Mumbai Court September 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.
Bharat Education Society's Junior College of Commerce and Economics an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)BomCR367; [2001(88)FLR226]
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The respondent was employed as an Assistant Teacher in a Junior College which is conducted by the petitioners. The respondent had worked as an Assistant Teacher between April, 1989 and May, 1991. His services were terminated in May, 1991. On 15-7-1991, an appeal filed by the respondent came to be allowed by the School Tribunal which directed that the respondent be reinstated in service with continuity of service and full back wages. After the respondent was reinstated in compliance with the order passed by the School Tribunal, his status was altered from that of a full time employee to a teacher who would be engaged only on a clock-hour basis. The management of the petitioners had adopted the position that due to a reduction in the number of classes being conducted in the Junior College the respondent was placed as an employee on a clock-hour basis.2. On 6-9-1991 and on 22-9-1991, the Deputy Director of Education directed the management to refrain from unilateral...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Jaidev Alloys Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT389Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s. Jaidev Alloys Ltd., Veraval, respondent to this appeal, had taken modvat credit on the basis of the gate passes which were issued by the manufacturer, who in turn endorsed them to the respondent.Notice was issued to it proposing denial of the credit on the ground that there was no endorsement in proper form and did not show whether the entire consignment was in fact transferred or not. The assessee replied to the notice raising various contentions. The Assistant Collector did not accept these contentions. He found that the stamp showing that the goods were sold and transferred to the assessee had been bought by the assessee itself (i.e. Jaidev Alloys Ltd.) and therefore concluded that the goods were not in fact properly endorsed by the consignee or the subsequent purchaser of the goods. He also asked the assessee to produce documents under which the goods were received. This could not be produced. He therefore found that the documents produced by the assessee was fraudulent an...
Diamond and Gem Development Vs. Commr. of Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT811Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Although the stay application is listed today, we have, with the consent of the departmental representative, acceded to the request made by the advocate of the appellant to take up the appeal and dispose of it.2. The appellant imported a consignment of diamonds. These were declared in the bill of entry as "rough diamonds non-industrial non-mounted unset unworked (excluding industrial diamonds)" and the benefit of notification 20/Cus/99 was claimed. This notification exempts from duty rough diamonds.3. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has declined to consider these goods as rough diamonds. We are not required to go into the correctness or otherwise of the order denying the benefit of the notification for the reason that the advocate for the appellant says that it wishes to re-export the diamonds on the ground that if the benefit of the notification is denied, the import of these diamonds become uneconomic. He therefore requests for re-export. He contends that th...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Sujata Data Products
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT72Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondent to this appeal filed a classification list effective from 1st March, 1993 which was approved by the Superintendent. The department appealed to Commissioner (Appeals) against the approval granted to classification of some of the products seeking their classification elsewhere in the tariff. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that in terms of the authority conferred on the jurisdictional Superintendent with regard to the approval of the classification he could not be considered to be an adjudicating authority. He therefore held that the application filed under Section 35E(2) was not maintainable and dismissed it. Hence this appeal by the department.2. After hearing both sides we are unable to interfere with the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals). He noted that the 'proper officer' for approving the classification list is the Assistant Collector (now Assistant Commissioner). These powers had been delegated to the Superintendent in specific cases. The Superintendent cou...
Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-2000
Reported in: (2000)(122)ELT371Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of polypropylene ropes of various colours. In order to impart the required colour to these ropes, master batch, a quantity of polypropylene containing concentration of the colour to be imparted, is required. The appellant got such master batches manufactured from the job worker to whom it supplied the plastic and pigments and other necessary materials. The appellant followed the procedures prescribed under Sub-rule (2) of rule 57F. The master batches were therefore sent by the manufacturer, the job worker to the appellant without payment of duty. From 1-3-1992, strips and tapes of polypropylene out of which the appellant manufactured its ropes were exempted from duty if used captively in the manufacture of ropes. The appellant therefore stopped paying duty on the polypropylene and discontinued the Modvat procedure. However, the challans under which the raw materials, including the polypropylene, for manufacturing master batches were sent...
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-2000
Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT864Tri(Mum.)bai
1. No deposit of duty or penalty is required to be made. The application is for stay of operation of the Commissioner's order.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented and requests decision on the stay application on merits.3. The appeal is against the order of the Assistant Commissioner telling the appellant that he is directed to inform it, that the permission earlier granted to it to keep duty paid goods within the factory premises has been withdrawn.4. The appeal proceeds on the footing that the withdrawal is ordered by the Commissioner. It is not possible, on reading the letter which is appealed against, to come to this conclusion. There is not the slightest indication that the Assistant Commissioner merely communicated the decision of the Commissioner. It does appear that some other officers directed him, since he says that he was directed to inform the appellant of the withdrawal. That direction perhaps may have been that of the Deputy Commissioner. In any event, it is not p...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›