardhman Polymer Industries. It was alleged that the seized goods were liable to confiscation. M/s. Vardhaman Polymer Industries and its partners S/Shri A.D. Jain and P.D. Jain were allegedly liable to penalty under Rule 173Q and 2...
Wadco Packaging P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1999
Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT660Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an application for early hearing. The issue is the dutiability of top covers, bottom covers, partitions, sleeves, corrugated sheets supplied along with corrugated boxes manufactured by the applicants. In the impugned order duty amounting to Rs. 40,73,725/- was confirmed and penalty of equal amount imposed under Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In their order on the stay petition, the Tribunal directed the applicants to deposit a sum of Rs. 25.00 lacs as pre-condition to hearing of the appeal. The appellants have complied with the direction and are seeking early hearing.2. Shri R. Nambirajan the ld. Counsel submits that their buyers Godrej offer them a fixed price for the packaging. On their having to pay differential duty on such equipments they are placed in an adverse situation when compared with the other suppliers or similar goods who are not paying duty on such fitments. It is also his claim that because of the extra margin of duty, they have to pay highe...
Dr. Bharat Pandurang Dhokane Vs. Yeshwantrao Kankarrao Gadakh and Anot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALLMR632; 2000(3)BomCR107
ORDERR.G. Deshpande, J.1. The present election petition is filed challenging the election of the respondent No. 1 as a member of the Legislative Council from Ahmednagar; District Ahmednagar in the election held on 29th December, 1997, the result of which was declared on 31st December, 1997. The present respondent No. 1 contested the Legislative Council election of the Maharashtra Legislative Council from Ahmednagar, District Ahmednagar constituency (hereinafter referred to as 'the Constituency' for the purposes of brevity). The petitioner also contested the said election and was sponsored by Shiv Sena party. The present respondent No. 1 was a candidate of Indian National Congress (I). There was a third candidate, namely, Dilip Kumar Gandhi, who was fielded by Bharatiya Janata Party (B.J.P.). Thus, in the fray, there were in all three candidates. The elections were held on 29th December 1997; whereas counting of votes was conducted on 31st December, 1997 and, on the same day, the result...
Mukand Ltd. Vs. Mukand Kamgar Union and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1999
Reported in: [2000(86)FLR27]; (2000)ILLJ1569Bom
A.P. Shah, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India arises out of the award dated April 17, 1998 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Mumbai in Reference (IT) No. 70 of 1996.2. In this petition, the controversy relates to: (i) wage scale, (ii) fitment, (iii) special increments, (iv) dearness allowance, (v) education allowance, (vi) LTA, (vii) washing allowance, (viii) acting allowance, (ix) lunch and snacks allowance, (x) pollution allowance, (xi) picnic allowance, (xii) fixed allowance in lieu of incentive, (xiii) paid holidays, (xiv) privilege/casual/sick leave, and (xv) special advance. Though there are certain other matters dealt with in the award in the reference they are not the subject of controversy in this petition.3. I shall now state the circumstances under which the reference came to be made to the Tribunal.4. The petitioner is a public limited company engaged in steel making, manufacture of industrial machineries and steel castings, having two facto...
Cce Vs. Philips Weighmech Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: (2000)(90)LC621Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In this appeal preferred by Revenue the issue involved is whether benefit of Notification No. 175/86-CE is available to the respondents in respect of their factory at Bombay which is not registered as a Small Scale Unit with the Directorate of Industries.2. Shri Ashok Kumar Id. JDR, submitted that the respondents M/s.Philips Weighmech Pvt. Ltd. are having one Unit at Goa which is registered as Small Scale Unit with the Directorate of Industries in Goa. Their another unit at Andheri in Bombay is also engaged in the manufacture of weighing scales and parts thereof. This Unit at Andheri is not registered as the SSI Unit and as per the provisions of Para-4 of Notification No. 175/86-CE, the benefit of notification shall not be applicable as this factory was not registered with the Directorate of Industries or Development Commissioner (Small Scale Industries).3. Shri Rajeev Wagley, learned Chartered Accountant, submitted that it is not disputed by the Revenue that their factory at Goa i...
Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Shree Vindhya Paper Mills Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT320Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an application filed under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act seeking the indulgence of this Tribunal to refer following question of law : "Whether Felts and Wire nettings used in the manufacture of papers are inputs within the meaning of Rule 57 A are admissible or not?" 2. By our Order dated 21-6-1998, we had allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that felts and wire nettings used in the manufacture of papers are inputs within the meaning of Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules, following the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Union Carbide v. C.C.E., Calcutta - 1996 (86) E.L.T. 613. In similar application, we had referred the matter to the opinion of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Baroda v. Atlas Paper Mills P. Ltd. vide Order No. C-II/ 1218/99/WRB, dated 10-5-1999 [1999 (112) E.L.T. 839 (T)] in E/RA.115/98-Bom in A.No. E/766/92-Bom. Hence following the said judgment, we refer the question in this case to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »