Mumbai Court August 2003 Judgments

Controller of Stores Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)BomCR703

V.C. Daga, J.1. This application under section 61(2) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ('BST Act' for short) is at the instance of the applicant, Central Railway who is one of the departments of the Government of India engaged in the transportation of goods and passenger traffic. The catering department of the Railway serves food and non-alcoholic drinks to the travelling passengers.2. The Catering Department was holding Sales Tax RC No. NIA 10101 up to 28th November, 1962. Tax was being paid regularly till then. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax by his order passed under section 52 bearing No. 1068/76/B.5932 dated 24th October, 1968 held that the Railway Catering Department is not liable to pay sales tax. On this basis R.C. registered certified stood cancelled and, accordingly, Catering Department of the Railway stopped collecting and depositing sales tax.3. One of the officers of the Central Railway by designation the controller of stores was entrusted with the work of disposing o...

Unique Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner has confirmed the demand for duty in the notice issued to the appellant, imposed a penalty on it under Rule 173Q and demanded interest under Section 11AB of the Act. The appeal is limited to the demand for interest.2. I have heard Mr. Deepak Agarwal, proprietor of the appellant, and the departmental representative.3. The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of parts of motor vehicles and parts of diesel generating sets. By its letter dated 20.9.1993 to the jurisdictional Superintendent, the appellant informed him that owing to ignorance of law and procedure, it had not obtained registration in 1992-93 and that it had, despite crossing the exemption limit of Rs.20 lakhs, failed to pay duty and asked for registration of the factory and indicated its readiness to cross the limit for which guidance was sought. This resulted in the recording of three statements of the appellant. The appellant paid in 1994 duty totalling Rs. 1,70,...

Garware Polyester Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(165)ELT538Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The question for consideration in these appeals is the eligibility for consideration as capital goods in terms of Rule 57Q of certain items used by the appellant in its factory. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that since these items were not used for producing or processing or bringing about any change in any substance for the manufacture of final product, they would not qualify for consideration as inputs.2. The appellant is absent and unrepresented and requested adjournment on the ground of short of time to prepare for the case. I note however that there is no short of time and therefore decline to adjourn.3. The items in consideration are capacitor, electrical cables, measuring gauge and motor controls. The Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded the use of these items in his order. The measuring gauge is used to measure the vacuum in the reactor for polymer intake. The capacitor is part of the power supply system which controls the total pro...

Lalchand S/O Sheetalsing Pardeshi Died Through Heirs and Legal Represe ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)BomCR757; 2003(4)MhLj119

A.P. Deshpande, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties.Shri A. D. Kasliwal, learned Counsel, waives service for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.Shri U. M. Thigale, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3, waives service for the same respondent and undertakes to file Vakil Patra.3. The petitioner is the original plaintiff who has instituted a suit for specific performance of contract against the respondents/defendants. The case of the plaintiff is that an agreement of sale was executed by defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in favour of the plaintiffs in regard to 12 plots and open land admeasuring 1 Acre 7 Gunthas from Survey No. 12 situated at Aurangabad, dated 28-4-1987. It is the case of the plaintiff/petitioner that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 refused to execute the sale deed though the plaintiffs were ready and willing to perform their part of contract. The plaintiff further contended that they were placed in possession of the...

Vasantrao Shankarrao Bhosle Vs. Suhas Ramchandra Apte

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR199; 2004(4)BomCR314; 2004(1)MhLj461

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The present proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, are directed against a judgment and order dated 21st September 1989 of the 2nd Additional District Judge, Sangli. By the aforesaid judgment, the Learned Additional District Judge, confirmed a decree for eviction passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Sangli, on 16th March 1982 on the ground of default in the payment of the arrears of rent.2. The Petitioner is a tenant in the occupation of four rooms on the north side of a property bearing City Survey No. 991 at Gaonbhag, Sangli. The petitioner is conducting and running a Printing Press therein since 1970. On 10th October 1977, a demand notice was issued by the Respondent-landlord by which a demand was made in respect of the arrears of rent in the total amount of Rs. 1125.69 as on 30th September 1977. The demand was based on arrears in respect of a period exceeding six months. There is no dispute about the fact that within a period ...

Bhau Anna Patil Since Deceased Through L.Rs. Vs. Smt. Dhondibai Bhima ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR141; 2004(4)BomCR311; (2004)106BOMLR764

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Bombay, Camp at Kolhapur, dated 8th December, 1989 in Revision Application No. MRT-KP-45/1986.2. The land in question is situated at village Vasagade, taluka Karvir, district Kolhapur, bearing Survey Nos. 37(2B), 38(2B) and 38(6B), totally admeasuring 0.27 Ares only. The respondent is the landlady, whereas the petitioner is the tenant. The land was leased for sugarcane cultivation. The landlady filed application under Section 43B for fixation of reasonable rent for the year 1972-73, which was decided by fixing the reasonable rent at Rs. 490/- per annum. Later on, the petitioner tenant filed application under Section 43A(i)(b) read with Notifications dated 14th February. 1958, as amended on 8th October, 1969, for purchasing the suit land. That application was filed on 16th November, 1973. It appears from the record ...

Cosme Remedies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT977Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The applicants herein are engaged in the manufacture of P&P medicines on behalf of M/s. Pharmaceuticals Ltd and M/s. Wallace Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (loan licensee) and the goods are then transferred to the loan licensees' depot as stock transfer. The department was of the view that the correct assessable value of the goods would be the selling price of the loan licensee and not the price paid by the loan licensee to the applicants. Show cause notices dated 21/01/2002 for recovery of duty of Rs. 29,79,137/- and dated 01/04/2002 for Rs. 30,00,000/- were issued on the above premises and confirmed by the adjudicating authority by their impugned order under which penalty of amount equal to duty as also imposed. Hence this application for waiver of pre-deposit.2. On hearing both sides and noting that prima facie the applicants who are job workers are the manufacturers and their factory gate was "deemed" factory gate, and the assessable value computed into terms of the Apex Court judgme...

Godrej Ge Appliances Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The common issue for consideration in these three appeals is that the appellants was entitled to take modvat credit of the duty paid on electrical wire by its manufacturer and used by the appellant as an input in the manufacture of refrigerator. In the common order impugned in these appeals by the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the finding in the order of the Assistant Commissioner confirming the denial of credit proposed in the three notices under adjudication by him on the ground that the manufacturer of the wire was not required to pay duty because it was within the limits of exemption contained in notification 1/93 and what was paid was not duty but "deposit".2. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that there is no material to show that it has been established by the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over the factory of Madhu Enterprises, the manufacturer of electric wire has concluded of the process that it was not required to pay duty and that theref...

Punjab and Sind Bank Vs. Pankaj A. Mehta and ors.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

Reported in: IV(2004)BC115

1. This Misc. Appeal is filed by the appellant original applicant Punjab and Sind Bank, being aggrieved by the order date 19.8.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Office of Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai in Appeal No. 8/2002. The said appeal was filed by the appellant/obstructionist Mr. Pankaj Mehta being aggrieved by the order passed by the Recovery Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai on 13.4.2002, whereby application in R.P. No. 77/2001 for lifting the attachment over Plot No. 22-A, Shri Bhakti Nagar Co-operative Housing Society, Mathani Road, Rang Bhavan, Rajkot, Gujarat State, came to be rejected. Those recovery proceedings had arisen from recovery certificate issued by DRT-II in Original Application No. 2405 of 1999 against respondent Nos. 2 to 8. By the impugned order dated 19.8.2002, the learned Presiding Officer allowed the said appeal filed by the obstructionist Mr. Pankaj Mehta and the order passed by Recovery Officer on 13.4.2002 rejecting his claim/objection...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dwarka Cement Works Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)95TTJ(Mum.)208

1. This appeal, filed by the Revenue, is directed against the order dt.14th Oct., 1997, passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the asst. yr. 1993-94. "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the carry forward of the previous business losses and to set off against the income of the current year and also in holding that manufacturing and trading of cement constituted a composite business activity of the assessee." 3. Briefly, the material facts, During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the AO noticed that assessee's cement plant was no longer in operation during the relevant previous year whereas the assessee had sought set off of losses incurred in earlier years against the incomes of the current year. It was in this backdrop that the...