Mumbai Court March 2001 Judgments

Shankarlal Khimji Patel and anr. Vs. the Municipal Corporation of Grea ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(4)BomCR605; (2001)4BOMLR441; 2001(4)MhLj21

D.B. Bhosale, J. 1. The petitioners are seeking directions to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, to handover the vacant and peaceful possession, free from all encumbrances of Final Plot No. 256 under the Town Planning Scheme, Ghatkopar No. III, to the petitioners after removing all unauthorised structures thereon and the unauthorised occupants namely the respondent Nos. 3 to 6, therefrom by invoking the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The Respondent No. 1 is a statutory body constituted and incorporated under the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, III of 1888 (hereinafter 'Corporation Act' for short). Respondent No. 2 is the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, appointed by the State Government and is an administrative head of respondent No. 1. The Respondent Nos. 3 to 6 are the occupants of the chawl standing on the land bearing Survey No. 226. Hissa No. 2 and original Plot No. 181, which forms part of Filial Plot No. 236 of Ghatkopar Town Pl...

Tata Consulting Engineers and Associates' Staff Union Vs. Tata Sons Lt ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(4)BomCR565; [2001(90)FLR1066]; (2002)IVLLJ899Bom

ORDERR.J. Kochar, J. 1. The petitioner, a break away fraction of the parent All India Union - Tata Consultancy Employees Union has been since then, i.e., 1986, frantically trying to establish itself in the undertaking of the Respondent Company at Mumbai. Now it is the question of its survival itself as the benefits of the last settlement of 1999 between the parent Union (recognised under the 1984 - Settlement by the Respondent Company (and not under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971), and the Company was accepted 'under protest' by all the 23 members. Initially this membership was claimed to be 200 in the year 1986. The erosion in the membership is not very much in dispute. Split and disunity has been the curse to the Trade Union movement in this Country. For the reasons best known to the leaders of the Petitioner Union, with a small following amongst the categories of draughtsmen, clerks, peons etc. the Petitioner Union submitted a separate charter of demands dated April 12, 1985 to the Respo...

Lipi Boilers Private Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(133)ELT26(Bom)

R.G. Deshpande, J.1. Petitioner, a Private Limited Company, is doing the business through its factory at E-5, M.I.D.C. Industrial Area, Chikalthana, Aurangabad. It deals in boilers and boiler parts falling under Chapter sub-headings 8402 and 8404 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short the Act of 1985). Needless to mention, the petitioner holds a valid licence as required under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act for the purposes of brevity).2. By Notification bearing No. 120/81-C.E., dated 15-5-1981, which was amended by Notification No. 209/82-C.E., dated 9-8-1982 and a subsequent Notification No. 80/86-CE., dated 10-2-1986, necessary exemption from the whole of the excise duty leviable on the goods as specified in the table to the said notifications was granted. Prior to the abovesaid notifications, no doubt, the items included in the notification happened to be covered in tariff Item No. 68 (NES) of the First Schedule to the Act of 1985. ...

Mahesh Bhatt Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)87TTJ(Mumbai)734

ORDERD. Maawohan, J.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Assistant Commissioner, Central Circle-23, Mumbai.2. The facts in short are that the assessee is a leading director of the Hindi films. On 18-12-1996, a search and seizure operation was conducted at the residence of the assessee wherefrom certain loose papers and incriminating documents were found and they were seized. The search which began on 17th December, continued upto 18th and again after the time-gap of 5 days, Panchanama was recorded on 24-12-1996. On 2-1-1997, another authorisation was issued to search a locker bearing No. A.26 in Hongkong and Shanghai Bank , Tardeo Branch, Mumbai. The said locker stood in the names of Smt. Soni Rajdan and Shri Mahesh Bhatt. Another Panchanama was drawn on 22-1-1997.3. Consequent to the search action, the assessing officer proceeded to make an assessment for the block period, i.e., 1-4-1986 to 18-12-1996, and issued a notice under section 158BC of the...

Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Joint Cit

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)74TTJ(Mumbai)624

ORDERPradeep Parikh, A.M.All these five appeals by the assessee arise out of five separate orders of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), dated 28-11-1995, 24-7-1996, 30-7-1997, 28-7-1998, and 29-10-1999, for assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97, respectively. Approval of the committee on disputes permitting the assessee to pursue the appeals before the Tribunal is placed on record for the assessment years in question. Since the point of dispute is common in all the appeals, they are being disposed of by this combined order for the sake of convenience.2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are quite narrative and argumentative which is contrary to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Rules. However, the common issue is that the assessee in all these appeals is aggrieved against inclusion of interest on debentures, bonds and Government securities in the total amount of interest on loans and advances and subjecting it to interest-tax under the Interest Tax Act...

Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai Vs. M/S. Hindustan Gas Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(137)ELT849Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The copies of the authorisation given by the Commissioner were filed in photostat format.On 19.1.2001 notice was sent directing production of the original authorisation. Subsequently another notice was also issued. In response, the Commissioner of Customs (E.P.) filed a fresh authorisation dated 14.2.2001.2. What was required was filing of the original copy of the authorisation earlier made by the Commissioner, dated 24.11.2000. the fresh authorisation dated 14.2.2001 cannot empower an appeal to be filed on 28.11.2000. The appeal filed on 28.11.2000 was defective. The defect has not been cured by the Commissioner. We have found in number of cases that the Revenue does not take sufficient care in filing of the appeals. In a number of cases even repeated reminders and notices cautioning about the possible dismissal are not replied. The corrective action wherever undertaken is reluctant and lackadaisical. It is not kept in mind by the Revenue th...

Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Vs. Commissioner of Customer, Mumbai

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal is taken up for disposal with consent of both sides, after waiving deposit.2. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner has held that modvat credit was availed of dyed blankets made of shoddy wool which were exported by Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills, Amritsar and it was therefore not entitled to the benefit of notification 203/92 for the goods imported by it.3. The counsel for the appellant contends that evidence had been cited before the Commissioner by its letter dated 7.6.1999 that modvat credit had not been availed. It had enclosed in its reply dated 7.6.1999 to the show cause notice a certificate of the jurisdictional Central Excise Superintendent stating that modvat credit had not been availed on woollen rags, scoured wool and wool waste used in the manufacture of dyed shoddy woollen blankets which were exported. He also refers to a letter dated 25.9.2000 which is acknowledged by the department.4. The Commissioner's conclusion that the appellant did ...

Shri M.P. Abraham, M/S. Sunita Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These seven applications relate to seven appeals filed against two orders-in-original where the assessees are the same and the issues are also the same. In case of the one order-in-original leading to four appeals, the assessees sought to achieve satisfaction under the KVSS Rules, 1998 and deposit an amount of Rs.9,06,877/-. The designated authority is yet to issue the indemnity order. The total revenue involved in these two sets of appeals is Rs.25,77,985/-. The factory and the assets of the applicants have been taken over by the Maharashtra State Financial Corporation vide panchnama dated 20.7.2000.The accumulated losses as on 31.3.2000 were Rs.4,15,00,970.45/- and further outstanding liabilities of Rs.2.4 crores. In this situation, we direct that in the event of non-acceptance of statement under KVSS, the Commissioner shall retain the amount already paid by the assessees as a pre-deposit towards pursuance of this appeal. The condition of pre-deposit of the remainder duty and als...

Kellogs India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(78)ECC209

1. The appeal is taken up for disposal, after waiving deposit of the duty demanded with the consent of both sides.2. The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of a product manufactured by Kellogs (India) Ltd., the appellant before us described as Chocos. The product, we are told, is essentially wheat flakes coated with cocoa and sugar. The manufacturer had claimed classification of this product under heading 19.04 of the tariff. This heading read thus: "Prepared foods obtained by the swelling or roasting of cereals or cereal products (for example, corn flakes); cereals (other than maize (corn), in grain form or int he form of flakes or other worked grains (except flour and meal), precooked, or otherwise prepared, not elsewhere specified or included".3. Note 2 to Chapter 19 proves that heading 19.04 does not cover preparations containing more than 6% by weight of cocoa calculated on a totally defatted basis or coated with chocolate or other food preparations c...

M/S. Jyoti Embroidery P.Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. We have heard Shri K.V. Sahasrabudhe, appearing with Shri P.S.Kalve, consultants for the applicants and Shri B.K. Choubey for the Revenue.2. The applicants are manufacturers of embroidery operating under the compounded levy scheme. The duty liability is fixed in terms of rule Z(i) and notification 33/95 issued thereunder which prescribes rate of Rs.30/- per meter length of the machine per shift. The meter length was defined in sub-rule (6) as follows:- " "Metre length" in relation to machine, means the distance between the points provided for the first and the last needles of the rollers (emphasis added) of such machines." 3. This definition was amended vide the provisions of the Finance Bill, 1998. Thereafter the sub-clause read as under:- " "Metre length" in relation to machine, means the distance between the points provided for the first needle and the last needle of only one roller of such machine." 4. The applicants had machines in which there were sets of rollers.Each vertica...