Mumbai Court December 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.
Haroon Rashid NizamuddIn Umatiya Vs. Jivatlal Purtapshi and Raj Develo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR945; 2003(4)BomCR346; 2003(2)MhLj465
S.J. Vazifdar, J.1. The Plaintiff seeks to amend the plaint by impleading the Respondent and seeking a declaration that an agreement entered into between the Respondent and the Defendant dated 8th August, 2001 is illegal, unenforceable and not binding on him.2. The suit was filed on 24th August, 2001, for specific performance in respect of an agreement dated 26th March, 2001 by which the Plaintiff agreed to purchase from the Defendant various plots of land. The Plaintiff filed Notice of Motion No.2069 of 2001 for the usual interlocutory reliefs in a suit for specific performance. The Defendant in his affidavit in reply disclosed the M.O.U. dated 8th August, 2001, by which they agreed to sell and transfer the suit property to the Respondent. The Plaintiff therefore filed the present Chamber Summons.3. The Plaintiff contends that the M.O.U. dated 8th August, 2001 is not valid and binding on him, as it was made invalidly and during the subsistence of his agreement dated 26th March, 2001. ...
Alka A. Misra Vs. J.P. Shoke and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)43; 2003(3)MhLj62
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. The petitioner is hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order passed by J.M.F.C., Igatpuri on 3rd May, 1997, issuing process against her for commission of offences in context with Section 3(1)(viii), (ix), (x), (xv) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as Act for convenience). The complaint if read as itself shows three allegations made in it, which are :'(1). That petitioner Alka Misra, told the original complainant Shri J.P. Shoke that there are complaints against him and he should leave Igatpuri. (2) When he reiterated his request for getting a particular quarter, Mrs. Alka Misra said that she knows her job. (3) Though Alka Misra has been appointed for taking steps for welfare of members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes but according to the say of Shri J.P. Shoke, she did not take necessary steps as stated by Shri Shoke for getting him a quarter at Kalyan. 2. The said c...
Indian Seamless Steel and Alloys Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)ALLMR982; 2003(156)ELT945(Bom); 2003(3)MhLj120
V.C. Daga, J.1. The source of this petition is the order dated 28th August, 2002 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune VII Division, Pune, forfeiting the facility of making payment of excise duty on fortnightly basis, in exercise of powers conferred on him under Rule 8(4)(ii) of the Central Excise-Rules, 2001 (the 'Excise Rules of 2001' for short), framed under Central Excise Act, 1944 (the 'Excise Act' for short). THE FACTS :2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are in a narrow compass. They are; The petitioners are the public limited Company engaged in business of manufacturing steel and Alloys with other allied products which attract payment of excise duty under the provisions of the Central Excise Act.3. The petitioners were enjoying facility of payment of excise duty payable by them on their products on, fortnightly basis under Rule 8(1) of the Excise Rules of 2001, which respondent No. 2 has forfeited by his impugned order dated 28th August 2002 pas...
Sanjay S/O Pandurang Chavan and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR242; (2003)2BOMLR771; 2003(3)MhLj596
A.B. Naik, J. 1. In this petition, a short question arises for my consideration as to whether the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik, allowing the appeal filed by the present respondent No. 5, declaring the meeting dated 2-7-2001 as vitiated on the ground that the meeting was not convened within seven days from the receipt of notice of no confidence motion by the Tahsildar and the minutes of the meeting were not properly written, can be sustained.2. The undisputed facts can be briefly stated thus :The petitioners and the respondent No. 5 were elected as members of Gram Panchayat of village Jeur Kumbhari, Tq. Kopargaon, District Ahmednagar. The term of the office of the petitioners and respondent No. 5 commenced in the month of October 2000 and would come to an end in October 2005. The respondent No. 5 is elected as Sarpanch (hereinafter referred to as 'Sarpanch') of the said Village Panchayat. The members of the said Village Panchayat noticed that respon...
Chhaganlal S/O Govinda Bangalkar Vs. Additional Commissioner, Nagpur D ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-2002
Reported in: (2003)105BOMLR734
V.M. Kanade, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and is seeking an appropriate writ, order of direction for quashing the order dated 17th August, 1993 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur in Appeal No. 32 of 1992-93 and for further quashing and setting aside the order dated 4.6.1992 retiring the petitioner at the age of 58 years.2. Brief facts which are necessary for the purpose of deciding the writ petition are as follows :The petitioner was born on 22.12.1934 and he was initially appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 2.4.1954 in I. M. School, Mahadi. The petitioner was confirmed in I. M. School, Sihora and, thereafter, was promoted in Indian English Middle School as an Assistant Master on 22.9.1958. The services of the petitioner were governed by the Madhya Pradesh School Code which was framed under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Education Act. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that before 1962, Janpa...
thermon Heat Tracers Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Customs and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT208Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the incidence of duty for which refund has been claimed and sanctioned was not shown not to have been passed on, and confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner crediting the refund to the Consumer Welfare Fund.2. On 1-6-2001, the Bench which heard the appeal passed orders holding that on the facts of the case that the appellant shall be entitled to refund [2001 (132) E.L.T. 455 (Tri.)]. However the department moved an application for rectification on the ground that the basis on which refund has been sanctioned, the classification of the heat tracing cables in heading 85.14 of the Central Excise Tariff Act confirmed, was itself under challenge. The question of classification had been pending with the Assistant Commissioner. It had been remanded by the Tribunal in its order passed on 6-1-2002 on appeals by the assessee and the department. The Tribunal, after considering this application and hearing t...
Mangalam Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT393Tri(Mum.)bai
1. When these appeals came up for hearing on 31-10-2002, none appeared for the appellants. A letter dated 36-10-2002 has been filed by M/s.Arhat Industries, asking for adjournment on the ground that the appellant's factory is closed since 1997 and with the death of the main Director in May 1992, there was nobody to take care of the matter. The letter has, accordingly, sought adjournment of the case. Since the appeals are of 1998 and the request for adjournment is of indefinite, the adjournment sought is denied. We proceed to dispose of the appeals after hearing the learned SDR.2. The issue involved in both the appeals is common i.e. appellants' claim for Modvat credit in respect of partially oriented yarn (POY).Such yarn was received and utilized by the appellants in the manufacture of draw to twisted yarn. Credit of duty paid on POY which was utilized as input, has been denied solely on the ground that the consignments of inputs were not directly received into the factory, but were s...
interchrome Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)(86)ECC394
1. These four appeals have been filed against a common Order-in-Original No. 32 to 36/1997 passed by the Commissioner (Adjudication) Central Excise, Mumbai. The impugned order relates to the five Show Cause Notices dtd. 4.1.1993, 1.2.1993, 2.3.1993, 29.6.1993 and 2.3.1994. The first four have been issued by the Superintendent and the last one by the Commissioner. The impugned order drops the demand under Show Cause Notice dtd. 4.1.1993 as the same is included in the notice dtd. 2.3.1994. As regards the other four Show Cause Notices, the demands have been confirmed totalling Rs. 2,64,07,189 and in addition a penalty of Rs. 20 Lakhs have been imposed. The stay application was earlier decided by this Tribunal on 26.3.1998 staying the recovery of the duty amount that there is no specific order regarding stay of the penalty.2. Shri V. Sridharan, learned Advocate for the appellant argued the case at length and made detailed submissions to the following effect: "A.1 The activity undertaken i...
Bombay Dyeing and Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC615
1. Shri M.H. Patil, learned advocate appearing for the appellants states that for a different period the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order dated 28.1.2002 has held that the process of Bleaching and Dyeing undertaken by the appellants on duty paid yarn did not amount to manufacture prior to the period 16.3.1995 before inclusion of specific Chapter Note. He states that this order of the Commissioner (Appeals) has not been challenged by the Revenue. He also states that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ashok Silk Mills v. CCE, Mumbai-ll 1999 (107) ELT 771 (Tri) holds that bleaching and dyeing of embroidered grey fabrics do not amount to manufacture before introduction of the relevant Chapter Notes. He also states that another decision of the Tribunal In the case of Standard Industries Ltd. v.CCE, Mumbai-l, 2000 (121) ELT 622 (Tri) grants stay on the ground that prior to amendment specifically Including doubling of yarn as a process prima-facie it could not be considered as ma...
White-way Products Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)(153)ELT583Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The present appellant M/s. White-Way Products, Vadodara is the manufacturer of pharmaceutical products. They have their own factory and manufacture pharmaceutical products therein. M/s. AIMCO Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Co. is a loan licencee. They have no factory of their own. They produce certain pharmaceutical products in the factory of M/s. White-Way Products. Duty demand of about Rs. 52,000/- has been raised in regard to this production against M/s.White-Way Products on the ground that M/s. Aimco Pharmaceutical is not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 1/93 in respect of their own goods. It has been held that to be eligible for the exemption a manufacturer has to have his own manufacturing unit.2. The appellant's chellange is on two grounds. The first is that the proceedings before the lower authorities were pursuant to a direction by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court that the issue be decided in the light of the ruling contained in that High Courts' decision in the c...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »