Mumbai Court November 2002 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.
Sunrise Metal Industries Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2002
Reported in: (2004)89ITD406(Mum.)
1. This appeal of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)'s order dated 22/1/2002. "A) Disallowance of deduction Under Section 80IA of the Act - Rs. 1,29,86,160/- 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance of deduction claimed Under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the appellant is engaged in the manufacturing of copper rods, segment section, wires, sheets, plates, etc. and has complied with all the provisions of the Section 80IA of the Act and hence, the provisions of the Section 80IA of the Act and hence, the deduction of Rs. 1,29,86,160/- is correctly claimed Under Section 80IA of the Act and may be allowed. 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that entire income was derived from the industrial undertaking and that the manufacturing activity was done by the appellant and outside agencies for job work was mainly for hot rolling activities, which could not disentitle the appellant from claiming deduction Under Section 8...
Jhunjhunwala Company Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2002
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Bom)464; [2003]259ITR178(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The appellant is engaged in the business of dealing in cotton. The appellant filed its return of income for the year ending October 22, 1987, relevant to the assessment year 1988-89 returning income of Rs. 14,13,280 along with a copy of the accounts and tax audit report. The return was filed on August 11, 1988. In the profit and loss account for the year ending October 22, 1987, the assessee claimed bad debt in respect of an amount of Rs. 5,87,531.01 due from Podar Mills Ltd. (Bombay). The assessee also claimed bad debt in respect of the amount of Rs. 6,25,704.14 due from Podar Spinning Mills (Jaipur).2. Podar Spinning Mills (Jaipur) and Podar Mills Ltd. (Bombay) were taken over by the Central Government vide Notification dated October 18, 1983, issued under Section 4(3) of the Textiles Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Ordinance, 1983. In the circumstances, the assessee contended before the Assessing Officer that it was impossible to recover the debts from Po...
Mumbai Bidi Tambaku Vyapari Sangh and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR1127; 2003(4)BomCR300; 2003(2)MhLj147
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have sought declaration that Rules 2(r) and 23(2) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (packaged commodities) Rules, 1977 (for short 'the Rules') are ultra vires provisions of the Standards of the Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act') and, therefore, void ab initio, non est and without any effect in law. The declaration has also been sought that Rules 2(r) and 23(2) are violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. Rule 2(r) of the Rules, defines 'retail sale price' which in short means the maximum price at which the commodity in the packaged form may be sold to the ultimate consumer and where such price is mentioned on the package. Rule 23(2) of the Rules prohibits retail dealer or other persons including manufacturer, packer and wholesale dealer from making any sale of any commodity in packaged form at the price exceeding the retail sale price thereof.2....
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Ashok Laxman Wadkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)BomCR356
R.S. Mohite, J.1. Heard Shri Wankhede, Advocate for the petitioner. None is present for the respondent.2. The petitioner challenges an order dated 12-3-1991 passed by the Industrial Court, Nagpur, in Revision (ULPN) No. 45 of 1990. The brief facts of the case are as follows:(a) That the respondent was employed with the petitioner Corporation as a driver. On 2-4-1987, he was driving a bus of the petitioner Corporation at a very slow speed near S.T. Bus Stand, Wardha. While so driving the bus, one old woman came under the right front wheel of the bus and died instantly.(b) On 24-6-1987, on the basis of the aforesaid incident, two charges were framed under Clauses 10 and 11 of Scheduled 'A' to the Discipline and Appeal Procedure for employees of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, which are the rules governing discipline and appeals. For the sake of convenience, the aforesaid Clauses 10 and 11 are reproduced herein under :'10. Indiscipline 11. Gross negligence resulting in s...
Holographic Security Marking Vs. C.C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: (2003)(151)ELT470Tri(Mum.)bai
1. At the hearing of the stay application, the parties were advised that the appeals would be taken up for disposal at the next hearing.Having heard the parties on appeals, we proceed to dictate our order.2. Holographic Security Marking Systems Pvt. Ltd. manufactures holograms. The starting point of manufacture of these goods is stamping foils which are imported by them in running length. The assessee embosses these foils with hologram image, by means of what is stated to be inkless duplication process, and appears to be some kind of thermal embossing process (although it is not by no means established). The embossed stamping foils roll is coated with adhesive and laminated with release paper. Thereafter the roll is so processed as to separate each individual hologram - while still fixed to the release paper so that it can be pulled off by the customer - cut into strips of 17.5 cm packed into rolls. The appellant manufactures three types of holograms. One has base paper pasted on stam...
Acc Nihon Castings Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: (2003)(153)ELT584Tri(Mum.)bai
2. Notice issued to the appellant demanded duty of Rs. 1,03,001/-on goods which had been manufactured by it and removed under bond for export, on the ground that proof for export had not been furnished. The Assistant Commissioner, after having seen the document that the assessee produced, was satisfied that the export had taken place and dropped the proceedings.3. The department appealed this order to the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the copy of the shipping bill which had been produced before the Assistant Commissioner had not been attested by the exporter or the authorised person, as required in the Circular No.527/2/2000-CX., dated 1-5-2000 of the Board. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted this ground and set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner. Hence this appeal by the assessee.4. The circular in question noted that, in accordance with the earlier circulars, one of the documents showing export was attested copies/photocopy of the shipping bill, and noted tha...
Narsinggiriji Mills Vs. Commr. of Customs and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT589Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is the eligibility to the benefit of the exemption contained in Notification 46/87 as amended by Notification 71/94 to the cotton yarn that the appellant manufactured and subjected to the processes specified in the application and ultimately used in the weaving of fabric. Entry 2 of the table to the notification as amended exempts from duty "cotton yarn and cellulosic spun yarn subjected to beaming, warping, wrapping, winding or reeling or any one or more of these processes with or without the aid of power, if produced out of cotton yarn or cellulosic spun yarn on which the appropriate duty of excise has already been paid under Heading Nos. 52.03 and 55.05, as the case may be." At the relevant time, the appellant was availing of the facility contained in Rule 49A of the Central Excise Rules. This inter alia permitted the manufacturer of cellulosic spun yarn or cotton yarn, who uses the whole or part of the yarn in the manufacture of cot...
Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT614Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has held that the Notification 103/95 will apply from 4th July, 1995, the date on which it was issued and that the polyester yarn that the appellant manufactured enjoyed in terms of Notification 36/95 will cease to be available from 4th July, 1995. He therefore demanded duty from the appellant for the goods cleared on that date (the appellant having paid the correct duty from the next day onwards) and imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs.2. Counsel for the appellant does not wish to press with regard to levy of duty, the issue having now been decided by various judgments of the Supreme Court against the appellant, and the appeal is limited to penalty. Her contention is that the notification only came to be known on the 5th of July, 1995 and could not have been known earlier and the appellant thereafter paid duty at the higher rate. She further contended that the reason advanced by the Commissioner for the penalty, that the assessee d...
Caprihans India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: (2003)(154)ELT628Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appeal taken up for disposal, after waiving deposit with consent of both sides.2. The question for consideration in this appeal is the classification of the product "Sunpac" manufactured by the appellant.3. In its earlier Order-in-Appeal E/462/01 of the same appellant,the Tribunal had held that the product was rightly classifiable in Heading 39.16 as profile shapes. It noted that, while the appellant's claim was for Heading 39.26, the department had classified the goods in Heading 39.20. Since the classification determined by the department was incorrect, there was no scope for interfering with the classification claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal therefore allowed the appeal.4. The facts and issue being identical, this appeal is also allowed and the impugned order set aside....
Naresh K. Gupta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-2002
Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ229CAT
1. The applicant in this case has come up to the Tribunal seeking reliefs as follows-- (a) This Hon'ble Tribunal will be pleased to call for the records of the case and after going through its propriety, legality and constitutional validity, be pleased to order and direct the Respondents to implement the advice as tendered by the CVC in the normal way, i.e. as received on or about 8.7.2002. (b) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to declare that the action of the Respondents in sending back the case of the applicant to CVC is biased and be pleased to quash the same and order to close the subsequent proceedings. (c) Any other or further order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit, proper and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case be passed.2. When the case was heard for admission on the initial date, interim orders were made to the effect that the Respondents are restrained from taking any action on the basis of second CVC report, if the said report is in respect...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »