Mumbai Court August 2001 Judgments

Mohd. Aslam Abdul Sattar Shaikh Vs. M.N. Singh, Commissioner of Police ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)4BOMLR506

Pratibha Upasani, J.1. The Petitioner, who claims to be the cousin brother of the detenu Mohd. Aslam Abdul Sattar Shaikh has, through this Criminal Writ Petition, impugned order dated 16th March. 2001 passed by Respondent No. 1 M. N. Singh, Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, under Section 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers. Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (Amendment 1996), whereby, the said detenu Mohd. Aslam Abdul Sattar Shaikh came to be detained and at present, he is lodged in Nasik Road Prison.2. The detention order along with the grounds of detention which are also dated 16th March, 2001 was served on the same day and their true copies are annexed as Annexure A and Annexure B respectively to this Petition.3. The grounds of detention would reveal that it is based on one C.R. namely C.R. No. 406 of 2000 dated 15th November, 2000 under Sections 302, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 25 o...

Krishi Utpanna Bazar Samiti, Aurangabad Vs. State of Maharashtra and o ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(1)ALLMR560; 2001(4)BomCR609; (2002)1BOMLR531; 2002(1)MhLj45

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, raises an important question of law regarding the rights of the beneficiary of land under acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (L. A. Act, for short) when the State Government invokes its powers under Section 48(1) of the L. A. Act.FACTUAL MATRIX 2. The petitioner market committee came to be established at Aurangabad initially in the year 1934 under the Hyderabad Markets Act as applicable to the erstwhile Hyderabad State and with the enactment of the Maharashtra Agricultural Crops Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 (for short, the said Act) came to be known as a Market Committee within meaning of Section 11 of the said Act. It used to function in the market area of Aurangabad City and its jurisdiction was extended to Aurangabad as well as Khultabad Talukas. With the rapid development of Aurangabad city and the surroundingareas, a proposal for construction of new market yard of the Aurangabad Cit...

Sayed Najer @ Sayed Najir S/O Baba and anr. Vs. Returning Officer and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002(1)ALLMR556; 2002(3)BomCR405

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the record.2. This petition arises from the judgment and order dated 23-1-2001 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad in Appeal No. 34 of 2000. The said appeal was filed by the petitioner and his brother against the order dated 11-12-2000 passed by the Additional Collector, Jalna in dispute No. 14 of 2000. By the impugned order, the Additional Commissioner has confirmed the order of the Additional Collector regarding fresh elections to the post of Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch of village Panchayat of Nandi, in Taluka of Ambad, in district of Jalna.3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was elected as a member of the said village panchayat for the term commencing from the year 1995. When fresh elections were announced in May 2000, he contested the election for membership of the panchayat and was accordingly elected from Ward No. 1. He defeated his rival candidate namely Sayed Munir in the said elec...

Nanded Textile Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal is taken up for disposal with consent, after waiving deposit.2. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Assistant Commissioner that the appellant did not pay the duty leviable on the towels that it manufactured, confirming the duty short paid and imposing penalty on it.3. The counsel for the appellant concedes that there has been short payment of duty on the towels, as duty is payable at the rate applicable of heading 6807.00 of the tariff post payable. He contends that the appellant had acted bona fide. It had paid the duty applicable to cotton fabrics, and was under the impression that no further duty was payable. It gathered this impression because, earlier, notification 65/87 provided that no duty is to be paid on towels as made up articles, if duty had been paid on the towels and fabrics. He further contends that the appellant was a Central Government Undertaking.4. We do not accept this argument. The notifica...

Enron Oil and Gas India Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. The following corrections are to be made in the final order CI/303-309/WZB/2001 dated 2.2.2001.3. In paragraph 1 on page 2 for "M/s. Enron Oil & Power Corporation" read "Enron Oil & Gas India Limited".4. In line 11 and 12 of the paragraph 15 on page 8, line 4 of paragraph 17 on page 9 on line 8 paragraph 17 on page 10 of the said order, for "ONGC" read "Government of India".5. In line 3 of paragraph 16 on page 9 of the said order for "ONGC" read "Sedco".6. In the last line of paragraph 17 on page 10 of the said order for "ONGC" read "Enron"....

Shree Ram Printers Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Shri Joshi submits that the disputed duty has been deposited on 20/04/2000. He shows us a certificate by the Bank of Baroda. The figure of duty namely Rs. 2,96,227/- appears there upon. But there is no co-relation between the order and the deposit.2. We, however, accept the counsel's statement giving liberty to the department to verify these deposits and grant waiver of deposit of penalty of Rs. 2,50,000/- and stay of recovery thereof during the pendency of this appeal....

Hynoup Food and Oil Industries Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise ...

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. When this modification application filed jointly by the three applicants came up for hearing today the applicants were not present nor was there any communication. We therefore take up the application for disposal ex-parte.2. Vide order dated 15/11/2000 the applicant company were directed to deposit the entire amount of duty of Rs. 54.06 laks as a precondition for hearing of their appeal. The deposit was to be made within a month from the receipt of that order. The order was despatched on 17/11/2000.It is therefore presumed that the assessee had received the order in time and in any event before the end December, 2000. This order was made in the face of the claim that the company had filed an application before the BIFR. Instead of complying with that order this application was filed on 03/01/2001, once again claiming sickness and enclosing certain judgments as to the manner to be adopted in dealing with sick industrial unit. This application was taken up for hearing twice earlier ...

Sarvodaya Laboratory Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Against the order-in-appeal YPP/1029/M.III/1999 dated 26.11.1999 M/s Sarvodaya Laboratory had filed an appeal No. E/675/2000-Mum and also an application for waver of pre-deposit bearing No. E/Stay-518/2000-Mum.The application was disposed off by the Tribunal by order No.C-I/2279-80//WZB 2000 dated 29/06/2000. Paragraph 6 of the order reads as under: "Accordingly we consider it appropriate to ask the applicant to deposit within a month from the receipt of this order a sum of Rs. 1.90 lakhs towards the duty and penalty. On such deposit being made, the appeal is allowed and impugned order set aside, the matter remitted to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits. In the event that it is not deposited within this period, the appeal before us shall stand dismissed." 2. Notice that the appellant had not complied with the direction in the stay order vide order No. C-I/3639/WZB 2000 dated 12/10/2000 the appeal was dismissed. The present application seeks restoration of the appeal.3. I...

Lakme Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 74.47 crores and penalty of Rs. 2 crores. The duty had been demanded and penalty imposed, on the finding of the commissioner (Appeals), confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner that Lakme Ltd., the applicant, is related to Lakme Lever Ltd., and the value for assessment of the goods manufactured by Lakme Ltd. should be the price at which Lakme Lever Ltd., which was its sole purchaser, sold the goods through its dealers.2. The departmental representative sought adjournment on the ground that the decision of the Tribunal in the appeal by Godrej Soaps Ltd., involving identical issue, had been reserved. however, Mr. Atul Setalvad, Advocate who had appeared for Godrej & Boyce ltd., also happened to be present in court, explained the issues in that case, and on the opinion of Mr. G.N. Srinivasan, Member (Judicial) who was a member of the bench, that the issues were not similar, we declined to adjourn. We therefore heard...

Hindustan Engineering Corpn. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Three applications have been filed under section 35F of the Central Excise Act for waiver of duty of Rs. 23,72,852/- and an application has been filed by Maharashstra State Electricity Board for staying the operation of the impugned order imposing redemption fine of Rs. 3.5 lakhs.2. In this case a show cause notice was issued on 22^nd November, 1982 against the assessee appellants on the ground inter alia that they had wrongly obtained exemption under notification 176/77 by means of suppression of the production and clearances. The matters were heard by the then adjudicating authority resulting in an appeal being filed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by order dated 22.1.1997 in EA/248-249/86-B set aside the Order-in-Original passed on 31.10.1985 and remaned the matter back to the adjudicating authority with a direction that the Collector should consider the case afresh in de novo proceedings after giving opportunity to the appellants to be heard and after permitting them to cross...