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.
Vijayata Audio World Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT204Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The applications are for waiver of deposit of the following amounts demanded from each of the applicants : (a) Vijayata Audio World - Rs. 25,46,4887- duty and equal amount of penalty under Section 11 AC of the Act.2. M/s. Vijayata Audio World manufactured recorded video cassettes out of masters supplied by Venus Records and Tapes Pvt. Ltd. and Magnasound (India) Limited. Recording was on job-work, the audio cassettes on which the recording was done being supplied by the principals. In the impugned order, the Commissioner finds that in determining the cost of manufacture of job-work, the cost of the master tapes (which were copies by the job-workers) ought to have been included. Since the cost of these masters was not available to the department, not having been disclosed by the job-worker, he has held that the duty payable would be on the basis of the price at which the customers sell the tapes less various deductions relating to expenses of sale.3. After hearing the advocate and t...
Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT77Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue of four noticees the department proposed confiscation of cotton fabrics which it alleged had been manufactured by the appellant by wrongly claiming the benefit of Notification 32/56. The notices relied for the proposed action on the books of accounts seized from the various persons mentioned in the annexure 1A to it. In the order impugned in the appeal, confiscating the goods and imposing penalty on the appellant, the Commissioner has referred to this "to various entries made in various account books". There is no other reference in his finding to the books of accounts. He has devoted 75 pages to analyse the statement of various persons which he finds, proves the case against the appellant.2. It is obvious that these statements could not be relied upon by the Commissioner. They were not even referred to in the show cause notices or brought to the notice of the appellant in any manner before the issue of the order. The order relies entirely on the material which was not ma...
Diamond Metal Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: (2000)(72)ECC627
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 38.69 lakhs approx.(Appeals), confirmed demand for duty issued to the assessee, ordered confiscation of the finished excisable goods with an option to redeem them on payment of duty and imposed penalty on the assessee.3. Representative of the appellant says that duty has already been paid on the goods, after their seizure when they were permitted to be released. He contends that by application of the ratio of the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Pioneer Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty for the duty leviable under Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 has to be held invalid.4. The consequence of allowing the department's appeal thus would be that duty would have been payable on the goods and by virtue of the Delhi High Court judgment, penalty and confiscation would have to be set aside. The same result in fact has been arrived at....
Dempo Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT260Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 21.39 lakhs and penalty of equivalent amount. The applicant cleared to a bonded warehouse steel engine and other equipmerits, and with the permission from the department manufactured barge which it cleared by presenting a bill of entry for home consumption. The duty has been demanded and penalty imposed on an order of the Commissioner, subsequent to the clearance that excise duty was payable on the barge for the reason that it was manufactured.2. It appears to us prima facie that since the barge was manufactured in India, it is liable to excise duty. On limitation, however, the applicant has a very good case. Three notifications issued between 1959 and 1987 exempted ocean-going vessel if manufactured in and cleared from a custom bonded warehouse, from customs duty. The customs department itself proceeded against the applicant for recovery of additional duty of customs, before dropping the proceedings on the ground that in the ...
Asaram Kishanrao Bhaware Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: (2001)1BOMLR379; 2000(4)MhLj695
B. B. Vagyani. J.1. Heard learned Advocate Shri Prashant Deshmukh for the petitioner and learned APP Shri M. S. Indani for respondent State.2. The petitioner herein was prosecuted for having committed offence punishable under section 409 of Indian Penal Code. Petitioner, at the relevant time, i.e. between 19.8.1982 to 4.9.1984 was Headmaster of Central Primary School at Panranjangaon. The said primary school was under the management of Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad. At the material time the petitioner received consolidated salary cheque on 4th of December, 1982, from Panchayat Samiti, Paithan. The salary was for the month of November, 1982, to be paid in the month of December, 1982. It is prosecution case that accused misappropriated certain amount. Similarly, he did not pay the salary of Rs. 660.20 to prosecution witness Shaikh Tajoddin. In the monthly pay bill of November, 1982, Ex. 20, there was no signature of co-teacher Shaikh Tajoddin on the revenue stamp. Shaikh Tajoddin asked accu...
Joaquim D'Costa and Ors. Vs. Anthony D'Souza alias Joseph Anthony Igna ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Bom298; 2001(2)BomCR247; 2001(1)MhLj694
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J. 1. Rule. By consent heard forthwith.2. A short question which is involved in this petition is as to whether a legal heir of a mundkar is entitled to register as a mundkar under Section 29(4) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975 (hereinafter called 'the Act') without fixed habitation in the mundkarial house. The petitioners claim to be the legal heirs of one Rosy D'Costa. Rosy D'Costa is the nice one Ana Francisca Mascarenhas, who was residing in the mundkarial house with fixed habitation. On the death of the Ana Francisca Mascarenhas, her niece said Rozy D'Costa filed an application for registration as mundkar under Section 29(4) of the Act.3. The case of said Rosy D'Costa was that her aunt Ana Francisca Mascarenhas died issueless and she was staying with her and she gave birth to her children in Goa and, therefore, she is entitled to mundkarial right which Ana Mascarenhas was enjoying. The Joint mamlatdar of Bardez allowe...
Babasaheb Dnyanoba Ritpure and ors. Vs. Dagdu S/O Gina Ritpure and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR146; 2001(3)BomCR18
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Since a common question of law and facts arise in both these petitions, they were heard and are being disposed of together by this common judgment.2. In Writ Petition No. 920/1984, the order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal is challenged by the legal representatives of the original tenant, on the ground that the confirmation of ownership of land, under section 38-E of the Hyderabad Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (hereinafter called as 'the said Act'), in favour of co-tenant Dagadu, is contrary to the material on record, whereas in Writ Petition No. 1257/1988, the same order of the Tribunal is challenged as far as it relates to rejection of the revision application filed by the petitioners on the ground of same being barred by limitation.3. Few facts which are relevant for the decision in both the matters are that the properties bearing Survey Nos. 152 and 153 situated in the village of Mangrul (Taluka : Kallam, District : Osmanabad) were cultivated ...
Narayan S/O Ganpati Warambhe Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)103; 2001CriLJ527
R.K. Batta, J.1. Heard, Rule. With the consent of the learned advocate for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. rule in writ petition No. 235/2000. is made returnable forthwith and with their consent the matter is heard forthwith along with the writ petitions Nos. 75/00 and 273/00. In these writ petitions common questions arise for consideration and as such it is proposed to dispose of the same by common judgment.In Criminal Writ Petition No. 75/2000, the petitioner was charge-sheeted for offences under Sections 7, 13(1)(D) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. In respect of an incident of acceptance of bribe of Rs. 500/- on 11-12-1990. The charge-sheet was filed on 24-12-91 and it was registered as a Special Criminal Case No. 30/91. The charge was framed on 18-1-1994. The matter was fixed for prosecution evidence for the first time on 8-7-1999. On 12-7-1999 the application was filed by the petitioner for closure of the prosecution case. This application was rejected by...
Pulgaon Cotton Mills Ltd. and ors. Vs. Maharashtra Pollution Control B ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)95; 2001CriLJ610
S.S. Parkar, J.1. By this application the applicants have challenged the order dated 10-5-1994 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pulgaon, framing the charges under Sections 25 and 26 read with Section 44 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act'), confirmed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha, in Criminal Application No. 75/94 by the Judgment and the Order dated 7-9-1995.2. Applicant No. 1 is a unit of the Maharashtra State Textile Corporation, Bombay (for short 'the Corporation'), which is a Government of Maharashtra undertaking. Applicant No. 2 is the Chairman of the said Corporation. Applicant No. 3 is the General Manager and applicant No. 4 is the Factory Manager of applicant No. 1 Pulgaon Cotton Mills (for short the 'Mill').3. A private complaint was filed by respondent No. 1 Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (for short 'the Board'), in the Court of the JMFC, Pulgaon, being Criminal Case No. 992/90 against the applic...
Sintex Industries Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex., and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-21-2000
Reported in: (2000)(72)ECC611
1. Among the goods that M/s. Sinter Industries Ltd., (formerly known as Sinter Plast Containers) manufactures are doors, windows and their frames of plastic. It had filed classification lists in which it claimed classification of these goods under heading 3925.20. In these classification lists, apart from complete doors, windows, the assessee had indicated that it proposed to clear doors and windows "KDC" condition (completely knocked down condition). Six such classification lists were approved. Subsequent to such approval, the department issued notice dated 28-5-1994. The notice demanded, mainly, duty on the ground that doors, windows and their frames cleared in completely knocked down condition were not classifiable under heading 3925.20 which has been claimed and approved but under heading 3525.99. The notice also proposed recovery on two other counts. The first was that the expenses incurred by dealers of the assessee on advertisement of the products manufactured by it should from...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »