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.
Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Ashish Dye Chem and Textiles
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: (2001)(129)ELT184Tri(Mum.)bai
1. By the order impugned in this appeal filed by the Collector, the adjudicating authority has held that the process undertaken by Shree Vishnu Processors does not amount to bleaching within the meaning of explanation to Notification 130/82 as it stood at the relevant time.Notice issued to the three assessees proceeded on the footing that they were in the same premises, and that bleaching was being undertaken by Shree Vishnu Processors. It therefore proposed that, consequent to amendment of notification 132/82, the benefit of the notification would not be available for the reason that the quantities of cotton fabrics processed by these three persons after they were bleached, and cleared for home consumption exceeded the quantities specified in the notification.2. The department's appeal is not maintainable for two reasons. Firstly one appeal has been filed, the respondent to it being to be M/s. Ashish Dye Chem & Textile Processors Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.. The objection raised by Mr. H....
Solapur Zilla Vinkar Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: (2001)(133)ELT741Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the stiffened fabric manufactured by the appellant is classifiable under Heading 52.06 of the Tariff, as claimed by the appellant, or under Heading 59.01, as determined by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the order impugned before us.2. The appellant has not appeared for the hearing and has asked for decision on its written submission. In this submission, the appellant has cited an order of this Tribunal in its own case, reported in 1998 (104) E.L.T. 402, holding that it is only fabrics with permanent stiffness that would be classifiable under Heading 59.01; the stiffening imparted to fabrics by the appellant being of a temporary nature, they would not be classifiable under this heading. The appeal against this order of the Tribunal has been dismissed on limitation as well as on merits by the Supreme Court, as reported in 1999 (108) E.L.T. A57.3. The goods in the present case are covered by the earlier order. We therefore allow ...
Rupalee Dyeing and Printing Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: (2001)(73)ECC711
1. On hearing the parties, we have, with the consent of both sides taken up the appeal for disposal, waiving deposit.2. M/s. Rupalee Dyeing and Printing Works (hereinafter Rupalee) was a partnership firm, which was in existence from 1976. It was engaged in bleaching, dyeing and printing of textile fabrics by use of machine operated with power. It was also engaged in padding and calendering fabrics. These finishing processes were exempted from duty by Notification No. 253/82. Rupalee availed of this exemption in respect of fabrics, which it subjected to finishing, and paid duty on the fabrics, which it subjected to dyeing and finishing. Around 1985, Fatimaben Ismailbhai Devdiwala, the mother of the four brothers who were the partners of Rupalee, set up in the premises adjoining Rupalee, but in the same compound a unit named India Textiles. India Textile was doing bleaching, dyeing printing of fabric without aid of power or steam. Such activity was exempted from duty by Notification No....
Engineering Tooling Equipment Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: (2001)(95)LC545Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue involved in this case is the classification of products described as: The assessees claimed that these would continue to fall under heading 7304 as tubes pipes etc. The ground was that the activity of threading ends of the pipe either internally or externally did not amount to manufacture. The second ground taken by the assessees is that the sub notes of the HSN, to heading 73.04 specifically made for inclusion therein of line pipes, drill pipes etc. used in drilling for oil or gas. The department insisted that going by the use the goods would classify under heading 84.31 as identifiable parts of drilling machinery falling under heading 84.30. Here also the HSN Note 1(h) of Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff Act comes to their rescue. The note holds that drill pipes would not be covered under that section but would fall under the parent heading 73.04. The HSN sub-notes to heading 84.31 also excludes from the coverage thereof casings, tubes and drill pipes and sugges...
Smita Ambalal Patel Vs. Ila VipIn Pandya
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)BomCR436; (2001)3BOMLR610
B. N. Srikrishna, J. 1. Long long ago, on the eve of the war at Kurukshetra, Lord Krishna advised the educated leaders of society against doing anything which would incite persons from the lower echelons of society into acts destructive of the orderly fabric of society. Said the Good Lord, 'Na buddhibhedam janayet ajnaanam Karmasanginaam; Joshayet Sarva Karmani Vldwan Yuktah Samaacharan' ('Do not confuse the ignorant lay persons (by tall talk); act rightly, so that the people following are enthused to act rightly'). It is unfortunate that recognised leaders of society, recipients of international literacy awards and erstwhile holders of high constitutional offices, go around making speeches, in and out of season, which tend to give an impression to the lay in society that the judiciary is unworthy of the high pedestal on which it is placed and that the Judges can be criticized in a manner that is far from being fair comment. We think that the appeal before us is the fallout of such mis...
