Mumbai Court October 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
italia Ceramics Ltd., Shri Vs. the Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: (2005)(99)ECC201
1. The above appeals arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), Mumbai, who has :- a) Rejected the declared value of unglazed vitrified tiles of different sizes manufactured by M/s. Nengquang Ceramics Co. Ltd., China, and supplied to the appellants by M/s. Noble Electronics, Hong Kong, and imported under Bill of Entry dated 03/01/2001 and subsequent Bill of Entry, under Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Prices of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. b) Fixed the value of imported tiles under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules as under :- iv) Tiles of size 600 mm x 600 mm imported from Kea Group - US $ 10.68 per Sq.Mtr. C1F c) Finalised the Bills of Entry on the basis of the values given herein above and confirming differential duty demands of Rs. 79,06,378/-, Rs. 26,78,073/- and Rs. 2,00,219/- together with interest. d) Held goods liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and levied a fine of Rs. 20 lakhs in lieu of co...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Hafa Hoists and Cranes
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT510Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Shri A.K. Saxena, ld. JDR appeared for the appellant. None appeared for the respondent. The ld. JDR submitted that the issue relates to inclusion of interest accrued on advances. He submitted that in view of the Board Circular No. 215/49/96-C.X., dated 27-5-96 and Circular No.404/37/98-C.X., dated 22-6-98, the element of interest accrued was liable to be included in the assessable value. He also contended that the assessee has failed to show that the interest amount on the advances has been adjusted against the price at the time of delivery.Thus there is a nexus between the advance received and the price charged.2. After hearing the ld. JDR and perusal of the records, we allow the appeal filed by the revenue following the Supreme Court decision in the case of Metal Box India v. CCE, Madras.3. I have gone through the order of ld. Member (J) in this appeal and agree that the appeal filed by Revenue should be allowed. The Commissioner (Appeals) has found that the adjudicating authorit...
Janardhan Vasant Yadav Vs. Vidyadhar Kanade and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Bom229; 2005(1)ALLMR348; 2005(1)MhLj269
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. The petitioner herein is a Municipal Corporator elected to respondent No. 2-Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai from a Ward reserved for the Backward Class candidates. Respondent No. 1 is the Additional Municipal Commissioner of respondent No. 2. The Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'Scrutiny Committee') appointed by respondent No. 4-State of Maharashtra, by its decision/order dated 23rd/29th July, 2002, cancelled the Caste Certificate on the basis of which the petitioner had contested the election to respondent No. 2-Municipal Corporation. This order cancelled the certificate of validity issued to the petitioner. Consequently, respondent No. 1 issued an order dated 14th August, 2002 stating that as a result of the said order of the Scrutiny Committee, Section 16(1C)(a) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (hereinafter referred to as the 'MMC Act') will come into application and the petitioner shall be deemed to have v...
S. Sampath Kumar Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR308]; (2005)IILLJ817Bom; 2005(1)MhLj1166
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The petitioner, a Director of the Company, M/s Deve Paints Limited, formerly known as M/s Garware Paints Limited, (hereinafter referred as Company) has invoked the provision of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and basically prays to quash and et aside the proceeding of Criminal Case No. 18 of 1996, pending before the Judicial Magistrate F.C., 2nd Court, Thane, Maharashtra.2. The proceeding arose in pursuance to the complaint dated 18/8/1995 / 30/8/1995, filed by the Provident Fund, Assist. Commissioner, Regional P.F. Commissioner, Maharashtra and Goa.3. It has been alleged that the company and its officers have committed offence punishable under Section 405 and 406 of Indian Penal Code by committing the criminal breach of trust as defaulted in the payment of the contribution of the family pension fund, even though deducted from the salary of the employees of the said Company. Criminal breach of trust - Section 405 (extract) is as under :-'Whoever, bein...
A.R. Khan Construwell Company Vs. Youth Education and Welfare Society ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Bom123
V.C. Daga, J.1. These writ petitions have been filed against the common order dated 26th June, 2003 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nasik, whereby Application No. 21 of 2002 taken out by Youth Education and Welfare Society, Nasik (the 'Trust' for short) under Section 36(1)(b) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (the 'Trust Act' for short) came to be allowed and decision taken by the said Trust to develop Trust property for through respondent No. 7 (in Writ Petition No. 6549/2003), viz., M/s. Suyojit Builders Pvt. Ltd. (the 'Builder and Developer' for short) came to be affirmed.2. As the principal arguments were addressed in the case of M/s. Ahmed Dagumiya Shaikh and Ors. v. Youth Education and Welfare Society and Ors. (W.P. No. 6459/2003) by Shri Ravi Kadam assisted by Shri K.S. Bapat, Advocate, I propose to refer to the relevant facts appearing in that case, for the sake of convenience.Introduction of Litigation :3. The introduction of litigation, based on more or less und...
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Through Its Chief General Manager, Vs. Shri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALLMR504; 2005(2)BomCR808
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. This Writ Petition challenges the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal by which the Tribunal has granted the reliefs claimed by the Respondent Nos. 1 to 50 to the present Writ Petition. The Tribunal while deciding the Original Application has granted the respondent Nos. 1 to 50, besides other reliefs, notional promotion with retrospective effect to grade IV of the Biennial Cadre Review scheme from the time their immediate junior was given such promotion. It is this part of the judgment of the Tribunal which is being impugned in the present writ petition.2. Two questions which arise to our determination are: 1) whether the Central Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to decide the Original Application when it passed the order on 5.11.2001, granting reliefs to the respondent-employees who were employed with the erstwhile Department of Telecommunications (for short, 'DOT'), Government of India which was incorporated as a Government company known as Bharat ...
Mrs. Manisha Sandeep Gade Vs. Sandeep Vinayak Gade
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Bom180; 2005(1)ALLMR564; 2005(1)BomCR554; I(2005)DMC173
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. These two appeals filed by a wife seek to challenge the common judgment and order dated 12th February 2004 passed by Family Court No. III at Pune in Petition No. A-827 of 2000 and Petition No. C-55 of 2002. Petition No. A-827 of 2000 as filed by the respondent husband seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956. Petition No. C-55 of 2002 was filed by the appellant wife seeking permanent maintenance under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The impugned common judgment allowed the petition filed by the respondent husband seeking divorce and dismissed the petition filed by the appellant wife for maintenance. It is, therefore, that these two appeals are filed by the appellant wife arising out of the two proceedings.2. The short facts leading to these appeals are as follows:. The appellant and the respondent were married as per the Hindu Vedic Rites on 19th December 1997. Soon thereafter, diffe...
J. Panigrahi (Mrs.) Vs. Mrs. Sameera W/O Amzad I. Sayyed and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MhLj1017
V.C. Daga, J.1. This appeal takes exception to the order dated 13th October, 2003 passed in Notice of Motion No. 2569 of 2003 in Small Cause Suit No. 3225 of 2003 by the Bombay City Civil Court at Bombay directing disclosure of details of the adoptive parents, who have taken the child in adoption, to the Court holding that the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India : [1984]2SCR795 in the matter of abandoned of infant children have not been followed. Factual Matrix :2. Filtering out unnecessary details, the factual score giving rise to the present appeal from order, in nutshell, may be stated. The reference to the appellant and respondents henceforth shall be in their original capacity as were referred to in the trial Court unless it is not mentioned specifically.3. The plaintiff No. 1 is wife and plaintiff No. 2 is husband. Defendant No. 1 is the mother of plaintiff No. 1 and defendant No. 2 is brother-in-law of plaintiff No. 1 (sister...
Shivshakti Shikshan Sanstha Kotha (Veni) and anr. Vs. Nilkanth Kawaduj ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)BomCR105; 2005(3)MhLj696
Dharmadhikari B.P., J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-management challenges the judgment dated 2-5-1991 delivered by the School Tribunal, Amravati and Aurangabad Division at Aurangabad in Appeal No. 129 of 1988-A. By this judgment, the School Tribunal has directed the petitioners to reinstate respondent No. 1 by quashing and setting aside the oral termination done on 25-6-1988 or 1-7-1988 and has further directed that respondent No. 1 should be reinstated as Assistant Teacher or as a physical education instructor within 40 days with continuity of service and back wages till he is allowed to resume his duties. In the alternative, the Government has been directed that an equal amount be deducted from the grant due and payable to the petitioner-management and the same be paid to the respondent No. 1-employee.2. This Court admitted writ petition on 18-6-1991 and granted interim stay of reinstatement only. The back wages were ordered ...
Billimoria Jehan Bux Tehmuras and ors. Vs. Indian Institute of Archite ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MhLj206
V.C. Daga, J.1. This appeal takes exception to the order of the City Civil Court at Bombay dated 26th August, 2004 passed in Notice of Motion No. 2489 of 2004 in Short Cause Suit No. 2992 of 2004, whereby prayer for interim relief came to be rejected.The Facts :2. The facts leading to the present appeal may be stated thus :The respondent No. 1 is an Indian Institute of Architects registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The respondent No. 2 is an Architect by profession. He was holding post of Joint Hon. Secretary of the council of respondent No. 1 for the year 2002-2004. His term with other office bearers has expired on 31st May, 2004.3. The election programme to elect new council was declared by respondent No. 1. The election to elect new body is to be conducted as per the constitution and byelaws adopted by respondent No. 1. Bye-law No. 22 provides that all the affairs of respondent No. 1 are to be managed by a council which shall be the governing bod...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »