Mumbai Court September 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.
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Haldyn Glass Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT835Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Assessees manufactured castings and cleared the same in terms of Notification No. 275/86 (sic) which provided full exemption subject to the condition that the inputs used in the manufacture of such castings should have suffered duty leviable and that no credit thereof should have been taken, either under Rule 56A or under Rule 57A. In the manufacture of such castings broken moulds were used as inputs. These broken moulds after being scrapped were allowed clearance without payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 171/88 which provided that such scrap should arise from goods on which the duty leviable had been paid. The SCN was issued seeking recovery of duty on the castings cleared under Notification No. 275/88 on the ground that the scrap used in their manufacture was cleared at nil rate of duty and, therefore, the castings did not satisfy the first proviso in the Notification No.275/88. Before the Assistant Collector, the assessees claimed that the goods cleared at Nil rate of...
Indian Lead Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC346
1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants against the decision of the Collector (Appeals), Mumbai made in Order-in-Original No. 17/94 BCH dated 11-1-1994 dismissing the appeal of the appellant and confirming the order of the Assistant Collector of Customs who enhanced the value of lead tin antimony and ingots by US $ 400 per MT from US $ 713 to US $ 1113.93 per MT.2. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of pure lead ingots from lead concentrates and scrap of lead and for this purpose they were importing lead concentrates, scrap of lead and sometimes lead alloys which were not easily marketable in the foreign countries. Such goods, according to the appellants, could not be marketable in foreign countries as they could not meet the requirements of the customers in the foreign countries. In such a case the said lead alloys were disposed of as scrap. It was represented before us by the appellants that in such an event the lead alloys were remelted and refined for the purpose ...
Hercules Hoists Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT833Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The assessees manufactured goods described as "Triple Spur Gear Chain Pully Blocks". The classification claimed was under Sub-heading 8425 of the CETA, 1985. It appears from 1986 to 1991 this classification was approved by the Department. When similar classification lists were filed on 1-4-1991 and 26-7-1991, the Assistant Commissioner issued show cause notice alleging that the correct classification was under sub-heading 8483 in place of that suggested by the assessee. Differential duty was sought to be demanded.In neither of the two notices dated 21-10-1991 and 26-10-1991, was any ground given for seeking re-classification. The assessees advanced arguments on merits. The Assistant Collector held that, pulleys and pulley blocks, separately presented without chains, would merit classification under Heading 84.83 and not 84.25. He confirmed the classil' ication in terms of the show cause notices and also confirmed the demand amounting to Rs. 43,010.55. The assessees then filed an ap...
Samrat Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: (2000)LC272Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants are Steamer Agent they filed an Import General Manifest for a vessel on 5-7-1995. The manifest did not record two cases consigned to an importer in Pune. The steamer agents sought to amend the IGM on 20-7-1995. The Commissioner of Customs in the impugned order held that in landing the goods which were not shown in the IGM initially filed, the steamer agent had rendered the goods liable to confiscation under Section 111(f) and (g) of the Customs Act, 1962.Although he did not confiscate those goods, he imposed a penalty of Rs. 2.5 lakhs on the steamer agent. Hence, the present appeal.2. I have heard Shri N.P. Jagasia the ld. Counsel for the appellant and Shri K.L. Ramteke, the ld. JDR for the Revenue.3. As disclosed by Shri Jagasia, the two cases were part of the goods belonging to several importers stuffed in one container (LCL container). When this container was destuffed on 11-7-1995 under tally, it came to notice that these cases had not been manifested. The reason...
ici (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT125Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Application is for waiver of deposit of Rs. 27.35 lakhs and penalty of an equal amount under Section 11AC of the Act. The advocate for the applicant explains that the Commissioner has in his order denied the benefit the applicant claims for classification of the product Milproof VFS 50% under Heading 3808.10 and held it classifiable under 3808.90.The first such heading is inter alia for fungicide and the later heading for other. He contends that the product is manufactured out of 2, mercapto benzo thiazole (MBT). It is used as a antifungal preparation to protect fabrics and other goods from mildew. He contends that the Condensed Chemical Dictionary by Hawley indicates one of the uses of the product as fungicide; McGraw Hill Dictionary of Science and Technology shows that sodium salt or MBT is obtained in the process by its reaction of caustic soda and as fungicide. It is further contended that the demand is barred by limitation. The notice was issued in July, 1998 for the period fr...
B.J. Shetty and Others Vs. Air India Limited and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALLMR559; 2000(1)BomCR743; 2000(4)MhLj274
ORDERB.N. Srikrishna, J.1. Rules issued returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service through their respective Counsel. By consent, rules called out and heard finally.2. These three writ petitions, though marginally variant on facts, arise out of the same circumstances and impugn the action of the first respondents, Air-India Limited, of reducing the age of superannuation form 60 years to 58 years. Hence, it would be convenient to dispose of all the three writ petitions by a common judgment. For the sake of convenience, we would recite in detail the facts in Writ Petition No. 1473 of 1999 and indicate the variation in facts in the other two writ petitions.3. The petitioners is Writ Petition No. 1473 of 1999 are employees employed in various capacities with the first respondent. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1557 of 1999 is employed as a Pilot in the employment of the first respondent, while the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1988 of 1999 is employed as Joint General Manager in...
Shri Vijay Vishwanath Kuvalekar Vs. Shri Suresh Raghunathrao Kalkundri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR402
ORDERShafi Parkar, J.1. The question which arises in this petition is whether a son can be said to be an 'aggrieved' person within the meaning of section 199 of Cr.P.C. and, therefore, competent to file a complaint for the offence of defamation under section 500 of I.P.C. for the alleged defamation of his father who was the sole trustee of Dutta Mandir situated in village Ashti in District Pune.2. This application is filed for quashing the process issued by JMFC, A/C Court, Pune in Criminal Case No. 1867 of 1989 in the complaint filed by the respondent No. 1 for offence under section 500 of I.P.C. in respect of the news item published in 'Daily Sakal' a newspaper in Marathi, on 21st May 1989, under the inherent powers of this Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.3. The brief facts giving the backdrop of the present petition can be stated as follows:At Village Ashti, there is a temple called Dutta Temple. It is registered as a Trust with ...
State of Maharashtra and Etc. Vs. Suja Karan Rabbani and Etc.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR899; 2000CriLJ664
ORDERS.D. Gundewar, J. 1. In both these criminal writ petitions the facts are identical and they raise a common question of law and, therefore, can be conveniently disposed of by this common judgment.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of these writ petitions are as follows :-On 16-11 -1996 some Forest Officers while taking a round by Kakodi-Chichgadh Road in a jeep, noticed that the respondent and others were grazing sheep and goats deep inside the compartment No. 660 of the protected forest. On seeing those cattle grazing there, the Forest Officers went towards the said place, stopped the jeep and got down from it. They had then seized in all 105 sheep and 11 goats which were found grazing in the said compartment of the protected forest. The Forest Officer, who had seized those cattle under section 52(1) of the Indian Forests Act, 1927 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') also found that those cattle ate and damaged forest produce such as grass, young plants of Saja, Bija, Gara...
Jairam Somaji More Vs. Sindhubai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Reported in: I(2001)DMC407
S.S. Parkar, J.1. This writ petition arises in the maintenance proceedings adopted by the wife-respondent No. 1 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The petitioner and the respondent No. 1 were married some time in the year 1970 as per the Hindu Law. They cohabited until 4th December, 1979, when they separated by a registered Deed of Divorce which is at Exhibit 22. From the said marriage admittedly a daughter was born who is residing with the petitioner-husband. It is the case of the respondent-wife that the petitioner repented for the separation which was effected between them by the Deed of Divorce dated 4.12.1979 and, therefore, there was reunion between them and they entered into an agreement (Exhibit 19) executed on 18th November, 1980. The wife stayed with the petitioner for a period of 1 and1/2 years after the said reunion and thereafter she was driven away from the matrimonial home by the petitioner and hence again went back to her father's house in village Dh...
Omni Forgings (Guj) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1999
Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC338
1. By order dated 4.2.1998, the Tribunal waived deposit of the amount of duty, took up the appeal itself for disposal, and passed orders, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and remanding the matter back to him for decision subject to the appellant depositing Rs. 1.50 lakhs within three months from the receipt of the order. The application is for modification of that order.2. The applicant is absent and unrepresented. Advocate for the applicant requests adjournment on the ground that since the order was passed by two member Bench, the application should also be placed before it.3. The departmental representative contends that what has been passed is not a stay order, but a final order, and there is no question of modification of that order. He says that since the matter is within the jurisdiction of a single member Bench, the Bench can decide the application.4. The fact that the order was passed by a two member Bench does not preclude a single member bench having appropriat...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »