Mumbai Court June 2003 Judgments

Manohar S/O Marotrao Sadavarte Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)MhLj531

P.S. Brahme, J.1. Heard Mr. Sukhdeve, learned counsel for theapplicant and Mr. Loney, learned A.P.P. for State.2. This revision application is preferred by the applicant - ManoharSadavarte who was original accused in Criminal Case No. 1441/1983 on the fileof the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur for challenging the judgmentand order passed by the Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Criminal Appeal No. 9/1991confirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by theChief Judicial Magistrare, Nagpur convicting the applicant for offences under Section 467 and 471 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer S. I. for 3months and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine of Rs. 500/- tofurther undergo S. I. for one month and to suffer S. I. for 3 months and to payfine of Rs. 500/- in default to undergo S. I. for 3 months respectively.3. The applicant was working as Manager in the Malloogir SwamiWeavers Co-operative Society, Umrer, District : Nagpur. The com...

Devendra S/O Dayal Lohokare and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)MhLj963

R.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioners thirteen in number and young in age have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for a simple direction to the respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5 in particular to declare the result of the examination held in March-1999 of the second year of I.T.I. of 1996-98 Batch. They have also made prayer for directions to the respondents to pay to the petitioners damages - compensation for the loss suffered by them for non-declaration of the results.2. In view of the importance of the subject to the young petitioners, who are anxious to begin their career of occupational trade after getting the results of the final examination of the I.T.I. courses, which they had entered in the year 1996 and which they completed in the year 1998 and they had appeared for the examination in March 1999. Unfortunately, they are waiting in queue before this Court with a hope for a favourable result from this Court in their petition from 18th October, 2000. In th...

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)105BOMLR594

D.S. Zoting, J.1. Heard Mrs. S.S. Autade, learned A.G.P., for the appellant (Original respondent) and Mr. V.S. Bedre, learned Counsel for respondents (Original applicants).2. These are the three appeals preferred by the original respondent -State of Maharashtra against the Judgments and Awards dated 27.7.1984 passed by IInd Jt. Civil Judge, S.D., Ahmednagar in L.A.R. No. 26/1983. 25/1983 and 27/1983 respectively.3. As a common question is Involved as regards the market value of the acquired lands in all these appeals arising out of the land reference and as all the land reference were decided on the basis of the common evidence, common arguments have been advanced by both the parties and therefore it would be just and proper to dispose of all these appeals by common Judgment and therefore, they are being disposed of by common Judgment.4. The State of Maharashtra issued notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') seeking to ac...

Kawa Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Bill of Entry No. 262491 was filed by CHA No. 11/1111, on behalf of the appellants for the clearance of the goods imported in container brought by Vessel Orient Stride (202) vide IGM/Item No. 11332/144 dated 22.4.2002. Officers of Customs House, Mumbai, pursuant to an intelligence, that there was gross mis-declaration and under-invoicing in the import conducted enquiries. It was observed: a) The declaration made was for clearance of unbranded goods of Chinese/Taiwanese origin on examination goods were found with the following discrepancies:- I. No Markings indicating the name of the manufacturing country were found:Item No. 1 of Invoice: Caller ID PhoneItem No. 2 of Invoice: Cordless Caller ID phoneItem No. 3 of Invoice: Cordless telephoneItem No. 6 of Invoice: WalkmanItem No. 8 of Invoice: Single VCD PlayerItem No. 9 of Invoice: 88 pcs. Of B/W Tele VItem No. 10 of Invoice: Terminator SD Games 400 pcs. Of B/W TV found to be Aniko, Japan against the declared country of origin as...

Commr. of Cus. (Prev.) Vs. Dhirajbhai Ramjibhai Tandel

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT797Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Collector (Appeals), Ahemdabad regarding extending the option to the respondent herein to redeem confiscated VCR of foreign origin recovered from the possession of the respondent on 14-8-1993 when he was travelling in bus bearing registration No. DD-02-9001, on payment of Rs. 15,000/- which he has held to include duty element also. According to the department the duty is payable separately and independent of the redemption fine.2. None remains present for the respondents in spite of notice. Hence I heard the learned SDR and perused the records.3. I find that there is a clear conclusion arrived at that the VCR is a used item and the Commissioner has fixed the redemption fine after noting that the item is a used item and the extent of duties which should have been imposed on legitimate import. The learned SDR has not been able to point out the provisions under the law regarding duty liability when the item is a used one. I therefore see no...

Rosana Tools And Shri Paul D'Souza Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 1,32,962.30 and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- upon the applicants unit and Rs. 25,000/- on its partner arise out of the Order of Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Mumbai. The demand arises as a result of holding that the applicants carried out manufacture of parts of die blocks on job work basis on materials supplied by their customers under their delivery challans as processes such as wire cutting, drilling and milling as per the specifications given by the customers, carried out by them amounts to manufacture. The extended period was invoked on the ground that the applicants suppressed the non inclusion of the cost of raw material supplied by the customers in the actual clearance value.2. We heard both sides. We find that the appellants had accepted assessability and dutiability of the same goods when it was manufactured on their own raw materials, therefore prima facie it is not open to them to argue that when the same ...

Rathi Re-rolling Mills, Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both sides for sometime on the applications for waiver of the pre-deposit of balance duty of Rs. 7,76,077/- and penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs imposed on the applicants as well as penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on each of the three partners, we found that it was possible to decide the appeals themselves at this stage itself. Hence after waiving pre-deposit of the duty and penalty we proceed to hear and dispose of the appeals with the consent of both sides.2. The Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise had confirmed duty demand of Rs. 18,90,945/- on account of shortages. He also imposed penalty as mentioned above on the company as well as on its partners. The applicants have filed the applications for waiver of pre-deposit and also paid a sum of Rs. 11,64,868 before the issue of show cause notice.They plead, in addition to arguing the case on merits, that demand is barred by limitation as show cause notice dated 16.6.1999 was issued beyond 6 months from the relevant date. However, Commi...

Murarka Cables and Conductors Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Arguing on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 10,91,294/- and penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs the applicants submit that the demand is prima facie not sustainable as it has been confirmed as a result of denial of the benefit of Notification No. 77/80 for non fulfilment of export obligation, as the imported goods were stolen in a theft which took place in the factory in April, 1994 and which was intimated to the authorities concerned, and therefore could not be used in the manufacture of final products to be exported. Their further contention is that the demand is barred by limitation as the show cause notice has been issued beyond a period of six months from the date of detection of the shortage due to theft. Lastly it is their contention that the show cause notice is without jurisdiction as the Notification in question requires the satisfaction of the Commissioner for proper accountal of the goods while in the present case the show cause notice was issued by the Deput...

Sangko Pharmaceuticals and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The above appeals arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai who has confirmed duty demand of Rs. 22,00,566.31 against M/s. Sangko Pharmaceuticals and imposed penalty of Rs. 10,00,000/- upon them and also a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- on M/s.Guardian Health Care Pvt. Ltd., (formerly known as Crossland Health Care Pvt. Ltd.). Both appeals involve a common issue and are hence heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. The duty demand has been confirmed on the ground that Sangko Pharmaceuticals were manufacturing P&P medicines on behalf of M/s.Guardian Health Care Pvt. Ltd. (GHCPL) on job work basis and using the brand names 'Xtragesic' and 'Mobinak' owned by GHCPL, who were not entitled to SSI exemption and therefore M/s. Sangko Pharmaceuticals were not entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification 175/86.3. M/s. Sangko Pharmaceuticals have filed a miscellaneous application seeking to raise additional grounds of appeal, namely, that t...

Basant Rubber Factory Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 26,61,570/- and a penalty of equivalent amount arises out of the order of Commissioner, Central Excise, Mumbai. The duty demand has been confirmed as a result of holding that the applicant had availed Modvat credit on Hot/Cold Rolled sheets and coils on the strength of the invoices issued by the registered dealers without actual receipt of the goods. It is found that in certain cases there is a difference in the thickness of the goods mentioned in the manufacturer's invoice and the thickness shown in the delivery challan on actual receipt and the purchase invoice. It is the submission prima facie of the applicant that goods were actually received from the registered dealers and used by them in the manufacture of iron and steel products supplied exclusively to Indian Railways, and it is not the case of the department that the Indian Railways who had placed orders for such goods had not received goods as per specific purchase o...