Mumbai Court October 2000 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.
Chanda Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Through Its Secretary and anr. Vs. Pre ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-18-2000
Reported in: 2001(3)BomCR177
S.G. Mahajan, J.1. This common judgment shall dispose of two writ petitions, namely (1) Writ Petition No. 1279 of 1998 and (2) Writ Petition No. 1154 of 1998.2. Facts giving rise to the dispute in these cases are as below:(a) The petitioner-Society Chanda Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Chandrapur, administers a large number of institutions including colleges. Janata Vidyalaya, Ghuggus, Chandrapur, is one of those institutions. By the order dated 3rd August, 1998, the Director of Education took over the management of the schools run by the petitioner-Society, under the provisions of Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Management) Act, 1976 (for the sake of brevity,' The M.E.I. Management Act, 1976). The Administrator was appointed to manage the affairs of the institution. This appointment was challenged by the petitioner-Society in Writ Petition No. 2239 of 1998 in the High Court. The Division Bench of this Court, by the judgment dated 28th February, 1991, allowed the writ petition and hel...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Okasa Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT184Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These appeals are against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), overruling the findings of the Assistant Commissioner, that the assessee was not entitled to take Modvat credit on invoices which were not issued in accordance with the rules for one or more of the following reasons; they were not issued by a registered dealer; they did not show the mode of transport of the goods or the value of the consignments received by the dealer from the manufacturer of which the consignment formed a part.2. We are not able to accept the reasoning of the Commissioner (Appeals), when he says that the failure of the dealer to comply with these requirements, contained in trade notice 57/94, cannot have the consequence of credit being denied. The trade notice prescribes these particulars and provides that the failure to include them would entail "penal action". We are not able to agree with him that "penal action" only means a penalty and not action resulting in Modvat credit being denied. The co...
Commissioner of Customs Vs. Elpro International Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT157Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondent to this appeal imported a consignment of cobalt metal briquettes. The goods arrived V sometime in 1993 and were invoiced at US $ 14.50 CIF per piece. The department was of the view that the price of the commodity should be assessed at the value of US $ 15.08 per pound CIF based on the price of similar goods quoted in the London Metal Exchange (LME). The LME prices which were coated for the cobalt metal briquettes of 99.8% purity ranging from US $ 14.70 to 15.30 per pound and the average of these two prices have been taken. The price for the purity of the goods imported by the respondent is 99.95%. LME prices were not available for the goods of the purity imported by the appellant. The Assistant Collector enhanced the price to the extent proposed. On appeal by the importer from this order, the Collector (Appeals) took the view that it was not permissible to increase the price solely on the basis of the quotations in the LME. He cited the decision of this Tribunal. He ...
Skf Bearings (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT225Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Collector has confirmed the notice dated 4-2-1994 issued to the appellant demanding duty on the scrap obtained in the manufacture of ball and roller bearings, during the period from January, 1989 to January, 1992. The appellant sent out to job workers the rough forgings made by it to grind and otherwise finish them, in order to obtain the inner and outer rings (or races, as they are more correctly referred) of the bearings finished to the degree of precision required. In the course of this process, some amount of waste results, part of which is irrecoverable, being in the form of very fine particles that are blown away, the remaining being in the form of turnings and shavings. The latter was required, either to be cleared by the job worker on payment of duty, or to be returned to the appellant. The job worker did neither of these, but removed the scrap without paying duty.2. Some time in 1989, the department asked the appellant to give deta...
Aurangabad Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)(128)ELT218Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeal is against the order of the Collector (Appeals) confirming the order of the Addl. Collector confiscating a quantity of pipes manufactured by the appellant and permitting them redemption on fine, and imposing penalty on it under Rule 173Q. The Addl. Collector found that the appellant had undertaken the manufacture of these pipes without applying for registration.2. We are unable to accede to the request for adjournment on the ground that the appellant's unspecified consultant is out of station. No consultant's name is indicated nor has been any authority submitted to appear before the Tribunal. We have read the appeal memorandum and heard the departmental representative.3. The ground that the appellant was registered for manufacture of paper and paperboard is no answer. Sub-rule (7) of Rule 174 specifically provides that the particulars of each product manufactured by an assessee should be endorsed on the registering certificate and it is not in dispute that the pipes wer...
Sri Ram Impex Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT172Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether catheters imported by the appellant are accessories of haemodyliser, and hence entitled to the benefit of entry 320 of the Table to Notification 16/2000. The entry exempts, inter alia medical equipment specified in list 28 of the notification, and accessories of such medical equipment.Haemodylisers form part of list 28. Therefore, accessories of haemodyliser are exempt from duty. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the order of the Assistant Commissioner that these catheters were consumables and therefore not in the nature of accessories of haemodyliser.2. A haemodyliser filters the blood of the person connected to it and returns that blood to his body. It is used to perform the function of the kidney and is used in case of repeat failure. The catheter is put simply, is the pipe to carry the blood from the patient to the haemodyliser, or the pipes that return the filtered blood to the pa...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Deepak Vegetable Oil Inds.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT817Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondent to this appeal manufactures vegetable product. Its claim for refund of Modvat credit of duty paid on tin plate used for manufacture (by its job worker) of tin containers in which the vegetable product was to be packed was disallowed by the department. At a subsequent stage in the proceedings the Tribunal by order dated 4-2-1997 held that tin plate was an input and the duty paid on it was available as Modvat credit to be utilized as input in the manufacture of vegetable products. In the meantime the duty on the vegetable product was withdrawn in the budget of 1996-97.2. Consequent to the Tribunal's order the assessee claimed the refund of the duty of the Modvat credit on the ground that credit could not henceforth be utilized towards payment of duty on the final product.The Asst. Commissioner rejected the claim on the ground that there is no provision of cash refund in Modvat credit. On appeal from this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) ordered grant of cash refund re...
ila VipIn Pandya Vs. Smita Ambalal Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR27; 2001ALLMR(Cri)663; (2001)1BOMLR393; 2001CriLJ838
ORDERD. G. Deshpande, J.1. Contemner is Smita Ambalal Patel, who is the defendant in this suit and who is fighting her own cases in person in the Courts, particularly in this Court.2. This matter was on board on 25th August 2000 for framing Issues, when for no reason and without any provocation from the advocate for the petitioner Ms. Farister Sethna, contemner lost her temper and started making accusation against Ms. Sethna, in particular, and advocates in general calling them Virappan, the dreaded sandal decoit from South, kidnapping Justice and dictating terms to the Judges. She was warned repeatedly by me of consequences for making such reckless allegations. Butshe continued to make them without taking into account all the warnings. She lost her temper, sense of propriety and not maintaining decorum and created chaos in the Court Room.3. Then and there a notice was served upon her as to why action for contempt should not be taken against her. She was given eight days time to give r...
Sophia Shree Basant Kumar Memorial Polytechnic Vs. Regional Provident ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)BomCR791; (2001)1BOMLR428; [2001(88)FLR924]; (2001)ILLJ985Bom; 2001(1)MhLj211
S. K. Shah, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner-institution challenges the communications dated 6th July, 1997 and 15th October 1998 issued by respondent No. 1- Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner), whereby the Commissioner directed the petitioner-institution to refund to its employees the amount that was deducted by the petitioner from the wages payable to the employees on account of the petitioner having made employees contributions to the funds for the period between August 1982 and August 1991.2. The Central Government by Notification dated 19th February, 1982, the provisions of the Employees' Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 came to be extended to the educational, scientific, research and training institutions specified in the Notification. It was made applicable prospectively with effect from 6th March, 1982. The petitioner-institution was covered by that Notification. Therefore, the petitioner-institution was...
Dewal Singhal Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-2000
Reported in: [2001]106CompCas587(Bom)
1. Appeals admitted. Notice made returnable forthwith. Respondents in both the appeals waive service through their counsel. 2. Notice of Motion No. 96 of 2000 taken out for condonation of delay in presentation of Appeal Lodging No. 899 of 2000. By consent allowed and made absolute. Delay condoned. Appeal to be numbered. 3. These two appeals raise common issues of fact and law and, therefore can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment. 4. The respondent in both these appeals is a co-operative bank. The respondent had advanced certain monies to two companies known asShubham Vanijya Ltd. and Singhal Swaroop Ispat Ltd. The appellant herein was a guarantor of the loans advanced by the respondent to the said companies. The respondent moved the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, for issuance of a recovery certificate. On 5-8-1909, a recovery certificate was issued by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operat...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »