Mumbai Court June 2003 Judgments

State Bank of Indore Vs. Rashtriya Mazdoor Sena and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR1010; 2003(6)BomCR249; (2003)IIILLJ697Bom

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. The petitioners are challenging the Award dated June 10, 1999, passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Mumbai, allowing the reference and declaring the action of the management in terminating the services of one Damodar Sadashiv Rao Agra to be illegal and further directing his reinstatement in the services with continuity and payment of full back wages with effect from February 22, 1997.3. The impugned Award is sought to be challenged mainly on the ground that the voluminous documentary evidence produced by the petitioners was not at all considered by the Tribunal and the documentary evidence which is produced by the respondents themselves disclose that Damodar was not the workman within the meaning of the said expression under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter called as 'the said Act', and therefore the impugned order is illegal and needs to be set aside. Reliance i...

Dilip P. Mehta Vs. Mercury Paints and Varnishes Limited and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(6)BomCR261

Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner. None present for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, though served. Perused the records.2. The petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 15-3-1999, passed by the Industrial Court dismissing the complaint filed under section 28 r/w Items 5 and 9 of the Schedule-IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, hereinafter called as 'the said Act'. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been denied the benefits payable in terms of the Settlement dated 28-8-1991 even though such payments are being made to other workmen. The defence of the respondents is that the petitioner has no furnished the necessary declaration in terms of the Clause 24 of the Settlement and considering the provisions of the Clause 25 of the Settlement, the respondents are not liable to pay the dues to the petitioner and that therefore there is no case of any unfair labour p...

A.G. Pardeshi and ors. Vs. National Textile Corporation (South Maharas ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)BomCR489

Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners. None present for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, though served. Perused the records.2. Only grievance which is made in the present case is that inspite of the fact that the petitioners had claimed that they are entitled for NTC scale on par with the other employees, considering the identity of the nature and the duties of the petitioners vis a vis those of the said employees, the Industrial Court while dismissing the complaint filed under section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, failed to address itself to the said issue and the complaint has been rejected solely on the ground that the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 are not applicable to the workers, employed in the retail shop of the mill.3. Bare perusal of the impugned judgment itself discloses that it was the case of the petitioners that they were appointed by the respond...

Cymex Time Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT594Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are manufacturers of Quartz Alarm Clocks in SSI Sector. The appellant placed an order favouring to M/s. Wellgain Precision Products Ltd., Hong kong by opening of L/C (Letter of Credit) bearing No. 023069614, dated 8-3-1996 that was further amended on 21-3-1996. (i) In pursuance of order and L/C the Hong kong supplier supplied the goods vide their invoice dated 1-4-1996 and shipment made by Air under AWB No. 160-2915 4720 - flight No. CX 007, dated 3-4-1996. The appellant filed Bill of Entry No. A-1804/8(5), dated 3-4-1996 in Bombay Air Customs and by their letter dated 23-4-1996 stated that the cases for Alarm clocks under the above invoice had been imported and the imported goods are the parts of Alarm clocks and the same are not complete cases and hence should be freely importable. (ii) The goods were examined on first check basis and samples drawn. The customs authority was of the opinion that these clocks cases parts are in CKD condition and are restricted. (iii)...

Shri Shyam Bihani, Sujala Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The impugned order has been passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara demanding duty of Rs. 2,68,33,714/- and imposing various amounts of penalties on the appellants apart from confiscating the seized goods. The main allegation of the Department is that M/s. Sujala Exports, a 100% E.O.U. has been exporting locally procured products while diverting fabrics imported duty free for local sale.2. Shri V.M. Doiphode, learned Advocate for the appellants states that the Adjudicating Commissioner has relied on the B17 Bond for passing the impugned order but the same has not been included in the list of relied upon documents. He also states that statement of the buyers alleged to have purchased the imported fabrics have not been taken though there are statements of the partners regarding local sale of the imported fabrics. He further states that the test report in respect of the seized goods have been applied for the goods exported in the past.He further states that ...

Commissioner of Customs and Vs. Datar Switchgear Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(177)ELT1085Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Application 2204/02 has been filed by the Commissioner seeking to rectify the figure "Rs. 7.77 lacs" mentioned in order No.CII/2718/WZB/2002 dated 4.9.2002 passed in Appeal No. E/1482/97-Bom to be read as Rs. 13,76,598/-.2. Application 2205/02 has been filed by the assessee seeking to recall the said Order made by the Tribunal in said Appeal No. E/1482/97-Bom bearing order No. CII/2718/WZB/2002 dated 4.9.2002 modifying the order by granting relief's as stated in the Memorandum of Appeal after referring to the points urged in the said Memorandum of Appeal.3. In our above Order dated 4.9.2002 at paragraph 1 describes the facts of the case. At paragraph 3 of the same, refers to Board's Circular No.3/92 dated 14.05.92 and 9/97 dated 27/2/97. The said paragraph also deals with provisions of Sections 11A, 11B, 11AC of the Central Excise Act. Subsequent paragraph of the Order deals with the merits of the case and the Order provides for allowing of the appeal in part, in that penalty impos...

Ksb Pumps Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT187Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The issue involved in this appeal is whether 1950 Nos. of "Power Driven Centrifugal Pumps Primarily Designed for Handling Water" imported by the appellants can be treated as not conforming to the definition of "Consumer goods" and allowed to be imported freely. In the impugned order, the adjudicating Commissioner of Customs, Jawahar Customs House has dealt with the issue at length and has come to a conclusion that the imported goods are of small size, small weight, portable, run on single phase electric motor of small rating and are having small outlet diameter of 1 inch only. He has observed that the size and capacity of a mechanical/electrical gadet and the use it is put to, gives a fair idea as to whether it is "Consumer goods".Applying these parameters, he has held the impugned goods to be consumer goods. However, considering the fact that similar goods were cleared without licence at Mumbai Custom House, he has taken a lenient view and has imposed a very nominal fine of Rs. 5 ...

Sujala Exports, Shri Shyam Bihani Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The impugned order has been passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara confiscating seized Velvet fabrics of foreign Origin valued at about Rs. 67 lakhs and imposing penalties of various amounts on the appellants.2. Shri V.M. Doiphode, learned Advocate for the appellants mainly argues that the adjudicating Commissioner has no jurisdiction to decide the case as the impugned goods were seized at Surat outside his jurisdiction. He cites the decision of Tribunal in the case of M/s.Montana Valves & Compressors (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E. Mumbai - 2000 (116) E.L.T. 220 (Tribunal) in his support. He, however, concedes that this decision relates to goods removed from bonded warehouse and states that there is no decision relating to 100% E.O.U. where the goods have not been warehoused.3. Shri S.V. Parelkar, learned D.R. states that the impugned goods were imported duty free under Notification No. 53/97 for use in the export production in the premises of M/s Sujala Exports...

Shri Sanjay D. Gupta Vs. A.C.i.T.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)90ITD776(Mum.)

1. The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.11.97 of the CIT(A)-XXXVII, Mumbai, whereby the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed by the AO Under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act read with Explanation-1 thereunder for the AY 95-96.2. The facts in brief are these : The assessee is an individual whose sources of income are income from house property, business income and income from other sources. For the AY 1995-96 the previous year of which ended on 31.3.94, he filed his return declaring income of Rs. 2,96,640/- on 26.10.95 declaring therein, inter alia, long term capital loss of Rs. 1,33,583/-. The AO found that the assessee declared profit of Rs. 15,33,846/- on the sale of his land at Panvel. However, this gain on sale of land was not offered for taxation on the ground that it pertain to sale of agricultural land and is therefore, not taxable.During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee filed a copy of the purchase agreement of the land...

Mana Adim Jamat Mandal Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR270; 2004(2)BomCR295; 2003(3)MhLj513

A.P. Shah, J.1. The principal question that arises in this writ petition is whether the members of the 'Mana' community especially in Vidarbha region falls under Entry 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders, (Amendment) Act, 1976 and are entitled to be treated as members of the Scheduled Tribe. The petition seeks to quash Government Resolution No. C.B.C. 1584/309/Ka. 11 dated 24-4-1985 and Government Resolution No. 1083/1600/52/Ka.10 dated 19-6-1985 directing not to treat the members of the Mana community as belonging to Scheduled Tribe unless they establish relationship and/or affinity with Gond tribe. The petition also seeks to quash Government Resolution No. C.B.C. 1094/Praka-068/MaVa-16 dated 15-6-1995 declaring amongst others Mana community as Special Backward Class. The petition prays for direction to the State Government to instruct Sub-Divisional Officers/Magistrates in all regions within the State and Caste Scrutiny Committees to issue caste Certificates/ Caste...