Mumbai Court April 2004 Judgments

Manorama Wd/O Vijay Dankhade and ors. Vs. Lukmanshah Kasamshah and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2005)ACC622; 2006ACJ820; 2004(4)ALLMR201; (2005)107BOMLR862; 2005(1)MhLj65

S.T. Kharche, J.1. The original claimants, who are the legal representatives of deceased Vijay Dankhade, have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and Award dated 23-2-1995 passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Mr. J. H. Bhatia) in Claim Petition No. 48 of 1989, whereby the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to contributory negligence and as such the awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,12,500/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the application till realisation, which is stated to be grossly inadequate.2. Brief facts are required to be stated as under :Respondent No. 1 is the driver of the truck bearing registration No. MHV 6230 and this vehicle is admittedly owned by respondent No. 2 and the said vehicle has been duly insured with respondent No. 3 for the period 22-10-1988 to 21-10-1989. On the fateful day, i.e. on 8-5-1989, at about 2-00 p.m., the deceased Vijay was proceeding on his bicycle on Amravati road, near Shegao...

Neelam and ors. Vs. Gulab and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006ACJ1100; 2004(3)ALLMR639; 2004(6)BomCR840

S.T. Kharche, J.1. The original claimants being aggrieved by the award dated 26.4.1995 passed by the learned member of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in Claim Petition No. 121 of 1991, whereby respondents are directed to pay jointly and severally the compensation of Rs. 1,80,000 with interest at 12 per cent per annum, from the date of the application till realisation, have filed this appeal on the contention that the amount of compensation awarded is grossly inadequate.2. Brief facts are required to be stated as under:The accident occurred on 14.6.1991 at about 10.30 a.m. on Nagpur-Amravati bypass road and Ashwini Kumar died as a result of the accident arising out of the use of two motor vehicles, i.e., Ambassador car No. CHA 451 and the truck bearing registration No. MHV 2276. The truck is owned by respondent No. 1 whereas it was being driven by respondent No. 2 on the relevant date and time and the truck has been duly insured with respondent No. 3. On the fateful day, the deceas...

indo Rama Synthetics (i) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT188Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty arose out of the order of Commissioner of Central Excise Nagpur.2. In the impugned order the Commissioner demanded Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,21,32,329/- being the duty on Furnace Oil/Mineral Oil Sludge, Waste and Scrap arising from inputs and packing material and Waste and Scrap arising from capital goods, cleared by the applicant without payment of duty and imposed a penalty of Rs. 82,68,059/- under Section 11AC. These clearances without payment of duty were made during the period 1.4.96 to 30.6.03. In all 12 show cause notices were issued. Two of such notices were issued invoking larger period of limitation under proviso to Section 11A(1). The amount involved in these two notices was Rs. 86,94,014/-.4. The Ld. Advocate argued that duty demanded on the clearance of sludge is not warranted, as this product is not excisable according to Board's Circular dt.23.03.87. The question of payment of duty on sludge which is no...

Sun Pharmaceuticals Ind. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 13,91,439/-and penalty of equal amount arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise(Appeals) who has dismissed the assessee's appeal on the ground of non compliance with the direction for pre-deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs contained in his interim order dated 15.10.2003.2. We have heard both sides. The duty demand has been confirmed as a result of holding that inputs, intermediate products and finished excisable goods (bulk drugs and chemicals) were cleared from the store department to P.D.Lab, R & D department, rejection outside the factory and branch transfer without reversal of appropriate modvat credit and without payment of duty. The extended period of limitation has been invoked on the ground of non disclosure by the applicants of such removal. The plea raised before us is that the stay order dated 15.10.03 was received by them only on 21.11.03, they applied for modification, the appeal was dismissed witho...

i.T.D.C. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(170)ELT343Tri(Mum.)bai

1. On matter being called nobody appeared on behalf of the appellants in spite of today's notice of hearing having been sent to the appellants well in advance. Accordingly, I have heard Shri A.K. Saxena, learned J.D.R. appearing for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals).2. The appellants claim for refund of duty of Rs. 24,842/- as excess duty paid on the import of Champagne bottles has been rejected on the ground of un- just enrichment. Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the amended of pro- vision of Section 28D of Customs Act, requires the appellant to prove conclusively, by production of evidence that duty burden has not been passed on to their customer. Inasmuch as the appellants failed to do so, the refund was hit by bar of unjust enrichment.3. The appellants in their memorandum of appeal have only reiterated that their buyers M/s. Hotel Holiday Inn make their menus in advance by two years based on cost, market trend and rates in comp...

Shree Radheshyam Gupta Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)(94)ECC593

1. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the appellant despite notice. Shri Arun Chopra, Ld. JDR appeared on behalf of the revenue and he submitted that the appellant has removed the goods clandestinely without payment of duty and without issue of Central Excise documents during the period from 28.1.87 to 20.12.90. The statement of Shri A.R. Shaikh, Production Manager and P.R. Behere, Partners were recorded under Section 14 of Central Excise Act, 1944.They have clearly admitted that they have cleared the goods without payment of duty. Despite the opportunity of hearing, the appellants have not submitted any defence. They have failed to submit their reply to the show cause notice. In these circumstances, the Ld. JDR emphasised that the case of the appellant is based on their own admission and is devoid of any merits. He submitted that both the authorities have confirmed the demand and penalty. He submitted that the appeal filed by the appellant may also be dismissed for w...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Razdan Group

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Mumbai.2. The issue involved herein pertains to classification of clicking dies. The said goods are manufactured out of clicking knives in running lengths. A clicking die is given a shape of a shoe sole and used to cut leather into this shape. The Revenue contends that the goods are classifiable under chapter heading 8208.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act as this heading covers knives and cutting blades for machines or for mechanical appliance. The Commissioner (Appeals) held, following his earlier decision, that the goods in question are correctly classifiable under chapter heading 8453.00 of CETA. In fact the Revenue appealed against this earlier order-in-appeal No. NK (2592) 265/97 dated 2.5.1997.3. A co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal decided the issue in its order No. 4415/2002-WZB/C-II dated 20.12.2002 (2003 (154) ELT 278) holding that the goods in question are correctly classifiable under ...

Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both sides for sometime on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty or Rs. 12,03,136/- and penalty of equal amount, we found that it was possible to dispose of the appeal itself at this stage; hence we proceed to do so with the consent of both sides, after waiving pre-deposit.2. The duty demand was raised on the ground that the appellants had under valued the goods from 1.10.1996 to 30.6.2000. The contention of the appellants that the place of removal of RCC and PSC pips was the factory gate, was rejected by the Adjudication Authority; they filed appeal along with stay application in terms of Section 35F of Central Excise Act before the Commissioner (Appeals); the plea raised before the Commissioner (Appeals) was that the place of the removal of the goods in question was the factory gate and not the site to whom they have cleared the goods under invoice and the demand was barred by limitation as work contract filed clearly states that the place of removal of ...

Mangalya Trading and Investment Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)94TTJ(Mum.)526

1. The assessee is in appeal against the Order of the learned Commr. of Income-tax (Appeals) ("CIT(A)" in short) on the following grounds : "1. The learned CIT(A) erred in not entirely deleting the disallowance of Rs. 3,67,818 under Section 37(4) r/w Section 37(5) in respect of Ahmedabad bungalow expenses. The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the said accommodation was not in the nature of a guest-house and that, therefore, the provisions of Section 37(4) were not attracted. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the appellant's claim for deduction of the amount of Rs. 22,34,456 under Section 80HHC on the basis of an audit certificate. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that for the purpose of computation of the deduction under Section 80HHC, the loss on export of trading goods is to be reduced from the deduction available in respect of export benefits under the provisions of Section 80HHC(3). 4. As the appellant had incurred loss from export of trading goods, the learned C...

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Prakash Chunilal Mirgany and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2005)ACC799; AIR2004Bom334; 2004(4)ALLMR349; 2004(6)BomCR422

D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. The question which arises before the Court in this First Appeal lies within a narrow compass. The Second to Fourth Respondents are the claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whose claim has been allowed in the amount of Rs. 1 lac together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The accident in question took place on 25th November, 1981 at about 9.30 pm when the deceased was pulling a handcart from the West to East direction on Mesant Road, Sewri, Mumbai. The offending vehicle which was being driven by the First Respondent came from behind and overran the handcart along with the deceased. The deceased was admitted to hospital at 9.35 pm and had received a number of injuries including a head injury, injuries in the chest and a bronchial tear. He expired on 16th December 1981 at 4.50 pm. The motor vehicle in question bore registration No. MTT 3227.2. The defence of the insurance company which is the Appellant before the Court is that there was no v...