Leela Capital Finance Limited Vs. Modiluft Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)BomCR110
R.J. Kochar, J.1. The plaintiffs have prayed for an order and decree against the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs a sum of Rs. 5,67,68,433.23 as per particulars of claim Exh. N to the plaint together with further interest at the rate of 27% per annum on the principal sum of Rs. 5 Crores from the date of filing of the suit till payment and/or realisation and for costs of the suit.2. On receipt of writ of summons, the defendants entered their appearance to contest the suit. Thereafter, the plaintiffs have taken out the present summons for judgment for a decree on the ground that the suit claim is an ascertained and liquidated claim and it arises from a written contract between the parties and that the defendants have no defence of any nature. In support of the summons for judgment an affidavit of Shri Jayant Athavale verifying the facts is filed by the plaintiffs. The defendants have filed affidavit in reply dated 5th March, 1998 of one Shri Ogale, resisting the summons for judgment a...
Bombay Oil Industries Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-2000
Reported in: (2002)82ITD626(Mum.)
1. to 11. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues').12. We shall now proceed to consider the third ground. The brief facts are these. The assessee held shares in a company by name Harsh Archana Trading & Investments Ltd. It went into voluntary liquidation. The liquidators distributed 4,32,000 shares of Marico Industries Ltd. to the assessee-company on 28-12-1995. The market value of these shares as on that date was Rs. 7,12,80,000 @ Rs. 165 per share. After deducting the deemed dividend of Rs. 1,80,748, capital gains of Rs. 7,10,99,252 were computed under Section 46(2) of the Income-tax Act in the assessment. In the return, the assessee had declared such gains at the same figure but claimed capital loss of Rs. 6,32,62,694 (Fig. same in both original and revised returns). This loss the working of which was given in Annexure 4 to the return, arose on account of the sale of 60,00,000 shares which the assessee-company held in its wholly-owned subsidiary by na...
Jaysingh Wadhu Singh, (Through His Next Friend in the Family I.E. His ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-2000
Reported in: 2001BomCR(Cri)470; (2001)1BOMLR205; 2001CriLJ456; 2001(3)MhLj208
G. D. Patil, J.1. This Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioner wherein the constitutional validity of some of the provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the M.C.O.C. Act) is challenged. The Petitioner also prays for direction to the State Government to frame appropriate rules and guidelines for preventing misuse of the provisions of the M.C.O.C. Act. The other reliefs claimed are : (i) a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from relying upon the telephonic conversations dated 25th March, 1999, 9th April, 1999 and 10th April, 1999 against the Petitioner for invoking the provisions of the M.C.O.C. Act; (ii) to quash and set aside the order dated 12th May, 2000 passed by Respondent No. 3 - Additional Chief Secretary in the Home Department of the State of Maharashtra; (iii) to quash and set aside the orders dated 18th April, 2000 and 25th August, 2000 of the Learned Specia...
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Vs. Petroleum Employees Union and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)BomCR447; (2001)1BOMLR112; [2001(91)FLR108]; (2000)IIILLJ25Bom; 2001(1)MhLj708
ORDERF. I. Rebello, J.1. Does the working class of this country have the right to strike in furtherance of their demands when matters are in conciliation before a Conciliation Officer under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? Does such a strike which prima facie is deemed to be illegal by virtue of Section 22 or Section 23 of the Industrial Disputes Act confer a right on an employer to move a Civil Court for an injunction in exercise of its jurisdiction underSection 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to restrain either the Union or its members from going on strike? The Plaintiffs, a Company under the control of Government of India says 'YES'. If no injunction is granted, it is contended apart from production losses it will be the public who will have to suffer. Not long ago another Government at another point of time had pleaded before the Apex Court that emergency was declared in public interest and in view of that the fundamental rights of citizen as enshrined in Part III of the Consti...
R. Kumar and Co. Vs. Chemicals Unlimited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Bom116; 2001(1)BomCR836; 2001(1)MhLj687
R.J. Kochar, J. 1. The plaintiffs have prayed for a judgment and decree against the defendants ordering the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs the sum of Rs. 13,77,416-10 ps. and further interest at the rate of 15% per annum or at such other rate as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit on Rs. 8,78,453-20 from the date of the filing of the suit till payment and costs of the suit.2. From the averments in the plaint the suit claim appears to have been based on goods sold, supplied and delivered by the plaintiffs to the defendants from time-to-time. By three letters dated 10th April, 1990, 15th April, 1992 and 10th April, 1993 addressed by the defendants to the plaintiffs, the defendants had stated that in their account books in the account of the plaintiff during the year ended 31st March, 1990 a sum of Rs. 6,12,295.71 was due and similarly for the next two years i.e. year ending 31st March, 1992 and 31st March, 1993 an amount of Rs. 7,86,689.70 and Rs. 8,91,476.20 were shown due to them. By ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »