Mumbai Court December 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.
Goa Foundation Vs. Goa State Coastal Zone Management Authority and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR224; 2001(4)BomCR226
Pratibha Upasani, J.1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 read with Articles 21, 48-A and 51A(g) of the Constitution of India, is a public interest litigation filed by the petitioner, the Goa Foundation, which is non-Governmental organization. It is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The objects of the petitioner society amongst others, include appropriate action to halt the ecological degradation of the environment and to formulate and implement programmes for the rehabilitation and development of the Goan environment and to restore ecological balance. The petitioner Society has been pursuing the matter of protection of costal environment in Goa and in the rest of India, since it was set up in the year 1986. The petitioner has been monitoring the costal areas for several years and has approached the Court on numerous occasions for bringing to the notice of the Court violations of the Environment Protection Act, 1986, (hereinafter for brevity's sake r...
J.M. Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
Reported in: (2001)(133)ELT795Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The demand of the Department, which is the subject-matter of the captioned appeal, is one of interest only, the duty amounts having already been deposited with the department by the applicants. We have heard both sides. Since the entire duty demand was discharged by the applicant well before the issuance of the show cause notice in question, and the applicants' request in the present application is only for waiver of pre-deposit of the interest amount claimed by the Department on the duty already paid by them, we are of the view that this application can be allowed in the interest of justice. The question whether interest is payable or not is a legal question, which has to be sorted out in the appeal.2. In view of the above, this application is allowed unconditionally, and the appeal is directed to be posted for regular hearing in the due course of time....
Sarvajanik Medical Trust and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
Reported in: (2001)(74)ECC701
1. One of the captioned appeals is against confiscation of certain imported equipments with option for redemption thereof on payment of fine and also against imposition of penalty of Rs. 11,26,145. The appellant in that appeal is M/s. Sarvajanik Medical Trust, which, according to the appellants, is a charitable institution running a hospital. The other appeal is against imposition of penalty of Rs. 50,000 on the appellant, who is the Joint Secretary of the charitable Trust. These applications before us pray for waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amounts and for stay of recovery thereof, pending the captioned appeals.2. We have carefully examined the records and have heard Ld. Advocate Shri S.N. Parikh for the applicants and Ld. SDR Smt. Reena Arya.3. Ld. Advocate has given a brief account of the facts of the case and reiterated the grounds of the applications. The applicant-trust had imported an endoscopic equipment and filed bill of entry for home consumption, claiming exemption fr...
Veena Chokhani Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
Reported in: (2002)82ITD52(Mum.)
1. The appeal of the assesses for asst. yr. 1988-89 is directed against the order dt. 30th June, 1992, of CIT(A)-XXIII, Mumbai. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused.2. The relevant facts in this case are that the appellant was born on 7th of January, 1972 and, therefore, was a minor till asst. yr.1988-89. The return for asst. yr. 1988-89 was filed on 25th of July, 1990, after the assessee had attained the age of majority. A declaration under the Amnesty Scheme had been filed under the WT Act, 1957, on 31st of March ,1987, when the assessee was a minor. The silver utensils weighing 145.010 kgs. had been disclosed in trjfe wealth-tax return, The description of the silver utensils as per the valuation report is as under: .904 kgs. One Ladeo Gopalji with Singhasan .603 kgs. Six sweet dish bowl with spoonII. 140 kgs. - 2 Dinner set of 40 pcs. each, twenty- four thal, katori-96 pcs., Four lemon 3. In the previous year relevant to asst. yr. 1988-89 the silver utensils weighin...
Ramesh @ Lalya Anand Jagtap Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)209; 2001BomCR(Cri)385; (2001)1BOMLR290; 2001CriLJ1579
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 31.7.1997 passed by the Vth Assistant Sessions Judge. Thane in Sessions Case No. 610 of 1996 convicting and sentencing him to undergo 10 years R. I. and to pay a line of Rs. 1000/- in default to suffer three months S. I. for the offence under section 376(2)(f) I.P.C. has come up in appeal before us.2. Shortly stated the prosecution case runs as under :-The victim Nandini, a child aged 21/2 years is the daughter of the informant Saraswati Gupta P.W. 1 and Suresh Gupta PW 3. At the time of the incident, she lived along with her parents and grandmother Munnidevi PW 2 in Kopri Colony. District Thane. The appellant resided adjacent to her house and was known to her parents and her grandmother.On 10.6.1996, at 9.30 p.m. the appellant came to the informant's house and took Nandini on the pretext of giving her Pepsi drink. After 20 minutes, he came back with Nandini. There were blood stains on his shirt and there was al...
Norman Joseph Ferreira and anr. Vs. Arjandas Newandram, Heir and L.R. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
Reported in: 2001(3)BomCR475; (2001)2BOMLR731; 2001(2)MhLj810
ORDERR. M. Lodha, J. 1. By means of this Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners who are decree holders seek to challenge the order dated 1st March. 1988 passed by the Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court whereby they set aside the order of the Judge, Small Causes Court dated 26.6.73 and discharged obstructionist notice taken out by the present petitioner decree holders against respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 herein.2. Relevant facts first :Dr. John Joseph Ferreira and Mrs. Matilda John Ferreira were owners of plot Nos. 12 and 13, situate at Sitladevi Temple Road, Mahim. Mumbai. The present petitioners are the legal representatives and heirs of the said owners. The said John Joseph Ferreira and Matilda Ferreira granted lease of the aforesaid plots of land to one Jamnadas Dharamdas for a period of 15 years vide lease deed dated 14th December, 1948. The lease was renewable for a further period of 15 years. Under the lease, the said Jamnadas was per...
Miss Veena Chokhani Vs. Ito
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
Reported in: (2002)74TTJ(Mumbai)410
ORDERM.A. Bakshi, V.P.The appeal of the assessee for assessment year 1988-89 is directed against the order dated 30-6-1992, of Commissioner (Appeals)-XXIII, Mumbai. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused.2. The relevant facts in this case are that the appellant was born on 7-1-1972 and, therefore, was a minor till assessment year 1988-89, The return for assessment year 1988-89 was filed on 25-7-1990, after the assessee had attained the age of majority. A declaration under the Amnesty Scheme had been filed under the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, on 31-3-1987, when the assessee was a minor. The silver utensils weighing 145.010 kgs. had been disclosed in the wealth-tax return. The description of the silver utensils as per the valuation report is as under :Total weightItem wise weightDescriptionI5.010 kgs.1.165 kgs.Five glasses .418 kgs.One Atra Thal .746 kgs.One bed room set of 3 pcs. .291 kgs.One Laxmiji statute .834 kgs.One silver box .904 kgs.One Ladeo Gopalji with Singhasan .603...
Gajanan Auto Engg. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-18-2000
Reported in: (2001)(133)ELT793Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an application for early hearing. The Revenue involved is small. The plea made is that the issue is of recurring nature and the unit being in small scale cannot bear the continuous demands. On examination of the issue we find that the issue is well settled in law and that the appeals could be disposed of. We proceed to do so after granting waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 70,248/-.2. The appellants are manufacturers of M.V. Parts. Their buyers are original manufacturers namely M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. at Kandivali and M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. at Satpur, Nasik. The sales were on the basis of contracts. The prices charged for the same products from these two units were different. 4 show cause notices were issued taking the higher value as the base and demanding differential duty. Before the Assistant Commissioner the assessees claimed that the two units were separate entities that they had separate Central Excise & Sales Tax Registration. The contrac...
Collector of Central Excise, Vs. M/S. Bombay Switchgears
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-18-2000
Reported in: (2001)(135)ELT927Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal has been filed by the department against the decision of the Collector of Central Excise, Mumbai, made in Order-in-Appeal No.GS/216/BI/93 dated 21.4.1993 in and by which the learned Collector (Appeals) set aside the Order-in-Original dated 17.12.1990 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Dn. G-I, Mumbai-I.2. The respondents were manufacturing goods under chapter 85 of the CETA. They were also availing modvat facility in terms of rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules. It would appear that in the month of March, 1990 the factory of the respondents got fire and it is alleged that unutilized duty paid inputs on which modvat credit was availed were reported to have been destroyed. A show cause notice dated 28.9.1990 was issued demanding Rs. 18,343.94 on the ground that the modvat credit was not a admissible to the duty paid inputs which were destroyed before they were actually being used in the manufacture of final products. The Assistant Collector by order-in-...
Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-18-2000
Reported in: (2001)(133)ELT749Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals Appeal Nos. E/802/90-D and Appeal No. E/4488/93-D have been filed against the decision of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Pune made two orders No. 72/CEX/1989, dated 6-12-1989 and 33/CEX/1993, dated 27-4-1993. In both appeals question involved is about eligibility of Modvat credit in respect of items which have been consumed captively after manufacturing in the same factory in the sense they are used in or in relation to manufacture of final products. The items are like being storage bins, racks, hand trolleys, partition etc. referred to in column No. 3 originally prior to 1989.2. The assessees were manufactured a finished products mainly automobile parts motor vehicle and its spare parts. The items in dispute were also manufactured by them in their factory for captive consumption prior to 1986. They were classified under Tariff Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants were enjoying the benefit of exemption under Notification ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »