Mumbai Court April 2001 Judgments

M.X. Advertising Vs. Surya Hot-sip Tea Co. (P.) Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(2)ALLMR125; (2002)1BOMLR622; [2003]115CompCas555(Bom)

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The company petition has been filed in pursuance of a claim by the petitioner in the amount of Rs. 6,66,701 which has remained to be due and outstanding despite a statutory notice dated 8-3-2000, to which there was no reply by the respondent. The petitioner is an advertising agency which had carried out certain work in connection with advertising for a brand of tea known as 'Hot Sip' marketed by the respondent. In the company petition reliance has been placed upon the bills which have been raised by the petitioner upon the respondent from time to time and it has been stated on behalf of the respondent by the learned counsel that inspection of the invoices was given to the respondent before the reply to the company petition was filed. In the company petition it has been stated that the respondent issued a cheque on 30-12-1999 in favour of the petitioner drawn on Janakalyan Sahakari Bank Ltd. which was dishonoured upon presentation to the bank on the ground that it...

Co-operative Bank Employees Union Vs. New India Co-operative Bank Ltd. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)IILLJ657Bom

ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1. Rule. 2. By consent the petition is heard and disposed of at this stage itself as no useful purpose would be served by keeping it for final hearing. I have done so, as a question of general demands of a large number of employees is involved. 3. The petitioner is registered under the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 and is also a registered Trade Union under the provisions of the BIR Act, 1946 as a representative and approved Union for the co-operative banking industry in the local area of Greater Bombay. The Respondent No. 1 is a Co-operative Bank duly incorporated under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Petitioners are. aggrieved by an order dated August 22, 2000 passed by the Commissioner of Labour, refusing to extend the period of conciliation proceeding and refusing to grant Failure Certificate under Section 86(cc) of the Act. 4. To appreciate the point of law the following few facts are required to be stated. 5. ...

Maria Thomas Gonsalvies Vs. Concept Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001(90)FLR412]; (2002)IVLLJ906Bom

ORDERR.J. Kochar,1. Both the petitioners in their Petitions respectively are aggrieved by the award passed by the Labour Court in Reference (IDA) No. 218 of 1997 referred by the State of Maharashtra for adjudication of the Industrial Dispute raised by the workman challenging the order of termination dated August 27, 1986 and demanding reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service.2. Both the parties filed their pleadings and adduced their respective documentary and oral evidence before the Labour Court. The Labour Court framed two issues on the basis of the pleading that (1) whether the second party is a workman as contemplated under Industrial Disputes Act? and (2) whether her services were illegally terminated? On the first issue the Labour Court recorded affirmative finding that the second party was a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The employer company has challenged this finding of the Labour Court in the above petition. On the second issue the Labo...

Shri D.K. Agriwalla, Shri M.V. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. 1. M/s. German Remedies Limited (hereinafter called as M/s. GRL) manufacture Bulk Drugs and Pharmaceutical Formulations. The bulk drugs are made at Patalganga and the formulations are made at Goa. Credit of the duty paid at Patalganga is taken as Modvat Credit by the Goa unit.The movements of bulk drugs from one unit to another did not involve any sale. The declaration as required under Rule 173 of the Central Excise Rules 1944 were filed by the manufacturer from time to time.M/s. GRL were also filing certain returns to the Drug Control Authorities in terms of the relevant Act. The officers of the Directorate of Anti Evasion compared the valuation of the Bulk Drugs as disclosed to the Central Excise Authorities and to the Drug Control Authorities. Where the later declarations were based on the details of various items of costing, the valuation for the Central Excise was merely described as "Selling Price" fixed by the company. The prima facie view of the officers was that the value...

Star Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(78)ECC218

1. For reasons that will be apparent, the appeal is taken up for disposal, at the request of the counsel for the appellant and with the concurrence of the departmental representative, after waiving deposit.2. Star Industries, the appellant before us, has two factories one at Thane and another at Daman. It manufactured at Thane plain unprinted poly vinyl chloride sheets. It cleared major quantity on payment of duty at Daman for printing, cutting, embossing and other process. It sends the remaining part of the production without payment of duty under rule 57F(3) again to Daman for the same purposes.3. Investigations by the department in 1996 led to the recovery of some documents from the premises of the appellant and also from Om Prakash Saraogi, who, it is stated was connected with the chartered accountant who audited the accounts of the appellant. The department concluded these document that appellant had received from its buyers consideration over and above the price paid by them for...

Manjarati Chemicals Vs. Commissioner of Customs

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 of Customs has held that the benefit of exemption in notification 203/92 would not be available to the appellants before us for the goods imported by it, for the reason that one of the conditions in the notification, that modvat credit should not have been availed of in the manufacture of exported goods had been contravened.3. The contention of Mr. Upadhye, senior of the appellant appearing before us is that the manufacturer availed of the benefit not of notification 203/92 but of notification 204/92, in which there is no such condition. There is prima facie evidence in support of this claim form the advance licence, which indicate the limiting factors to both quantity and value (instead of value alone as would be the case if it were a value based licence) and the DEEC book, which specifies notification 204/92. However the bill of entry und...

J.C.T. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Airport

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(76)ECC504

2. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has confirmed the demand for duty issued to the appellant on the ground that the benefit of Notification 203/92 has been wrongly availed of. The Commissioner finds that modvat credit had been availed of in the manufacture of the exported goods, thus contravening the conditions contained in Clause (v)(b) of the notification.3. We have read the memorandum of appeal. The first contention in the appeal is that the credit referred to in paragraph 5 of the notification refers to credit taken of the additional duty of Customs paid on the imported goods used in the manufacture of the export product, and would apply to credit of excise duty. We do not find this proposition acceptable. The condition refers to "input stage credit" under Rule 56A or Rule 57A. Going by the plain meaning of these words, both kind of credits i.e. the Central Excise duty as well as the additional duty of Customs would be covered. It would not be correct to say ...

Century Textiles and Industries Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)(131)ELT671Tri(Mum.)bai

1. We are concerned in each of these appeals with the inclusion in the assessable value of the yarn manufactured by each of the appellants of the cost of sizing that yarn. Appeals 4009 to 4014 are by Century Textiles & Industries Ltd. and others by Shyamprakash Spinning Mills Ltd. 2. Century Textiles spins cotton yarn. It has filed appeals against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the orders of the Assistant Commissioner that in computing the value of yarn captively consumed in weaving fabrics, it is the value of the sized yarn that has to be considered, and not the value of the yarn before sizing. The clearances took place between May 1995 and February 1996.3. It is necessary to consider the history of judicial decisions relating to this aspect. The first of the decisions that we are concerned with is that of the Delhi High Court in J.K. Spinning & Weaving Mills - 1983 (12) E.L.T. 239. One of the points before the Delhi High Court was whether levy of duty co...

M/S. Rahul Fine Products Vs. C.C. Excise, Mumbai-vii

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The applicant is absent and unrepresented. There is no evidence of compliance with the terms of the Tribunal's stay order passed on 1.12.2000....

M.P. Sharma, Bindal Textile Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. These appeals, one by Bindal Textile Mills and other by M.P. Sharma, director at the relevant time of the company, are against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai III. In that order, the Commissioner adjudicated upon two notices. The first notice dated 8.12.89 demands duty of Rs. 19,128/- payable on a consignment of fabric processed by the assessee, which the officers of the department seized.The notice alleged that the goods were liable to duty at the higher of the two rates specified in notification 254/87. The notification provides a higher rate for fabric containing a 70% of more of polyester and another rate for others. Confiscation of the fabric and truck carrying them and penalty on various persons was proposed. The second notice dated 3.2.93 seeks to recover, by invoking the extended period contained in the proviso under sub-section (1) of section 11A of the Act, duty allegedly short paid on the fabrics, which were liable to duty at the higher rate, clea...