Mumbai Court November 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.
Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Grasim Industries
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-2000
Reported in: (2002)82ITD158(Mum.)
1. These appeals by the Department are directed against the combined order of the learned CIT(A), dt. 3rd Jan., 1992 for asst. yrs. 1972-73 to 1980-81 passed under Section 154 of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act). The Department has expressed its grievance by raising the following grounds in its appeals. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in granting depreciation on WDV of Scientific research assets where deduction has been granted under Section 35 of the Act. 2. Without prejudice to the above facts the CIT(A) ought to have considered the amendment to Section 35(2) (iv) of the IT Act with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1962 wherein no depreciation is to be granted under Section 32 where deduction has been granted under Section 35 of the Act." 2. Earlier, the CIT(A), in quantum appeals, had confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on the written down value (WDV) of scientific research assets on which deduction had been allowed un...
Sadashiv Dhondiram Pandit Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)69; 2001CriLJ4880; II(2002)DMC241
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal the appellant challenges the Judgment and order dated 28th November, 1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Kolhapur, in Sessions Case No. 93/1996, whereby he has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C.2. Shortly stated the prosecution case runs as under : The deceased Ratnamala was the wife of the appellant. The couple had a son and a married daughter. At the time of the incident they were residing in village Mohare, Taluka Panhala, Dist. Kolhapur. The appellant was addicted to liquor and used to demand money from Ratnamala for the same and when she was unable to pay he used to quarrel with her and beat her. He used to also suspect the fidelity of Ratnamala and used to beat her. Ratnamala told this to her sister Shahu Kambale P.W. 3.The evidence of Vikas Pandit P.W. 6, the son of the appellant and the deceased, shows that on the...
Vastu Invest and Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Lease Financing Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR322; 2001(2)ARBLR315(Bom); (2001)2BOMLR156
B. N. Sriktishna, J.1. Appeals admitted. Notice made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent, appeals called out and heard.2. These two appeals are inter-connected and can be conveniently heard and disposed of by the same judgment.3. Appellant Company owned certain premises in Mittal Court at Nariman Point, Mumbai, called 'business centre', use of which was made available to the Respondent by the agreement dated 27th June, 1994. One of the clauses of this agreement stipulated that the respondent was to place interest free deposit of Rs. 25,00,000/- with the Appellant for due performance of the agreement by the Respondent. The deposit was to continue in (he hands of the appellants 'till the client performs the terms of the agreement as above', the client being the respondent and the deposit was to bear no interest at any time whatsoever.4. The respondent gave notice of prematurely surrendering its rights under the agreement, return of the facilities, including the pr...
Gold Leaf Industries Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-2000
Reported in: (2001)(133)ELT230Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The application is for modification of Tribunal's stay order and for deciding the appeal, on the ground that orders deciding an identical issue have already been passed by the Tribunal.2. The issue itself having been decided, we waive deposit of the duty demanded and penalty imposed, and take up the appeal with consent of departmental representative.3. The appellant utilised five advance licences issued to exporters, purchased by it, to import three consignments of stamping foil, claiming the benefit of the Notification 203/92. The benefit was granted and the goods were cleared without payment of duty, by extending the exemption contained in the notification, on various dates between December, 1993 and October, 1994. In July, 1996 the department issued notice proposing to deny the benefit of the notification and imposition of penalty on the importer under Section 111 of the Act. The notice alleged that Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs had been utilised in the manufactur...
A. Arti Leathers Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-2000
Reported in: (2001)(73)ECC138
1. These three appeals are against the order of the Collector confirming a demand for duty for Rs. 30,62,251 issued to M/s. Aarti Leathers Pvt. Ltd., the manufacturer; imposing a penalty on it of Rs. 20.00 lacs under Rule 173Q(1) of the Act, and penalties under Rule 209A of the Rules of Rs. 5.00 lacs and Rs. 2.00 lacs respectively on K.M.Ved and A.K. Chakrabarty, production manager and director respectively.The Collector has also ordered confiscation of the plant and machinery of the manufacturer, permitting it to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 50,000. The common notice issued to the appellants arose out of a search by the officers of the factory. The search resulted in recovery of some documents. The statements of Kamlesh K. Trivedi, the packing clerk of the manufacturer, A.S. Chakrabarty, managing director, and K.M. Ved, production manager were recorded on that day and the next day. Trivedi acknowledged the seizure of a file bearing word "Kamal" from the table. He agreed that...
Mr. Prithvi Sovern Kuntal Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)1163; (2001)2BOMLR104
A. M. Khanwilkar, J.1. By this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner, who is the younger brother of one Abhishek Sovern Kuntal (hereinafter referred to as the Detenu), has challenged the detention order passed against the said Abhishek Severn Kuntal, dated May 30, 2000, under section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act. 1974.2. Although several contentions have been raised in the present writ petition, however, since we are inclined to accept the ground of challenge that the detention order suffers from non-application of mind, we have not dealt with the other contentions in the present judgment.3. The Respondent No. 2, Detaining Authority, issued detention order on May 30, 2000 indicating therein that power under section 3(1) of COFEPOSA Act of detaining the said Abhishek Sovern Kuntal was being exercised with a view to prevent him in future from abetting smuggling of goods. Along with the said detention order the grounds of detention and the subjective sa...
Shree Rajasthan Syntex Limited Vs. Kirloskar Oil Engines Limited and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR335
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Admit. Learned Counsels for the parties waive service. By consent heard and disposed of at final hearing.2. The law in relation to the grant of injunctions in respect of Bank Guarantees especially unconditional and irrevocable Bank guarantees is, indeed, when settled. In a long line of decisions, the Supreme Court has held that in junctions restraining the invocation or encashment of Bank guarantees should not be granted unless a case of established fraud is made out or a case where irretrievable injustice is likely to be caused unless an injunction was to be granted. Trial Courts have to exercise a degree of circumspection while passing ex parte orders. This is all the more so when what is sought is an injunction against the invocation of a Bank guarantee. In the present case, the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division. Pune proceeded to pass an order of status quo in relation to the invocation of the Bank guarantee in question, an order which has in substance the...
Parasharam Vishnu Siddha and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)1170; 2001(5)BomCR166
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal, the appellants challenge the judgment and order dated 29-1-1997 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Sessions Case No. 100 of 1996 whereby they have been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each, in default to undergo three months R.I. for the offence punishable under section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C.It is pertinent to mention that along with the appellants was tried co-accused Sou. Akkatai Parasharam Siddha but, she has been acquitted vide the impugned judgment and the State of Maharashtra has not challenged her acquittal by preferring an appeal under section 378(1) Cri.P.C.2. In short, the prosecution case runs as under :---The informant Bhagubai Siddha P.W. 1 is the mother of the appellant Parasharam Siddha and grand mother of the appellant Bhikaji Siddha. She is the mother-in-law of the acquitted accused Sou. Akkatai Siddha. The deceased Dhanaji Bandoba Burungale was her son-i...
Oriental Fire and Genl. Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs. Kumar Rahul Baben Khandagale ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-2000
Reported in: 2001ACJ611
R.M. Lodha, J.1. The Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co. Ltd. has come up in appeal challenging the award dated 11.10.1988 passed by the III Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in Greater Bombay at Bombay.2. The respondent No. 1 herein is the claimant who made claim application to recover a compensation of Rs. 25,000 from Imatiaz Ahmed Mohd. Hanif (opponent No. 1 and owner of vehicle taxi No. MRP 4312) and Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co. Ltd. The claimant stated in the claim application that on 10.11.1981 when he was sleeping on a small platform close to a building by roadside near Deonar Abattoir, Govandi, the vehicle taxi No. MRP 4312 driven by opponent No. 1 was taken in reverse direction and due to negligent act, the said vehicle passed over the back of the claimant, as a result of which he sustained injuries. The opponent No. 1 remained absent and claim was contested by the insurer Oriental Fire & General Ins. Co. Ltd. The insurer raised the defence that the said taxi wa...
U.P. State Bridge Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Customs and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-2000
Reported in: (2000)(72)ECC809
1. These two appeals have been filed against the decision made in Order-in-Original numbers 18 & 19/Collr./Goa/Cex/94 dated 31.11.94 and 27.10.94 by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise Goa, whereunder he confirmed the show cause notices dated 28.11.1989 and 13.9.1990, confirming the duty of Rs. 12,88,331 and penalty of Rs. 60,000.2. The appellants are a Public Sector Undertaking of the UP. Government engaged in the construction of Bridges and other civil construction all over India. The appellants undertook to construct a bridge across Mandovi River of about 1 kilometre length overlooking the Collector of Customs and Central Excise Goa. The department sought to levy duty on the following items and the contention of the appellants are also indicated as below:Items/Goods Findings in the Appellants Contentioninvolved impugned Order--Item-wise_____________________________________________________________________________Pile Liner These are. hollow profiles of 1. Duty was demand...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »