Mumbai Court February 2001 Judgments

J.R. Engineering Indus (P) Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of hose, made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) with a layer of glass fibre on it which in turn is covered by stainless steel wire braid.2. Both sides are agree that the classification of PTFE is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in J.R. Engineering Indus. (P) Ltd vs CCE 2000 (121) ELT 690....

C.C. Ahmedabad Vs. Contessa Commercial Co. P.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The goods, the value of which is the subject matter of these appeals, have already been cleared before the proceedings began with regard to their valuation. Hence no purpose would be served by entertaining these applications filed for stay of operation of the Commissioner's order, impugned in these appeals....

Bharat Forge Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(133)ELT638Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Adjournment is requested on the ground that the counsel for the appellant "will not be available." We do not consider such an assertion sufficient to grant adjournment. We have read the memorandum of appeal, and heard the departmental representative.2. The appellant manufacturers steel forgings. Notice was signed to it proposing to add to the assessable value of these forgings the cost of inspection carried out by Lloyds Ltd., and inspection agency. The appellant resisted the proposal claiming that such inspection was in addition to the inspection of goods carried out by it, and, by application of the ratio of the Tribunal's decision in Shree Pipes Ltd vs. CCE 1992 (59) ELT 462, such charges were not includible. The Assistant Collector accepted this contention and dropped the proceedings.3. The department appealed this order. The Commissioner (Appeals) took the view, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary produced before him, he was not in a position to say that the inspect...

M/S. Enercon (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Nhava

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants manufacture wind mills and other energy saving devices. Notification 123/87-Cus. Dated 1.3.1987 as amended provides concessional rate of duty for any machinery used in the production of such goods. The appellants imported two bridge cranes and claimed the benefit of this notification. The Commissioner of Custom, JCH, having denied the benefit of this notification, the present appeal has been filed.2. We have heard Shri Paresh Joshi, advocate for the appellants and Shri B.K. Choubey for the Revenue.3. The very issue stands decided in the case or the same appellants where the goods were the same vide Tribunal's order reproduced in 2000 (122) ELT 788. In this judgment the Tribunal had upheld the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) extending the benefit of this notification to the bridge crane imported by the same appellants. Following the ratio of this judgment, the appeal is allowed....

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Shri Rameshbhai J. Meghnani

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. On hearing Shri AK Jain on the stay application, it appeared that on a short point of law, the appeal itself could be taken up for disposal.This was done. The respondents had requested for disposal on merits.2. The respondents received certain goods of foreign origin by Railway parcel. He admitted ownership. The goods were seized. The Assistant Commissioner confiscated them under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and also imposed a penalty upon the respondent. In his order-in-appeal the Commissioner observe that the goods were neither notified under section 123 of the Act, nor under Chapter IVA thereof.He ruled that in this situation the Customs had to discharge the burden to establish the unlawful importation of the goods. He observed that these goods were routinely imported in baggage and were also available on production of Special Import License which were freely transferable.He observed that such goods wee freely available in the market and that the legal presumption ar...

Baban Genba Kalbhor Vs. Ambarinath Temple Endowment Trusts and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR91; 2001(3)BomCR257; (2001)2BOMLR710

A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. Heard both sides.The issue that arises for consideration in the present writ petition is that whether the Court below was justified in dismissing the application taken out by the petitioner whereby the petitioner wanted to raise an issue that the decree passed by the Court was a nullity. The Court below by the impugned order rejected the petitioner's said plea by relying on the decision of the Apex Court in Vasudev Dhanjibhai Modi v. Rajabhai Abdul Rehman and others,.2. Mr. Sali, appearing for the petitioner, strenuously contended that though the petitioner had not raised the issue of jurisdiction of the Civil Court in the context of provisions of the Bombay Public Trust Act in the appeal that was filed against the decree, however, it was still open to the petitioner to raise the said question when the said decree was sought to be executed against the petitioner. According to him, if the decree passed by the Civil Court is nullity on any count that issue could be...

M/S. Asia Today Ltd. and ors. Vs. M/S. Mudra Communication Ltd. and an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(4)ALLMR111; (2001)3BOMLR273

Dr. D. T. Chandrachud, J.1. In these proceedings under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the First Plaintiff is engaged in the business of conducting Satellite based Broadcasting of Programmes in the Asian region in 40 countries including India. The Second Plaintiff has acted as a Canvassing and Collecting Agent in India of the First Plaintiff. The Second Plaintiff has procured advertisements for the First Plaintiff through Advertising Agencies such as the First Defendant. In the present case, the First Defendant procured advertisements for the First Plaintiff from the Second Defendant which is a Company carrying on business in acrylic and synthetic yarn.2. The Second Plaintiff was approached by the First Defendant on behalf of the Second Defendant for advertising the products of the Second Defendant. The General Terms and Conditions governing the broadcast of advertisements in the TV channels of the First Plaintiff have been laid down by the First Plaintiff and were duly a...

Anwar HussaIn Mohd. Idris Ansari Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)609; 2001BomCR(Cri)694; (2001)3BOMLR338

V. Dabholkar, J. 1. These appeals, appellants - original accused Nos. 3, 2 and 1 respectively, impugn the conviction and sentence imposed upon them by the common judgment delivered in N.D.P.S. Special Case No. 61 of 1994 with 220 of 1994, by the Special Judge (N.D.P.S.) for Greater Bombay.The prosecution arises out of Crime No. 4 of 1994 registered with Narcotic Cell of C.B.C.I.D. Seven accused where charge sheeted by the caseregistered as Special Case No. 61 of 1994 and eight by Special Case No. 220 of 1994.By the impugned judgment delivered on 26.8.1997, the learned trial Judge was pleased to acquit accused Nos. 4 to 8 and convict the three appellants. In fact, all the accused are acquitted as far as charge under Section 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 i.e. criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable under Chapter IX of the said Act. All the three appellants are held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 21 read with Section 8(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 i.e. possessi...

Ksl and Industries Ltd. Vs. Nath Seeds

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(4)ALLMR134

Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. In or around November, 1995, the defendants requested the plaintiffs to grant financial accommodation against the security of shares. The defendants pledged with the plaintiffs collateral security consisting 1,25,000 equity shares of a Company known as Rama Pulp and Papers Ltd., together with the Bank transfer deeds duly signed by the holder of the shares with an irrevocable undertaking that the plaintiffs would be at liberty to dispose of the securities in the market upon the failure of the defendants to repay the amount advanced. In May 1996, the defendants for valuable consideration received, and in discharge of their liability issued a post-dated cheque, dated 19th August, 1996, for the amount of Rs. 26.25 lakhs drawn upon the Union Bank of India, in favour of the plaintiffs. The cheque was dishonoured upon presentation on the ground of insufficiency of funds. The plaintiffs have instituted proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,...

Voltas Limited (Motor Plant) Vs. Voltas Motor Plant Employees Union an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(4)BomCR784; [2001(89)FLR589]; (2001)IILLJ100Bom

V.C. Daga, J. 1. Heard parties. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties. The petitioner-company has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order dated March 24, 2000 passed by the Industrial Court, Thane. The company has been restrained temporarily, amongst others, to act upon notice dated February 15, 2000 whereby the employees were informed of the introduction of Voluntary Retirement Scheme ('VRS' for short).2. The question presented by this petition is: Whether the Industrial Court was justified in granting interim relief against the petitioner-company in the facts and circumstances of the case in hand? FACTUAL MATRIX 3. The factual matrix lies in the narrow compass and it is this:The petitioner is a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing small electric motors used for refrigerator compressors. It is a unit of Voltas Limited manufacturing and marketing motors to a joi...