Mumbai Court February 2000 Judgments

Pan Pipes Resplendents Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2000)LC132Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants obtained plain glazed tiles which were duty paid and processed them into decorated ceramic glazed wall tiles. The process as per the affidavit, dated 22-5-1998 of Dr. P.T. Shah, Chartered Engineer was of two types; the first type was screen-printing tiles which tiles were subjected to firing only for fastening the wet colours. The second variety was that of decorating glazed tiles which consisted of application of glass fritz of various colours as per the designs on the surface of the glazed tiles which on being fired would melt and blend with the surface of the tiles thereby turning the glazed tiles into decorative tiles. The machinery for this activity was imported and cleared under the Project Import Regulation Scheme under the concessional rate of duty. The imports were made sometime in 1996 and the production commenced in April 1997. In Feb. 1998, the premises were searched by the jurisdictional officers in the belief that the appellants were manufacturing dutia...

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Nirmal Warehousing Agency

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal is directed against the order of the CIT (Appeals) dated 20-6-1994 for the assessment year 1988-89. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in directing to treat the expenses of Rs. 7,85,866 made on premises as repairs and alterations in the form of replacing roof, new columns, demolition of old walls as revenue expenditure, without appreciating the facts and the circumstances on which the findings of Assessing Officer in the assessment order treating the said huge amount of repairs as capital expenditure was based and is well supported in the decided cases of M/s. Humayun Property Ltd. v. CIT [1962] 44 ITR 73 (Cal.)." 3. The assessee-firm is a tenant of a property belonging to M/s. Bombay Cotton Mills Estate (P.) Ltd. at Kalachowki, Bombay. The total built-up area in the possession of the assessee was 5,200 sq. ft. It was being used for carrying on the warehousing business of the assessee. The premises were owne...

Rasul Mohamad Hanif Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(3)MhLj177

Vishnu Sabai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30.11.1995 passed by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, in Sessions Case No. 14 of 1995, convicting and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to undergo one month imprisonment for the offence under section 302 of the I.P.C., has come up in appeal before us.2. Shortly stated, the prosecution case runs as under :-The deceased Rashida was the daughter of Jan Mohammed Abdul Mulla P.W. 7. She was married to the appellant on 12.4.1993. For three months, the appellant treated her properly but, thereafter he and his family members started ill treating and asking her to bring a gold chain of 11/2 tolas and cash of Rs. 2000/-. When Rashida used to visit the house of her father, she used to complain to him about the demand and ill-treatment and when he used to visit her house, she also made same complaint to him.According to the prosecution, at the time of her ...

Shri Jitendra Balmukund Dhoshi Vs. Union of India Through the Inspecto ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR648; 2000BomCR(Cri)648

ORDERSmt. R anjana Desai, J.1. The petitioner, who is original accused No. 2 in Special Case No. 23 of 1990 pending in the Court of the Special Judge, Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, has filed this criminal application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the process issued by the Special Judge in the said case on 10-1-1992.2. Briefly stated the facts, which give rise to this application, are as under: The petitioner was the Director of M/s. Gypsy Footwear Private Limited having their registered office at 3-B, Sherbanoo, 111 M.K. Road, Bombay (the said company for short) and having factory at B-26, MIDC, Phase-I, Dombivli (East), Dist. Thane. At the relevant time, one Cyrus Jolley Shroffwas the manager of the Kalbadevi Branch of the Bank. The said Cyrus Shroff is accused No. 1 in Special Case No. 23 of 1990. The said company had passed a resolution on 25-5-1987 for availing of credit facilities from the said bank. An account being account No. 211243 was open...

State of Maharashtra thro' Secretary, Department of Health and Ors. Vs ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001(89)FLR541]; (2001)ILLJ619Bom

J.N. Patel and P.S. Brahme, JJ.1. The original complainants who are Respondents before this Court viz. Kamgar Rajya Vima Yojna Karmachari Sanghathana filed complaint before the Labour Court challenging the intended termination of their members who are working in the capacity of Pharmacists in Class III category vide complaint No. 144 of 1997. Alongwith the complaint, the complainant Sanghathana and the employees also filed an application for grant of interim relief under Section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Act No. 1 of 1972. The learned Judge of the Labour Court, by its order dated October 30, 1998, allowed the application and directed the Respondents to continue the complainants in employment till the final decision of the complaint. The Petitioner State of Maharashtra assailed this order by preferring a revision before the Industrial Court, Nagpur. The Industrial Court dismissed the revision by its order dated January 22, 1999 which was then challenged by the State of Maharashtra by pre...

Sham Madhavrao Rupvate Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000CriLJ2389

Vishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 14-11-1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik, in Sessions Case No. 109/95 convicting and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. has come up in appeal before us:2. In, short prosecution case runs as under: The deceased Muktabai was the wife of appellant. She was married to him about 9 months prior to incident. Appellant under the influence of liquor used to beat and harass her. On 25-4-1995 at about 1 or 1.30 a.m. Pushpa Tadpade PW-6 a neighbour of Muktabai and appellant, heard cries of Muktabai on which she rushed to her house, followed by Mandabai Potinde PW-7 who was also Muktabai's neighbour. Pushpa Tadpade and Mandabai saw Muktabai, in a burnt condition. On seeing them Appellant ran away. Since Muktabai's sari was burnt Pushpa and Mandabai changed the same. On their asking Muktabai as to how she was burnt Muktabai replied that the appellant had ...