Mumbai Court March 2000 Judgments
Amol Rambhau Arjun Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)BomCR715; 2000(4)MhLj302
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Mr. Tated waives service for respondents.2. By consent rule is heard at this stage.3. In this revision application, the petitioner is impugning the order of the Assistant Collector, Khanapur. Sub Division Vita, Dist. Sangli whereby the application made by him under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for making reference to the District Court has been rejected.4. The Assistant Collector has rejected the reference application on the ground that the petitioner's case was covered under second proviso to sub section (2) of section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act.5. In the application under section 18 made by the petitioner before the Collector there is a specific and categorical averment that the amount of compensation was received by him under protest. No reply was filed to the said application and the said fact was not at all therefore disputed. Thus, the case set up by the petitioner that the claim amount was accepted by him under prot...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Maharashtra Vs. the Court Receiver, Shri Sai Baba Sanstha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Bom402; 2000(3)ALLMR516; 2000(4)BomCR755; (2000)2BOMLR241; 2000(4)MhLj15
ORDERN.J. Pandya, A.C.J.1. A very interesting question is sought to be raised in the present reference under the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. While taking the audit of respondent Sansthan, the auditors came across a document namely a receipt of goods. They felt that this would attract the stamp duty as per the provisions of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'Stamp Act' for short).2. The Sansthan admittedly received cash donations and gifts in the form of articles. So far as cash is concerned, the Controller under the Stamp Act determined that the receipts for money without consideration i.e. cash gifts are exempt and the receipts issued in respect of the gifts received in articles i.e. movable properties are chargeable under the Stamp Act. It will be relevant to mention at this juncture Clause (1) of section 2 of the Stamp Act:'instrument' includes every document by which any right or liability is, or purports to be created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished ...
Tag this Judgment!The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority for the State of Maharashtra V ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Bom403; 2000(3)ALLMR606; 2000(4)BomCR753; (2000)2BOMLR246; 2000(4)MhLj212
ORDERN. J. Pandaya, A.C.J.1. All the three references are heard together and decided by common judgement as they involve same question of law as to whether the hotel can be considered to be an industrial undertaking within the meaning of notification dated 3rd November 1972 issued under section 9 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. Other facts being admitted, we straightly go to this question.2. The word industrial undertaking is in the said notification. In respect of that exemption is granted as also the small scale industrial undertaking which are covered by it. The explanation in the notification specifies that unless a certificate of small scale industrial undertaking is produced, mere claim of stamp duty exemption will not be accepted.3. In each case, most of the finance assistance is obtained by the Maharashtra State Finance Corporation. The said Corporation is one of the financial institutions whose transaction mortgaged by way of financial assistance are exempted by the said notifi...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Rajendra Kashinath Dronkar and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)ALLMR484; 2001(1)BomCR31
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Deshpande, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, and Shri Manohar, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent No. 3. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties.2. Shri Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners are contractors. The second respondent on behalf of the first respondent enters into contracts with various contractors for excavation of sand from various places located in Nagpur District, which are commonly known as 'sand ghats'. Generally all tender notices are published about fifteen days prior to expiry of annual contract in the said calendar year, thereby inviting bids from aspiring Contractors to grant leases to excavate sand from various sand ghats. The contracts are executed for a period from 1st January to 31st December in every calendar year.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further submitted th...
Tag this Judgment!The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Vs. Shri Abdul Karim Ebrahim B ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-2000
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR290
N.J. Pandya, Act. C.J.1. The authorities under the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958, while dealing with fairly elaborate document which was titled as 'Memorandum of Family Arrangement' which is running into 44 typewritten pages with 7 more pages devoted to execution part bearing names of the respective parties, this is further annexed by written portion, running into 2 more pages bearing thumb impressions and signatures, as the case may be, felt that it was a deed of partition.2. The authorities were quite keen in the matter and took opinion of the Law and Judiciary Department of the State and of the Revenue Department. Initially, the State Government felt that the document is covered under Article 55 of the Stamp Act. But later on, it took a view that it was an instrument falling under Article 5(h) of the Act. The Revenue Department was of the opinion that it is a conveyance and, therefore, Article 25 will be attracted. There is one more view possible as recorded by the authorities that it is a...
Tag this Judgment!ito Vs. Smt. Kalavati R. Agarwal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-2000
Reported in: (2001)71TTJ(Mumbai)792
ORDERS. V. Mehrotra, A.M.This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)-XXVII, Bombay, dated 28-7-1995, for the assessment year 1994-95.2. The ground taken reads as follows :' 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in directing the assessing officer to treat the interest receipt of Rs. 81,910 as income from business without appreciating the fact that the assessing officer has treated the interest receipt as income from other sources.'3. The assessee carries on export business in the name of M/s Mechano International. From the computation of income filed, the assessing officer found that the assessee had shown profit of Rs. 3,05,395 from the proprietary concern of M/s Mechano International and had claimed deduction under section 80HHC of the said amount. However, this sum included interest of Rs. 81,910 received from various parties, to whom the surplus funds stated to be out of thi...
Tag this Judgment!Raymond Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)LC711Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These appeals arise out of orders passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bhopal. The appeals, therefore, would lie to Delhi benches of the Tribunal. Vide two miscellaneous applications the plea is made by the applicants that since the registered office of the applicants is in Mumbai, these appeals may be retained and heard in Mumbai bench. This prayer is granted and the appeals are continued to be dealt with in Mumbai benches.2. Stay applications bearing nos. E/Stay - 3082-R and E/stay - 3139-R/99-Mum. are also filed. On hearing Shri Prakash Shah, Advocate for the applicants and Shri K. L. Ramteke for the revenue, it appeared that the main appeals themselves could be taken up for disposal at this stage. This was done after granting waiver of the condition of pre-deposit of Rs. 9,35,367/-confirmed as duty and Rs. 50,000/- imposed as penalty in both the proceedings.3. The issue involved before the Assistant Commissioners who passed the orders-in-original was of the c...
Tag this Judgment!M.A. Exports Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT693Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The importer imported three consignments of used rubber tyres for being retreaded. The goods were claimed clearance in terms of Open General licence. However, the Department did not agree to the clearance under OGL as provided in paragraph 22 of the Import Policy 1992-97 on the ground that import of used tyres requires specific licence is provided in paragraph 24. The Department also found the value declared to be too low. Adjudication proceedings were commenced, resulting in adjudication order passed by the Additional Collector. In that order, the Additional Collector enhanced the value of the consignments, ordered confiscation under clauses (d) and (m) of Section 111 with an option to redeem them on payment of fine. He also imposed a penalty on the appellant.2. On appeal from that orders the Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the question of valuation back to the Additional Collector for redetermination. He however confirmed confiscation of the goods but reduced the redemption fine ...
Tag this Judgment!Sedco Forex International Inc Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2000)(70)ECC334
1. This application is for waiver of penalty of Rs. 5.00 crores imposed on the applicant, and for stay of operation of the order of the Commissioner by which he has ordered confiscation under Clauses (d), (f), (g), (h) and (j) of Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 of the drilling rig Trident II with an option to redeem it on payment of fine of Rs. 15.00 crores, in addition to any duty and charges payment under Sub-section (2) of Section 125 of the Act.2. The applicant and the department were heard on 8.3.2000 and 13.3.2000.3. In the order, the Commissioner finds that the drilling rig had been imported into various designated areas by notification under Section 7(7) of the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zones Act, 1976 to which the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 had been made applicable. He finds that these areas are part of India. He finds that the rig was first imported into India in 1988 without a bill of entry being filed for it as required under S...
Tag this Judgment!Shikhar Yarn Pvt. Ltd. and 2 ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2000)(70)ECC326
1. These appeals are taken up for the disposal with consent of both sides after condoning the delay of 18 days in Appeals C/1137, 1138 & 1139-RV/99-Bom and after waiving deposits.2. In the order impugned, the Commissioner has demanded duty on clearances made to the domestic tariff area by M/s. Shikhar Yarn Pvt.Ltd and M/s. Navpad Textiles Industries Limited, each of whom is a 100% export oriented unit. He has found that the goods in question were cleared without payment of appropriate excise duty. He therefore imposed a penalty on these assessees and on Ketan M. Shah, who was Director of each of these companies.3. In our view the Appeals C/1137, 1138 & 1139-RV/99-Bom filed under the Customs Act, 1962 are not maintainable. These appeals, it is explained, have been filed as a matter of abundant precaution since the Commissioner has confirmed the duty under the provisions of 11A of the Central Excise Act read with Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.4. Duty payable on the goods c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »