Mumbai Court July 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.
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Raptakos Brett and Co. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-2000
Reported in: (2001)(136)ELT460Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed by the department against the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) Mumbai made in the impugned Order-in-Appeal whereunder, he had directed reconsideration of the price list and its disapproval or otherwise in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The letter of the Asstt. Collector was to the effect of modifying the price list in accordance with the Collector (Appeals) decision disallowing the discount and it also contained a direction of the provisional assessment under Rule 9B. The ground made in the appeal memorandum is that order passed by the Asstt. Collector is only an administrative nature. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) could not have entertained any appeal. In our view, this contention raised by the department cannot be accepted.2. Section 35 of the Central Excise Act deals with appeals to Commissioner (Appeals). Sub-section (1) of the Act states that any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act by a Centr...
Vikas S/O Narayan Kumbhare Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)ALLMR505; 2001(1)BomCR496
D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Pathrabe, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Shri Charde, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No. 2 to 5 and Smt. S.W. Deshpande, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 6. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties.2. The writ petition is directed against the impugned order dated 7-10-1999 passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee whereby the caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to Halba (Scheduled Tribe) came to be invalidated. Shri Pathrabe, learned Counsel for the petitioner challenged the impugned order on the ground that the Police Vigilance Cell report and the documents collected by the Police Vigilance Cell during such investigation has not been served on the petitioner before passing the impugned order by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The learned Counsel contended that the petitioner has not received either the Police Vigilance Cell report nor the documents collected by the Vigilance Cell during the investigation of...
Sharp Industries Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-2000
Reported in: (2000)LC577Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of product manufactured by the appellant. This consists of aluminium foil, the thickness of which does not exceed .02mm and covered by one side polyester film and on the other polyethylene. The goods are cleared after printing of formed into containers, kept open one side and closed the other three sides by the appellant. The appellant had claimed classification of these foils and pouches under chapter 76 (foils under heading 76.07 and of the pouches under 76.12). The department was of the view that they are classifiable under heading 3920.38 and the pouches under heading 3920.90. Following the issue of show-cause notice and subsequent proceedings, the Commissioner's order confirmed the classification proposed. He also in addition imposed a penalty equal to the duty demanded of Rs. 3,38,90,754/- under section 11 AC and recovery of interest under section 11 A. Heading 76.07 reads as follows. "Aluminium foil (whether...
Commissioner of Customs Vs. J.M. Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT489Tri(Mum.)bai
1. By our order dated 12.05.2000 on the stay petition C/2312/99 we had warned the appellant that the Commissioner was cautioned that failure to rectify the appeal memorandum would result in dismissal of the appeal. This order was dictated in the presence of the DR. This was communicated to the Jt. CDR. Shri Patwari says that the stay order is not available in the file. The verification provided for the appeal should always come at the end of the appeal. Here it has not happened like that. It comes somewhere in the middle of the appeal. The verification is not an empty formality. The person who files the appeal i.e. the appellant should state that what is stated in the brief facts as well as in the grounds of appeal should be declared to be true. In case it is found not to be true, certain legal consequences may arise.Therefore, that is why the verification should come at the last in the appeal memorandum. Since the DR was present in the court when the order was dictated, he cannot tak...
Vithal Ganpat Paranekar and anr. Vs. Bijubai Gangaram Malpute
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR460; (2001)4BOMLR588
A.M. Khanwilkar. J. 1. This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune dated 10th February, 1987 in TEN B4/82 and TEN B5/82. 2. The petitioner No. 1 claims to have purchased the suit lands from the wife of the original owner (petitioner No. 2 herein) in the year 1977. The suit lands are situated at Survey No. 178/2, at Village Nandgaon, Taluka Mulshi, having area of 38 Are, which were originally owned by Shri Chindu Dhondu Fale, predecessor of the petitioner No. 2. The suit land was originally numbered as 178/5. The land was in possession of deceased Shankar Savala Fale, the predecessor of the respondents herein, as tenant from the year 1953 to 1959. It appears that Section 32-G proceedings were initiated, when the original tenant deceased Shankar Savala Fale made a statement that he was not willing to purchase the suit land. Pursuant to the said statement recorded by the autho...
ing Bank N.V. Vs. Enkay Texofood Industries Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR370; 2000(4)BomCR747
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J. 1. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioners stating that the undertaking given by the respondent No. 3 on behalf of the respondent No. 2 has not been complied with. An order in terms of the consent terms was passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 4th August, 1999. In Clause 11(a) of the consent terms, it was provided as follows:11(a). The appellants and the respondents agree and undertake to this Hon'ble Court to obtain a consent decree in terms of these consent terms in the suit/proceeding before the Appropriate Forum. 2. In spite of the aforesaid undertaking, the consent terms have not been filed in the appropriate forum. Thus, there is no decree in terms of the consent terms in favour of the petitioners. Repeatedly, the respondents were informed to execute the consent terms. On 11th January, 2000, the Counsel for the petitioners requested the respondents to sign the consent terms. A reminder was sent on 20th January, 2000. Thereafter anoth...
Karim Abdul Rehman Shaikh Vs. Shehnaz Karim Shaikh and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)ALLMR258; 2000(5)BomCR758; 2000CriLJ3560; II(2000)DMC634
ORDERSmt. Ranjana Desai, J.1. In this reference we are called upon to decide certain issues, which are very vital to Muslim women. The learned Single Judge of this Court, Justice Bhairavia came to a conclusion that the decision of this Court in Allabuksh Karim Shaikh v. Noorjahan Allabuksh Shaikh and another : (1994)96BOMLR761 is contrary to the object and spirit of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 ('Muslim Women Act' for short). The learned Single Judge was of the view that, and we quote his words: 'in the interest of fair justice, this matter requires to be referred to Full Bench for decision.' He has stated that having gone through the various authorities, he had noticed that the consistent view of the various courts after coming into force of the Muslim Women Act was that, the Muslim Woman is entitled to claim post iddat period maintenance under section 4 of the Muslim Women Act and not under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('the Code' for sho...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Switch N Control Gears
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2000
Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT477Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondent to this appeal was registered with the proper authority of the State Government as a small-scale industries on a provisional basis and the registration will be renewed on provisional basis. The last renewal was valid up to 4-6-1993 (sic). In the classification list filed on 1-4-1993, the respondent sought, and was granted the benefit of Notification 1/93. It availed of the benefit for the financial year 1993-94.2. Notice was issued to it proposing to disallow the benefit of the notification on the ground that the small-scale registration was not renewed after 6-4-1993 and therefore did not satisfy the condition in the notification that it must be shown registered after this date. The Assistant Collector, after considering the cause shown and hearing the assessee, denied the benefit of the notification and approved the classification list without such benefit. The result was that while the assessee was entitled to clearance in terms of the notification for the value o...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ivp Limited
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2000
Reported in: (2000)(121)ELT545Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. IVP Limited, the respondent to this appeal, had filed a classification list No. 1 of 1994 with effect from 1-3-1994 showing the classification of the product as "vanaspati" manufactured by it under heading 1504.00 of the tariff indicating the rate of duty and the notification. The classification list was approved by the jurisdictional Superintendent.2. The Commissioner of Central Excise questioned this approval by authorising under Section 35E(2) of the Act filing of an application before the Commissioner (Appeals). The application sought classification of the product under heading 1508 of the tariff.3. The Commissioner (Appeals) declined to entertain this application.He said that the Superintendent of Central Excise in approving the classification has not functioned as an adjudicating authority and therefore the provisions of Sub-section (2) of section 35B of the Act would not be applicable. Rule 173B designated the Assistant Commissioner, the proper authority for approving c...
Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Laxmi Prints
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT736Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In none of these applications filed by the department has any ground for seeking stay of the operation of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order. We have therefore no recourse but to dismiss these applications as totally lacking in substance.2. We have in the past dismissed number of stay applications of Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat for identical ground. We do not think anybody's interest is served by these applications which have no basis whatsoever. It only wastes time of all concerned. If the department is serious about pursuing stay of operation of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order proper grounds must be set out, if it is not it should not have filed these applications.3. We would like to endorse a copy of this order to the Chief Commissioner having jurisdiction over this Commissioner for appropriate action....
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »