Mumbai Court April 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.
Sanjiv Goyal and M.P. Uni-magna Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)(83)ECC424
1. One of these two appeals is by M/s. MP. Uni-Magna Teckh Ltd. Bhopal and the other by Shri Sanjiv Goyal, Director of the company. The appeals are against the order of the Commissioner of Customs. The Commissioner by the impugned order, confiscated certain goods imported by the company but permitted them to redeem the goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 2 Lakhs. He further ordered that the goods be assessed to duty as full CT. Scanner as also that an amount of Rs. 1,80,000 be loaded to the invoice value (FOB) of the goods in determining the assessable value. He also gave room for "usual additions as per law" to the invoice value. Further, he imposed penalties of Rs. 4 Lakhs and Rs. 2 Lakhs on the company and its Director respective under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. Inthis appeal, Shri Sanjiv Goyal (Director) is aggrieved by the imposition of the penalty of Rs. 2 Lakhs, while, in their appeal, the company is aggrieved by the rest of the Commissioner's order. The company imported ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Special Prints Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)LC788Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondents herein had imported polyster filament yarn (PFY) in 1982 for which Bill of Entry for warehousing was filed at Mumbai. The goods were then removed under bond for re-warehousing at Surat. At the relevant time, the goods were liable to duty at the rate of 200% Basic Customs Duty, 10% Auxiliary Duty and CVD at Rs. 87.50 per kg. Before ex-bonding the goods at Surat, a dispute arose as to the interpretation of Notification No. 38/78, dated 1-3-78 regarding the payment of auxiliary duty and additional duty. The respondents filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court on this issue and obtained interim stay on 28-5-82. In the meanwhile, the goods were allowed to be ex-bonded on execution of bond for full amount supported by bank guarantee for 50% of the differential duty. Ex-bonding of the goods from the warehouse took place during June, 1982 to August, 1982 by paying only the basic customs duty. On 23-8-82 the interim order dated 28-5-82 was vacated. The writ pe...
Straptex (India) (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)84ITD320(Mum.)
1. These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of CIT(A), Central-V, Mumbai.2. By way of this appeal, the assessee has challenged the levy of penalty of Rs. 43,05,000 under Section 271D of the IT Act. The assessee has also raised an additional ground reading as under : "The CIT(A) ought to have held that the penalty order passed by the Dy. CIT under Section 271D barred by limitation period as prescribed in Section 275 of the IT Act, 1961." 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company which is deriving income from manufacturing of plastic tapes, rigid tape lace, strips, safety belts, etc. There was search at the residence of Shri Niranjan J. Shah in May, 1992, in which certain loose papers and computer floppies were found and seized. According to the Department, the print out of the computer floppies was the account in the name of Straptex. This account contained some transactions by cheque and some by cash. The transactions by cheque...
Bank of India Vs. Harshadrai Odhavji Mody and Central Bank of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Bom449; 2002(3)ALLMR1; 2002(5)BomCR228; [2003]115CompCas86(Bom); 2002(3)MhLj723
ORDERS.A. Bobde, J.1. This Chamber Summons is taken out by the Defendant, Harashadrai Odhavji Mody, for a direction that the execution application filed by the plaintiff, Bank of India, which holds a decree against it, be in effect retained in this Court and not be transferred to the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to 'the RDB Act').2. The facts in brief are that on 16th October, 1996 the Bank of India obtained a decree before the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division at England in the sum of Rs. 2,47,82,743.40 ps. The Plaintiff Bank then put the decree into execution before this Court along with the certified copy on 6th May, 1998. The Debt Recovery Tribunal had not been constituted then. On 16th July, 1999 the constitution of the Debt Recovery Tribunal was notified. Thus execution application was being transferred to the Debt Recovery Tribunal when the Defendant erroneo...
Satish Padmakar Takle and anr. Vs. Nagpur Municipal Corporation Throug ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)BomCR89
J.P. Devadhar, J.1.This public interest litigation is filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking a writ directing Nagpur Municipal Corporation and Nagpur Improvement Trust to remove the structures standing on the lands owned by respondent No. 4 Trust on the ground that the same are contrary to the building regulations and contrary to the development plan sanctioned by the State Government under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966.2. Before setting out the facts relevant for the present petition, it will be useful to refer to the background pertaining to the development of the present day 'city of Nagpur' situated at the very heart of India and which is the second capital of the State of Maharashtra. 3. In the year 1936, the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act was enacted with a view to make provisions for the improvement and expansion of the then town of Nagpur in the manner specified under the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 19...
Marmo Classic Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Ep),
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)LC205Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants are a registered SSI unit, engaged in the processing of marble blocks into slabs. They sought clearances of consignments of rough marble blocks and filed bills of entry's. The declared value of the same was accepted. The clearance was sought at nil rate of duty against DEEC advance licence dated 19-7-1995 issued in the name of M/s.Fortune Exports, Ahmedabad and transferred in favour of the appellants by the DGFT, competent authority. Pursuant to public notice dated 31-3-2001 this licence was also re-validated, as per the letter dated 20-4-2001 by M/s. Fortune Exports made to the DGFT authorities. They made the request for endorsement of the transferability to the appellants. The licence was made valid for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement dated 26-6-2001. Release advises were issued by the Jawahar Customs House to Mumbai Custom House. Enquiries were made by the Custom House at Mumbai Port with the DGFT authorities concerned who informed the customs th...
Ravindra Marutrao Shelar Vs. Kalpana Ravindra Shelar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)BomCR631; (2002)3BOMLR456; 2002(3)MhLj741
H.L. Gokhale, J. 1. Heard Mr. Joshi for the appellant and Mr. Kshirsagar for the respondent. We would like to record that before proceeding to hear the appeal finally, we tried to see if the matter could be settled amicably; but our efforts failed.2. This appeal seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 22nd April, 1996 passed by the First Family Court, Pune dismissing the Petition No. A-772/1993 filed by the appellant.3. The appellant and the respondent were married on 17th December, 1987. In the year 1990, the appellant filed Petition No. 136 of 1990 in Fourth Family Court, Pune for divorce to which a counter claim for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the respondent herein. The Family Courts dismissed the said petition filed by the appellant and decreed the one filed by the respondent wife. Thereafter the appellant has proceeded to file Petition No. A-772/1993 seeking divorce under Section 13(lA)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which provides that either party of...
Sonewadi Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society Limited Through Its Di ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)104BOMLR520
D.G. Karnik, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. Rule, made returnable forthwith by consent for the parties.2. The petitioner was registered as a Co-operative Society in the year 1954 under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner claims to be a multi-purpose resource society. The area of operation of the petitioner society is stated to be entire Sonewadi village including Mhasobawadi. According to the Certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Kopargaon on 21st October, 1999. (at page 109 of the petition) the village Chande Kasare consists of three residential clusters (commonly known as 'Wadis') viz. Sone Wadi, Mhasoba Wadi and Nagad Wadi. One more multi-purpose resource society was subsequently registered in the same village and that society is known as Nagadwadi V. K. S. Society Ltd., According to the petitioner, some disgruntled members who were defeated in the elections to the Managing Committee of the petitioner society proposed to form another soci...
Surendra Alias Altaf Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-2002
Reported in: 2002BomCR(Cri)628; 2002CriLJ4137
V.M. Kanade, J.1. These two petitioners are filed by the petitioners challenging the order of detention dated 31st October, 2001 (in Cri. Writ Petition No. 76/2002 detaining the petitioner) and 24th October, 2001 (in Cri. Writ Petition No. 59/2002 detaining the husband of the petitioner) respectively. The grounds of detention in both the cases are identical and both the detenues were involved in the same offences and hence both these petitions are being decided by this common judgment.2. Facts :The petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 76/2002 is a student studying in LL.B. Part I and is 24 years old. The petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 59/2002 is the wife of detenu Rakesh Lachhiramani who is a young boy of 24 years of age. One Laxmikant Gupta who is the partner of Somras Distillers, filed an application on 11-4-2001 addressed to Shri Piulwant Kumar, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch, Nagpur. In the said application, he has mentioned that on 11-4-2001 at 18.45 hou...
Nilima Kishore Mhaske Vs. Kishore A. Mhaske
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)BomCR152; II(2002)DMC536; 2002(3)MhLj872
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. This appeal is filed by a wife seeking to challenge the judgment and decree dated 10th November 1990 passed by the , Judge, Family Court, Pune, on a petition moved by the respondent-husband under Section 13(l)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, allowing the said petition. Shri Shastri appears for the appellant and Shri Hardikar appears for the respondent. We would like to record at the outset, that before proceeding with final hearing, we made good efforts to see if the controversy could be resolved amicably, but our efforts failed.2. The parties were married on 10th March, 1985 and a son named Vivek was born out of this marriage on 25th August 1986. Subsequently, the above referred petition for divorce bearing petition No. A-405 of 1989 was filed by the respondent-husband which has led to the impugned judgment and decree. In this petition, he alleged that the appellant was insisting on separate residence and that she did not behave properly with the elders in the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »