Mumbai Court January 2004 Judgments

Baburao Dadarao Kolhe and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2004(101)FLR99]; (2004)IILLJ705Bom; 2004(2)MhLj898

A.P. Deshpande, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties.2. The present petition has been filed in a representative capacity for and on behalf of the workers, working with the third respondent - Godavari Dudhana Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana, which has gone in liquidation. The order passed in this petition relates to all the employees, who were in the employment of the respondent No. 4 and who had initiated proceeding before Industrial Court, for claiming arrears of wages, by filing the Complaint under Section 28, Sub-section (1) read with item 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.Initially, on 18-9-2001, 243 workers filed a complaint under Section 28, read with item 9 of Schedule IV, of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (Hereinafter referred to as M.R.T.U. and P.U.L.P. Act, 1971) before the Industrial Court, making a demand as r...

Balu Lakhu Waghmare Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004CriLJ1619

V.G. Palshikar J.1. This appeal is filed through jail by the original accused, present appellant, challenging the judgment and order of conviction passed on 28-12-1998 by Sessions Judge, Raigad in Sessions Case No. 202 of 1997 convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC to suffer imprisonment for life.2. When the appeal was called out for hearing the advocate appointed to represent the appellant in the appeal was absent. We therefore, with the assistance of the APP scrutinised the record and reappreciated the entire evidence with other documents etc.3. The prosecution story stated briefly is that the accused on 7-4-1996 killed his wife by hitting her on the head by a wooden bar and was absconding. He then accosted by two villagers and they started taking his to the police when he escaped from their custody and ran away. He was not traceable for several months and ultimately he was arrested and investigation was completed by the police an he was prosecuted for committing murde...

Hanmant Dada Bhosale Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004CriLJ2942; II(2004)DMC99

P.V. Kakade, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 18th August, 1998 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No. 294 of 1989 holding him guilty for commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer two years and to pay fine of Rs. 200/= in default to suffer R.I. for two months for the offence punishable under Section 498A of I.P.C. and for life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 200/= in default to suffer R.I. for two months. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The facts giving rise to the present case, in brief, are thus -3. The appellant was married to deceased Ranjana in the year 1985 and since that time they were residing in hutment at NOUCIL Naka, Rabale, Tal. and Dist. Thane. Few days after the marriage the accused started ill-treating Ranjana by beating her and also harassed her demanding gold ring which was agreed to be given in...

Pradip Polyfils Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Through the Sec ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)BomCR465; 2004(3)ELT173(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to avail the benefit of duty entitlement pass book Scheme on export of Polypropylene filter plates and accessories is the question raised in this petition. The Customs Authorities have held that the benefit of the scheme is available to the goods which fall under Chapter 39 ITC (HS) classification and since the polypropylene filter plates and accessories do not fall under Chapter 39, the benefit of the scheme cannot be granted to the petitioners.2. Duty Entitlement Pass Book ('DEPB' for short) is an export incentive Scheme contained in Chapter 7 of the Import-Export Policy, 1992-1997. Under the said DEPB Scheme, the Government granted certain percentage of credit on the FOB value of exports made by an exporter as per the schedule of rates published by the Government. The said schedule is called DEPB schedule. The said schedule prescribes the rate granted for various goods under various heads. For availing the benefit under the DE...

M.D. Sadrani Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT84Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is an application by M/s. M.D. Sadrani, CHA no. 11/337 against the order of Commissioner of Customs, suspending the CHA licence of the appellant under Regulation 21/2 of the CHA Licensing Regulation 1984, (CHA Regulations) pending enquiry under Regulation 23 , ibid. The said order was passed without offering the opportunity of hearing to the appellants.2. In the appeal, it has been claimed that this was not a fit case where immediate action was necessary pending an enquiry under the Regulations. The adjudication proceedings against the exporters are pending. The show cause was issued to the exporter as late as on 2.7.2003. The said show cause notice was issued by the Dy. Director DGCEI, Zonal Unit, Mumbai. The offence against the exporter is yet to be established. Hence the appellants claim that the ex parte order passed by the Commissioner suspending the licence in terms of Regulation 21 of the CHA Regulation are not sustainable.3. The brief facts are enumerated as under. A l...

ibrahim Mohammed El. Hawary Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT117Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These appeals are filed against the orders of the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), Mumbai dated 30-9-2002. In the impugned order the Commissioner confiscated M.V. Al-Wattyah owned by M/s. United Arab Shipping Co. under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act, and allowed it to be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 25 lakhs, imposed a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs on Capt. Ibrahim Mohammed El Hawary the master of the said vessel under Section 114(1), imposed a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs on the owners of the vessel (M/s. United Arab Shipping Company) and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on M/s. Transworld Shipping Services, the agents of the said vessel under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act. The above appeals are filed by the owners, agents and the captain of the vessel.2. The facts are that on receipt of information that some crew members working on the above-mentioned vessels were carrying out large scale smuggling a watch was kept on the activities of the crew members.Later, currency wor...

Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(165)ELT567Tri(Mum.)bai

Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J) 1. The applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duties and penalties as detailed in the annexure to this order arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vapi.2. We have heard both sides. The show cause notice issued on 33/10/2001 covers the period from October, 1996 to March, 1999. The applicants' plea, that the amount of duty confirmed was available by way of modvat credit to their sister concerns at Piparia and Tuticorin units, to whom the Chinchpada factory cleared copper cathode, and copper anodes for manufacture of copper rods and therefore the extended period of limitation, under which the demands have been confirmed, is not attracted; has prima facie substance, in the light of the ratio of the larger bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Jay Yuhshin Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi 2000 (119) ELT 718 which has been followed in the assessees own case as seen from order No. C-I/2892-2893/WZB/2003 dated 18/11/2003. We t...

Kiran D. Jani Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(5)BomCR791; 2004CriLJ3174; 2004(2)MhLj890

1. Rule, returnable forthwith. The A.G.P. waives service. By consent taken up for earning and final disposal.2. The petitioner has a restaurant and bar known as 'Memsaab Restaurant and Bar' situated at Novelty Silk Compound. Western Express Highway, Dahisar (East), Mumbai. The petitioner has been granted a Police licence for keeping a place of public entertainment under the Bombay Police Act, 1951 and the Rules framed thereunder. The petitioner applied for a Performance Licence to introduce a dance performance in the background of recorded music during the evenings. The application has not been disposed of. The Learned Vacation Judge passed an order on 29th December 2003, directing the second respondent to dispose of the application within a period of eight weeks. The aforesaid order is hereby confirmed and shall operate as an order in the Writ Petition.3. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has however, submitted that in the meantime even until the application for the grant ...

Ebers Pharmaceuticals Itd . Vs. Joint Cit

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)88TTJ(Mumbai)194

ORDERK.K. Boliya, A.M.These two appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of by this common order as the facts are common.Appeal No. 30092. This appeal arises from the order dated 23-3-2000 of Commissioner (Appeals)-I, Mumbai, confirming levy of penalty of Rs. 1,15,000 under section 271D of the Income Tax Act. The facts may be stated in brief. During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1997-98, the assessing officer noted that as per the remarks of the auditors, the assessee received a loan of Rs. 1, 15,000 in cash from M/s Regal Impex (P) LTD. (RIPL) and thus the provisions of section 269SS were violated. The assessing officer, therefore, issued a show-cause notice to the assessee, proposing levy of penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act. The assessee, in its defense, contended before the assessing officer that the company neither received nor repaid any loan or deposit in cash during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1997-98 and tha...

Commissioner of Customs (import) Vs. Saharanpur Electric Press

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is a miscellaneous application filed by the revenue seeking condonation of delay in filing the captioned appeal directed against the impugned order-in-appeal passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The prayer is to condone the delay of 476 days beyond the prescribed period of 3 months, which expired on 17.8.1999. The application mentions that, the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was in accordance with the Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Solar Pesticides, and hence it could not be challenged. On the announcement of Supreme Court's judgment dated 4.2.2000 (reported in 2000 (116) ELT 401 SC), the scenario changed. It is claimed that the appellant has a very strong case on merits and hence the delay be condoned.3. I note that, at the point of passing the impugned order-in-appeal, the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was holding the field.The impugned order was in accordance with the Bombay High Court's judgment, which was binding on the ...