Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Perfect Spinners

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(173)ELT418Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is revenue's appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The dispute in this case relates to extension of capital goods modvat credit under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules 1944 to an instrument known as "Electronic Yarn Evenness Tester". The adjudicating authority disallowed the credit on the ground that the equipment is not such which brings about any change in the material nor does it produce or process any goods and hence does not meet the eligibility criteria prescribed in Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules 1944. It is conceded in the order-in-original that, the said goods are utilised for quality control and marketability purposes, but holding the same to be outside the eligibility criteria prescribed in Rule 57Q, the credit was denied. The credit was also denied on the ground that the Tester was shown on the supplier's invoice as classified under Chapter Heading No. 84.71 of Central Excise Tariff and not a testing equipment of ...

Vishwa Paper Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Shri. Abhay P. Kolte, Ld. Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Shri. A.Chopra, Ld. JDR appeared on behalf of the Revenue. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the duty demand is approximately Rs.60 lakhs on Kraft paper declared under Chapter Sub Heading 4804.90 which attracted duty @ 18% at the relevant time. The period involved is from September 98 to March 99. The Ld. Counsel submitted that as per Notification No.4/97-CE the appellant were eligible for exemption upto 10,000 M.T on kraft paper declared by them in April 1998 and were liable to pay duty subsequently @ 5%. He also submitted that the appellant also claimed benefit of Notification No.38/97. On 22.4.1998 the range officers objected to the claim of benefit simultaneously on both the Notifications. As such, the appellant revised their declarations and dropped the claim of benefit under Notification No.38/97. As per the declaration dated 22.4.1998, he contended that the Addl. Commissioner has dropped the demand. He ...

Motilal S/O Raghudayal Srivastava Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR350; 2004(5)BomCR386; 2004(2)MhLj277

B.R. Gavai, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court, challenging the order passed by the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dated 2-4-1999, thereby dismissing the Review Application No. 90/97 in Original Application No. 702/91 for setting aside the order dated 27-6-1986 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Nagpur, compulsorily retiring the petitioner from services.2. The facts in brief, giving rise to the filing of the present petition are as under:--The petitioner who was at the relevant time, working as Assistant Sub-Inspector, Buckle No. 556 with the Nagpur police was directed on 4-1-1984, to escort 90 passengers from Central Jail, Nagpur to Pune. These prisoners were to be carried under the supervision of superior A.S.I. Shri Ramchhabilsingh having Buckle No. 305 and A.S.I. Babuva Prasad Buckle No. 526, the petitioner and the constables in the escorting party. These prisoners were carried in two buses. The petitioner along with his senior A.S.I. Babuva Prasad Buckl...

Lalit Kumar S/O Purushottamdas Mohta Vs. Official Liquidator, High Cou ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(5)BomCR223; 2004(2)MhLj457

D.D. Sinha, J. 1. Admit. Heard finally by consent of Shri Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel for the appellant, Miss Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1, Shri Madnani, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Shri Bhangde, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3.2. Shri Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel for the appellant, states that M/s Nav Bharat Trading Company had obtained a loan of Rs. 3,60,000/- in the year 1953 from the Laxmi Bank Ltd. Shri Gopaldas Mohta, grand-father of the appellant, was one of the Directors of the above referred Company and he allegedly stood guarantor for the above mentioned loan. It is further alleged that Company Appeal No. 9 of 2003 decided on 13-1-2004. (Nagpur) Shri Gopaldas Mohta had mortgaged two immovable properties known as 'Mohta House' situated at Civil Lines, Nagpur and 'Marble House' situated at Itwari, Nagpur. The aforesaid properties belong to M/s Gopaldasji Bulakidas Mohta, a HUF.3. Learned Counsel Shri Dharmadhikari further state...

Ajay Ramesh Bhoir Vs. Avinash Shantaram Jadial Shiravane and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: III(2004)ACC130; 2004ACJ737; 2004(2)ALLMR25; 2004(2)BomCR36; 2004(2)MhLj725

A.P. Shah, J. 1. Rule. Respondent No. 1 is a formal party. Ms. Barve, learned counsel, waives service for respondent No. 2. By consent rule is taken up for hearing.1. On 7-9-2002 the petitioner was travelling on Pillion of motor cycle bearing No. MH 04 AV 7790 being driven by the respondent No. 1. The petitioner fell down from the motor cycle and sustained fracture of skull (right parietal) and fracture and dislocation of maxillary zygmoid joint. The motor cycle was owned by the respondent No. 1 which was insured with respondent No. 2 National Insurance Co. Ltd. The petitioner filed application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thane for interim compensation. In support of his claim the petitioner relied upon the disability certificate issued by Dr. Rakesh Chaturvedi showing that the petitioner has suffered 14% permanent partial disability due to the accident. The petitioner, accordingly prayed for interim award of Rs. 25,000 t...

inayattulla MinoddIn Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004CriLJ1628

V.G. Palshikar, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 18-12-1998 passed in Sessions Case No. 333/97 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune convicting the accused under Section 302 of IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life, the appellant has preferred this appeal on the ground mentioned in the memo of appeal as also verbally canvassed by Shri Toraskar the learned advocate appointed to defend the appellant.2. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned A.P.P. we have scrutinised the record and reappreciated the evidence on record. On reappreciation of evidence on record the prosecution story is disclosed, is stated briefly as under :3. On 1-7-1997 around noon, deceased Jaysing went near Darga situated in the locality where he has residing alone. There it is alleged that the appellant-original accused tried to have unnatural intercourse with him and seeing resistance stabbed him. He some how managed to come out of the place ...

Phoenix Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(95)ECC400; 2004(168)ELT310(Bom); 2004(4)MhLj335

V.C. Daga, J.1. The short issue involved in the present petition relates to the excisability of the preparation of 'printing paste' by the petitioners.The Facts:2. The facts giving rise to the present petition as stated in the petition are that the petitioners are, inter alia, engaged in the manufacture of cotton fabrics and man-made fabrics. To carry out the printing operation the petitioners are required to make 'printing paste' by using, inter alia, various duty paid organic dyes which they purchase from the dye-stuff manufacturers. The printing paste is an ad hoc preparation. According to the petitioners, for making a pigment printing paste, formulated, standardised and prepared forms of pigments emulsions are used as ingredients and/or mixed in different concentrations with other essential ingredients because the final printing paste does not contain the standard amount of pigment since the depth of shade required varies in the final design produced on the fabrics. According to th...

Krushna S/O Radheshyam Nanhe Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)MhLj879

D.G. Deshpande, J. 1. Heard Mr. Daga, learned advocate for the appellant and learned A. P.P. for the State.2. The accused stands convicted for offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to suffer R.I for one year by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara by his judgment dated 15-4-1999 in Sessions Trial No. 6/1998.3. As per the prosecution case the deceased Naresh was assaulted by the accused with knife causing four injuries on the vital part of the body. The defence of the accused was that there was sudden fight between the parties in which accused also received injuries which were not examined by the prosecution. However, the trial Court disbelieving the defence convicted the appellant-accused as stated above.4. Mr. Daga, learned counsel for the appellant made only one submission that, according to him, the case does not come under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and it comes under Section 304-I of I...

Divisional Controller, Msrtc Vs. Sherkhan Chhotekhan

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR536; 2004(5)BomCR783; (2004)IIILLJ424Bom

S.T. Kharche, J.1. By invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:(i) issue writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned orders passed by the Member of the Industrial Court, Nagpur in Revision ULPA No. 97/88 dated April 8, 1991 and the order passed by the Labour Court, Nagpur, in Complaint ULPA No. 214/84 dated May 5, 1988; and(ii) to hold and declare that the impugned orders passed by the Courts below dated April 8, 1991 and May 5, 1988 are violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.'2. Relevant facts are as under:The respondent is working as a Conductor with the petitioner and as such he was on duty on August 24, 1982 on the bus No. 1033 on the route of Jaiwala to Wardhaman Nagar, Nagpur. The bus was checked by the checking staff at L.A.D. College bus stop and 50 passengers were found travelling in that bus o...

Ajay Ramesh Bhior Vs. Avinash Shantaram Jadial and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 3(2004)ACC130

A.P. Shah, J.1. Rule. Respondent No. 1 is a formal party. Ms. Barve, learned Counsel, waives service for respondent No. 2. By consent rule is taken up for hearing.2. On 7th September, 2002 the petitioner was travelling on pillion of motor cycle bearing No. MH-04-AV-7790 being driven by the respondent No. 1. The petitioner fell down from the motor cycle and sustained fracture of skull (right parietal) and fracture and dislocation of maxillary sigmoid joint The motor cycle was owned by the respondent No. 1 which was insured with respondent No. 2 National Insurance Co. Ltd. The petitioner filed application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thane for interim compensation. In support of his claim the petitioner relied upon the liability certificate issued by Dr. Rakesh Chaturvedi showing that the petitioner has suffered 14% permanent partial disability due to the Accident. The petitioner, Accordingly prayed for interim award of Rs. ...