Mumbai Court July 2003 Judgments

Bhaskar B. Bhosle Prop. of Rajnigandha Restaurant and Bar Vs. State of ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR56; 2003(6)BomCR592; 2003(4)MhLj328

C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. Rule. Smt. J.S. Pawar, learned Additional Government Pleader appears and waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent nos. 1,3,5 and 6. In the facts and circumstances, the matter is taken up for final hearing.2. This petition is filed for appropriate order directing the appellate authority to pass an order on an application for stay and till then no action be taken for closing of the business of the petitioner.3. According to the petitioner, an order of suspension of licence was passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police respondent no.3 herein on February 20, 2003 and the licence of the petitioner was suspended for a period of thirty days. In the operative part of order, it was stated as under:^^vkiu vfiy nk[ky d:u RHkkoj LFkfxuh vkns'kizkIr dbu u ?ksyO;kl] 30 fjoklkusrj vkiksvki ijokuk yhl 30 fnol fuycaukpsvkns'k vaeykb ;syhy**4. The above portion specifically recites that if the petitioner will not file appeal before the appellate authority and will ...

Shriram Uddhav Murari Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)MhLj544

R.K. Batta, J.1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard learned A.P.P. forthe State.2. In this petition, the petitioner's grievance is that the remission to thepetitioner has been permanently withdrawn.3. Learned A.P.P. urged before us that the petitioner was released onfurlough for 15 days but he did not report on the due date and was arrested onlyafter 674 days. The petitioner has further stated that he did not report back to the jail authorities on completion of furlough on account of the fact that his daughteraged about four years was missing and he was making efforts to trace her.Learned A. P. P. has filed additional reply stating that show cause notice wasserved on the petitioner and in reply to show cause, on 8-6-1993 the petitionerhad nowhere stated that his daughter was missing, but, on the contrary he hadstated that he could not surrender because his mother and daughter were ill. He,therefore, contends that in the circumstances, the punishment of withdrawal ofremission permanently ...

Romeo Sam Arambhan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2003Bom452; 2003(5)BomCR457; 2004(1)MhLj56

R.M. Lodha, J. 1. Having considered the controversy, we are of the view that Rule deserves to be issued and disposed of at this stage. Hence Rule. Returnable forthwith. Dr. Bhathija waives for respondents. 2. The petitioner approached and applied to respondent No. 3 for issue of two Six Years National Savings Certificates for the amount of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 5,000/-respectively. On the application and payment made by the petitioners, two Six Years National Savings Certificates, VIII issue came to be issued by respondent No. 3 on 18th July, 1995. The relevant portion of National Savings Certificate at Exh. B reads thus :-- 'The Government of India promises to pay to Romeo Marine Management a sum not exceeding Rs. 20150.00 (RUPEES TWENTY THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY) only on or after the 18-7-2001. This certificate is issued pursuant to Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Notification No. C.S.R. 196(E) dated the 1st May, 1989.' The relevant part of other National Savings Certif...

Jay Monofilaments Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT1064Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Duty of Rs. 39.45 lakhs approximately (out of which Rs. 5 lakhs has been deposited) and penalty of Rs. 41.45 lakhs approximately are required to be deposited by the assessee, and penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs to be deposited by Pankaj Rungta, the assessee's director.2. The duty has been demanded, and penalty imposed, on the view that the nylon monofilament yarn that the applicant manufactured does not qualify for the exemption contained in entry 96 of notification 4/97.The entry exempts nylon monofilament yarn of specified denierage classifiable in heading 5404.10 from duty. The case in the Commissioner's order is that what the assessee cleared was nylon monofilament and not nylon monofilament yarn.3. After hearing the representative of the applicant and the departmental representative, we are prima facie unable to agree that there is a difference between nylon monofilament specified in heading 54.04 and the nylon monofilament yarn specified in the relevant entry of the exemption notifica...

Shree Mahavir Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of articles of brass and availed of the exemption contained in notification 1/93 as also the modvat facility. In the course of the manufacture of the articles of brass from rods of brass, scrap emerged which the appellant set out in terms of Rule 57E(5) to its job worker for being converted into rods, which were returned to it, to be put into use in the manufacture at site. The notice issued to the appellant demanded duty on the ground that the value of the scrap so cleared by the appellant ought to be included in the aggregate value of clearances for the purpose of notification 1/93, and in doing so, the aggregate limits contained in the limitation were crossed earlier on the date on which the appellant sent the scrap. The order of the Assistant Commissioner confirming the proposal in the notice having been confirmed on appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals), the matter is before us.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented. Its counse...

Poly Processors Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(162)ELT230Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the denial by the Asst. Commissioner of the credit taken by the appellant on the ground that the duplicate copy of the invoice which was issued on 22-8-1994 was not coloured pink as provided by Notification 23/95 effective from 1-8-1995.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented and relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in Nexon Tubes Ltd. v. CCE 559. The departmental representative relies upon the decision of the single member of the Tribunal in Somani Iron and Steel - 1998 (100) E.L.T. 393.In Nexon Tubes v. CCE, the two member bench of the Tribunal at Calcutta held that the denial of the credit on the view that the duplicate invoice was not coloured pink was not justified because the invoices were issued between 1-8-1995 and 30-9-1995 shortly after the scheme was reasonably introduced and also found that the objection was hyper technical. In Somani Iron & Steel - 1998 (100) E.L.T. 393, it has been n...

Commissioner of Customs (Ep) Vs. the Design Point

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal filed by Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding the impugned goods to be printed books for the purpose of Sr. No. 457 in the DEPB Schedule.2. Shri A. Shukla, learned S.D.R. appearing for Revenue stats that the impugned goods merely consist of designs pasted on different pages and do not have any relative texts nor are they bound. It is his submission that a mere collection of pages cannot be considered to be a printed book. He also refers to the grounds of appeal and reiterates the same.Further, he states that the ISBN No. is given on request of a publisher on payment of prescribed fees and mere allocation of an ISBN No. is not sufficient to hold that the impugned goods are printed books.3. Shri K.M. Mondal, learned Consultant for the respondents explains that what are pasted on the pages are not photographs but are printed pictures obtained through scanning of textile prints to a computer and then reproduced by printing on high quality pa...

Asian Paints (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The common question for consideration in these two appeals is the eligibility to discount from the assessable value of paints and varnishes that the appellant manufactured.2. We have heard Mr. A. Fernandes, manager of the appellant, and the departmental representative.3. Among the four discounts under consideration, the representative of the appellant conceded that it did not have any claim for core commission and special deals. We are therefore left with bonus scheme and other dealer discount schemes. Mr. Fernandes explains the bonus scheme to be as follows. The scheme is decided by each of the branch managers of the appellant of whom there were about 50 at the relevant time, and is applicable to dealers located within the jurisdiction of each branch manager. The total quantity of bonus that can be paid from a particular branch is decided by the head office. Subject of these limits of the budget not being exceeded, it is the sole description of the branch manager to decide upon th...

Smt. Kunta Narayan Jagdale Vs. State of Maharashtra,

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR54; 2004(1)BomCR118

H.L. Gokhale, J. 1. This petition is by a school teacher, who initially worked in a secondary school, thereafter left the service of that school for a period of about 4 years, completed her Ph.D. in the meanwhile, then joined a junior college of the same institution and subsequently retired as a lecturer in the senior college of the same institution. In this process, there are a break in service for a period of 4 years and 24 days between 9th June and 2nd July 1973. In case that break is condoned by passing appropriate order, the Petitioner will be eligible to receive better retirement benefits. It is for this purpose that time present petition has been filed. 2. As stated above, the Petitioner initially worked as a Head Mistress in a school as 'Jaihind Vidyalaya' in District Osmanabad from 4th June 1959 to 8th June 1969. Thereafter she left the service and proceeded to improve her qualification by enrolling herself for Ph.D. The fact remains that she did receive her General Provident ...

Hyderbad (Sind) National Collegiate Board and ors. Vs. Smt. Nisha Rajp ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR51; 2004(1)BomCR756; 2004(1)MhLj596

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners and the respondent No. 1. Perused the records.2. The petitioners are challenging the order dated 31-8-2000, passed by the University and College Tribunal allowing the appeal filed by the respondent No. 1 against the order of reduction in rank passed on 8-3-1999 whereby she was reverted from her post of senior clerk to junior clerk. By the impugned order, the petitioners have been directed to reinstate the respondent No. 1 to her original post of senior clerk and to pay the arrears of salary from the date of her reversion till the date of reinstatement.3. The impugned order is sought to be assailed, firstly, on the ground that the Tribunal erred in holding that the Rector and Secretary of the petitioner No. 1-Board was not a competent authority to hold departmental enquiry and to take decision regarding imposition of penalty and that the decision for reversing the respondent No. 1 from the post of senior clerk to j...