Mumbai Court April 2004 Judgments

Sudarshan Steel Manufacturing Co. Vs. Mumbai Labour Union and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2004(102)FLR191]; (2004)IIILLJ704Bom

S.U. Kamdar, J.1. By the present petition, the petitioners are challenging the order passed by the learned Industrial Court in Complaint (ULP) No. 1660 of 1991 by which the learned Industrial Court has allowed the complaint in part and directed that the workmen should be allowed and permitted to resume their usual duty with effect from January 1, 2002 with continuity of service. It was further directed that the petitioner Company shall make payment of back wages at the rate of 25% 'o the workmen for a period from September 5, 1991 till end of December, 2001. The few facts of the present case are as under:2. It is the case of the petitioner that on April 15, 1987 the petitioner Union gave a notice of strike with effect from May 2, 1987. The said strike continued for almost a period of four years. Though the said strike was not declared illegal but on August 12, 1991 the said strike is supposed to have been withdrawn. It is the further case of the petitioner that inspite of the fact that...

Sham S/O Mangaldas Manwani Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(4)MhLj904

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith.2. The arbitrary and unfair refusal to issue blank tender form to the petitioner has compelled the petitioner to approach this Court with this petition. The petitioner is a registered contractor in Class-II under the Government of Maharashtra, Public Works Department. He is the sole proprietor of the proprietary concern by name M/s Shama Construction Company and is in the business of construction work for the last more than 15 years, having to his credit the execution of the work to the tune of crores of rupees under various Departments of the State Governments as well as the Central Government. A tender notice came to be published on 28-2-2004 in a daily newspaper 'Lokmat' (Marathi) bearing tender notice No. B1/3/2003-2004 for the construction of Varthan Storage Tank at Soygaon in the District of Aurangabad and the period for sale of the tender forms was disclosed to be from 3-3-2004 to 2-4-2004. Initial...

Sandu Alias JamaluddIn Madarbhai and anr. Vs. Maruti S/O Trimbak and a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(1)MhLj521

S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. Heard Shri Patni, Advocate for petitioners and Shri A. A. Joshi, Advocate for respondent No. 1.2. This petition takes an exception to the judgment and order passed by the learned Member, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in appeal No. 89/A/86/A dated 27th February, 1989, confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, in file No. 81/LR/TNC/A/62 dated 10th May, 1985.3. Few facts necessary to understand the controversy between the parties, may be summarised as below :-The agricultural landed property having survey No. 21/2, converted to Gat No. 8 admeasuring 25 acres 17 gunthas is situated at village Khardi, Tq. Khultabad, District Aurangabad. After declaration as an 'occupant' regarding the said land under Section 6 of the Hydrabad Abolition of Inam and Cash Grants Act, 1954, the said land came to be granted in favour of Respondent No. 1 on 1- 7-1960. The respondent No. 1 claimed to be a tenant and, therefore, the Occupancy Certific...

Balarvind Clearing Service Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Gen.)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT486Tri(Mum.)bai

1. By the impugned order, the Commissioner of Customs (Gen.) has revoked the CHA licence of the appellants herein, in terms of Regulation 21(1)(b) of the CHALR, 1984 for violation of the Regulations 14(k) & (1) and Regulation 16(1).2. We have heard both sides. We find that the ground for revocation is that even after the partnership firm to whom the CHA licence was granted was dissolved, the application was made for renewal of the licence to the firm and that the change in constitution of the firm was not intimated to the Department. We find that the Commissioner has come to the conclusion that the firm was dissolved, by reference to the Dissolution Notice issued to one of the brothers out of the two brothers constituting the firm, on 1-2-94 and the Bombay High Court order dated 22-8-95 on the suit filed for dissolution of the partnership firm, in which the dissolution of the Partnership at Will was admitted. No arguments have been put forth to warrant setting aside of this findin...

i.S.P.L. Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. In this case vide order NO. C-I/3716/WZB/2001 dt. 22.11.2001, the Tribunal held that the appellant herein could not be called as a deemed manufacture and the liability to pay duty would not be fastened upon them. The appeal along with other connected appeals was allowed. As a result of the Tribunal's order the appellant filed claim for refund of Rs. 10 lakhs paid as pre-deposit in compliance of the order No.270-76/93/WZB dt.23/6/93 which was the interim order passed in the appeal. The claim for refund was decided by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, who sanctioned the claim but ordered appropriation of Rs. 8,68,951/-towards the government dues (consisting of duty liability of Rs. 5,66,325/- together with interest at the rate of 24% for the month of June 2000) and sanctioned payment of balance amount of Rs. 1,31,049/-. The Commissioner (Appeals) having been upheld the order of the adjudicating authority the appellant is an appeal before the Tribunal.2. The contention of the...

Standard Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(175)ELT617Tri(Mum.)bai

1. After hearing both sides and considering the issue in this case is eligibility of Modvat credit on capital goods, namely 'autoconer machine with spindles and its components,' being spares for capital goods, and lower authority has come to a finding, after hearing the appellants, and considering the materials on record that the said autoconer system has a winding machine system and is meant for 'production of yarn packages.' Therefore, it is used only as a winding system for making 'yam packages' out of the 'yarn' which is already manufactured duly wounded on bobbins duty paid at spindle stage.Therefore these machines and their spares would not fall under the definition of 'capital goods'.2. We find force in the argument advanced by the learned Advocate to the effect that: (a) On 16.3.1995 Tariff was amended to bring in certain processes subsequent to 'spindle stage' in yarn factories to be deemed manufacture by introducing Chapter Notes. The autoconer systems used for the purpose o...

Commissioner of Customs (Pre) Vs. Shri Mohammed F. Sheikh and Shri

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Both the appeals filed by the revenue are being taken up together, after rejecting stay petition filed by them, in as much as both are directed against the same order of Commissioner (A).2. The respondents are absent inspite of today's notice of hearing having been sent to them I also find from records that the respondents were not present on the last date of hearing. Accordingly I have heard Shri A. Chopra, learned JDR appearing for the revenue. The short issue involved in the present appeal is as to whether the Commissioner was justified in setting aside the confiscation of VCD lens cleaners and VCD players and telephones of foreign origin, seized by the Customs Authorities from a train, where the same were booked by the respondents, on the ground that the goods are non-notified items under the provisions of Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 and in the absence of any evidence produced by the revenue, the same cannot be held to be of smuggled character. While allowing the appea...

Paradise Plastics Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The impugned order has been passed in denovo proceedings when the matter was remanded back by the Tribunal with direction to the original adjudicating authority to verify the work sheet produced by the appellants on record, as regards the shortages and excesses of raw-materials. The Joint Commissioner while passing the order observed that the appellants has relied on their revised figures of some photo copy hand-written calculation sheet claimed by M/s. Paradise Plastic Ents. Ltd. as prepared by the excise authorities. Such, calculation sheets were never relied upon and as such, no credence can be given to these unauthenticated documents. He has further observed that the original punchanama recorded before two independent witness and statements will have more official and legal weight than this mere photo copy of hand written calculation.2. As against the above the appellants contention is that the confirmation of demand of duty on 43,549 kg. of raw material allegedly found short i...

Bindal Textile Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both the sides, I find that the Commissioner has dismissed the appeal for non-compliance with this stay order by which he has directed the appellant to deposit the entire amount of duty of Rs. 5,69,075/- (Five Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand Seventy Five only) and penalty of identical amount.2. Shri Shroff, learned advocate appearing for the appellants strongly contested that he has a good case on merits and the Commissioner (Appeals) should have decided the matter finally without insisting on any pre-deposit. He submits that the entire demand of duty is based upon the scrutiny of their records maintained for the period 21/5/97 to 15/12/98 alleging that since the records show difference in the quantity of grey fabric received by them for processing and processed fabric, such difference is attributed to clandestine removal on their part. He submits that apart from the said difference, there is nothing else on record to corroborate the revenue's allegation. As regards the dif...

Dinesh Shantilal Bhatt Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for condonation of delay of 4 days in preferring the above appeal is allowed, as the reason given for the delay is that of the serious ill health of the appellant.2. The application for waiver of predeposit of Rs. 47,68,841/- being the draw back amount directed by the adjudicating authority to be returned and penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs imposed upon the applicant herein in terms of under Section 114 of the Customs Act, arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai. The case of the department in brief that exports garments were over-invoiced and the applicant and others have admitted that the value of the exported goods was only about Rs. 3 to 4 lakhs. The goods have also been held to be liable to confiscation on the ground that market value was less than the draw back.3. In spite of notice, the applicant is not present; hence we heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. In view of the evidence on record as well as including admission of the applicant hi...