Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Krishna Filaments Ltd. Vs. Industrial Development Bank of India and or ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2005)BC317; 2004(2)BomCR16; [2004]118CompCas356(Bom); 2004(2)MhLj823; [2004]53SCL79(Bom)

H.L. Gokhale, J.1. This is an appeal by original defendant No. 1 against an order dated July 6, 2000, passed by a single judge of this court dismissing the notice of motion taken out by the said defendant No. 1. The said notice of motion prayed for the dismissal of the suit filed by respondent No. 1 herein (original plaintiff) by contending that this court has no jurisdiction to try the suit and/or to pass any appropriate orders therein. The appellants and respondents Nos. 2 to 5 are defendants in that suit (though respondent No. 5 has been subsequently deleted for the purposes of this appeal).2. The short facts leading to this appeal are as follows :The appellant is a public limited company. On April 28, 1997, it came out with a public issue of 33,45,000 secured optionally fully convertible debentures (OFCD) of Rs. 200 each at a discounted price of Rs. 160. These debentures were issued to banks, mutual funds, financial institutions, including respondent No. 1 and individual subscriber...

National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Mahara ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2004]118CompCas556(Bom); (2004)2CompLJ160(Bom); [2004]51SCL629(Bom); [2004]135STC50(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.1. By the Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy and Amendment) Act, 2002, published on May 4, 2002, Section 33C has been inserted into the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ('the BST Act' for short), with retrospective effect from July 1, 1981. The validity of the newly inserted Section 33C to the BST Act is challenged in this petition mainly on two grounds. Firstly, the State Legislature is not competent to declare that for the purposes of sales tax, the date of amalgamation of the companies shall not be from the date declared by the court or the Central Government under the Companies Act, 1956, but from the date on which the scheme of amalgamation of the companies is approved by the court or the Central Government under the above Act and secondly, assuming the State has such legislative competence, then, such power cannot be exercised retrospectively so as to nullify the past orders passed by the court or the Central Government as the case may be. In other words, the submission is tha...

Harishchandra Dhondusheth Khude Vs. Shri Vithoba Rakhumai Devsthan, Pu ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR757; 2004(4)BomCR154; 2004(2)MhLj906

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. A suit for eviction was filed by the respondent against the petitioner in 1983 on the ground of default in the payment of rent. The petitioner is a tenant of a shop. Shop No. 5 situated within the precincts of property belonging to the respondent Trust. In the plaint before the Trial Court the respondent had averred that the petitioner was a monthly tenant in respect of the suit premises, each month of the tenancy commencing according to the Marathi calendar on Shukla 1 (Pratipada).2. According to the respondent, the petitioner had defaulted in the payment of rent from Kartik Shake 1902 and was in arrears of rent for a period of 26 months totally amounting to Rs. 286/-. The respondent stated that by its notice dated 29th November, 1982 the tenancy had been terminated from Margashirsha Shukla 1 Shake 1904. The petitioner had according to the respondent neither paid the arrears nor vacated the premises. The defence which was set up in the written statement was that...

Maharashtra General Kamgar Union Vs. J.K. Chemicals Limited, a Company ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)ALLMR760; 2004(2)BomCR484; [2004(101)FLR90]; (2004)IILLJ798Bom

S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. By this Petition, the Petitioner Maharashtra Judgment dated 19th January, 1989 passed by the Respondent No. 2 - the Presiding Officer, 1st Labour Court, Maharashtra, Bombay in the Reference (I.D.A.) No. 12 of 1983.2. The brief facts are that the Respondent No. 1 Company which used to engage in the business of manufacturing of industrial chemicals used to employ over 1000 workmen. According to the Petitioner Union the management of the Company did not share the prosperity with the workmen who constituted an important factor in the achievement of the said prosperity in the business, as a result of which the wages of the workmen and their conditions of service remained poor. Ultimately the workmen joined the Petitioner Union for effective representation with a view to improve their service conditions. To protest against the harassment and pressurising tactics of the management the Petitioner Union held a gate meeting on 16th January, 1981 at which one of the workmen...

Tukaram S/O Bakshu and anr. Vs. Dhondiba S/O Baliram and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(3)MhLj834

A.B. Naik, J.1. The two petitioners, protected tenants (hereinafter referred to as 'protected tenants') of Land Survey No. 38/1 and 39/1 admeasuring 13A 11G and 21A 20G respectively, are challenging the order dated 15th October 1987, passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal Aurangabad (for short 'the Tribunal'), allowing Revision Application filed by the respondents, on the ground that there is no evidence of declaration of ownership in favour of the petitioners in respect of Land Survey No. 38/1 and 39/1 and, as such, there is no question to put them in possession of the land.2. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in this Writ Petition, the facts borne out from the record, are to be mentioned :Land Survey No. 38/1 and 39/1 situated at village Sangvi - Benak Tq. Mukhed Dist. Nanded was of the ownership of the one Devidasrao Bhavanidasrao Deshmukh. On the enforcement of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the names of the...

Smt. Jayshreeben M. Patel and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(92)ECC514

1. Smt. Jayshreeben T. Patel, Bhikhabhai T. Patel, Arivndbhai K. Patel, Jaswant K. Patel, Smt. Rasilaben H. Rathod, Devang A. Patel.The ROM applications inter alia contend that tribunal has failed to take into account the order of ITAT, which is reasoned order giving clear finding that the entire transaction of acquiring of all gold bars are legal and there is nothing doubtful and since the said order has not been taken into consideration, order passed by this tribunal is erroneous and needs to be recalled.This application contends that tribunal has not considered the documents/evidence which are on records and which established that the goods are not smuggled. The applicant also contends that besides the aforesaid, the Tribunal has not considered the following ground :- "Apart from the aforesaid, this Hon'ble Tribunal has also not considered, although cited, the following decisions which directly and squarely support the case of the applicant's:-S.K. Chains v. Commissioner-2001 1. Th...

Essel Propack Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT220Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants in these appeals are manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Chapter 39 of the C.E.T.A. Schedule. During the period July, 2000 to March 2001, they had adopted the cost construction method of valuation of the goods, for the purpose of payment of Central Excise duty. One of the elements included in the assessable value of the goods was notional profit, which was taken as 6.06% of the cost of production instead of 15% provided under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 read with Section 4(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act. Duty was accordingly paid on the goods cleared for captive consumption either in the same unit or to their sister units. The department detected the above undervaluation and raised demand of the differential amount of duty. They also proposed to impose a penalty on the party. The demand of duty and the proposal for penalty were contested. The original authority confirmed the demand of duty...

Lakhanpal National Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The mistake apparent on the record as stated by the counsel for the applicants is as follows: "One of the argument that has been recorded by the bench in paragraph 6 of its order, is that prior to May, 1984 sums collected as handling/service charges was credit by the assessee in the head "transport charges". The amount credit as transport charges from 1^st April,1983 to 31^st December 1983 was transferred to the head "sales promotion expenses". Since this amount did not form any part of the deduction as claimed, the duty has already been paid on it.Therefore, it is now contended, consequent upon the findings of the bench that the deduction on account of handling charges was not permissible, the amount of such handling charges which are already suffered duty should have been taken into account in deciding the duty actually paid.2. The departmental representative contests this view. The departmental representative contends that on being asked to substantiate the claim that the handli...

Exxon Lubricants Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT462Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These two appeals are against the common order of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the order impugned before him of the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise.2. The facts under consideration are as follows: Nandan Petrochemicals Ltd., Exxon Lubricants Pvt. Ltd and earlier Indo Mobil Ltd. (IML) entered into an agreement dated 1 ^st December, 1998. The agreement provided for NPL to blend exclusively the lubricants of the brand name Mobil on behalf of ELP out of the inputs to be supplied by IML and to fill them into containers and drums to be supplied by IML. Notices issued to these parties in September, 2001 proposed to recovery duty on the lubricants cleared NPL in 50 ltrs. drums under Section 4A of the Act based upon the maximum price of these goods, proposed to recover duty on the 208/210 ltrs. drums and cleared in bulk in containers by applying the price at which the supplier of the raw material sold them.The Deputy Commissioner did not accept the submissions of the parties ...

S. Chemicals and Allied Prod(Sic) Vs. Cc Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. All these applications seek extension of the Tribunal's stay orders passed in the respective appeals. The common ground raised in these applications is that, in view of the amended provisions of Section 35C of the Central Excise Act, any stay order passed by the Tribunal would run out on expiry of 180 days and, in that event, it is open to the department to initiate recovery proceedings against the assessees. Both sides bring it to our notice that the common issue involved in these applications is presently pending before a larger bench of the Tribunal. The larger bench is yet to decide on the question whether extension of stay, as prayed for in these applications, can be granted under the existing provisions of law. This bench has taken a consistent view that, till final decision is taken by the larger bench, the department should be refrained from enforcing any recovery consequential to the orders impugned in the appeals. We would also follow this line. It is ordered that there w...