Mumbai Court August 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.
Sterlite Lighting Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: (2004)(178)ELT462Tri(Mum.)bai
1.1 Appellant, a public limited company, they put up a project to manufacture and sell Compact fluorescent lamps (hereafter referred as CFL) & placed an order with M/s Phillip Lightening BV, Netherlands. The agreement stipulated Training, demonstration of working condition of the plant/machinery and testruns were to be effected before shipment.The letter of Credit was opened on 3.3.1999.1.2 Goods were imported. The appellant had in the mean time opted for EPCG scheme licence and sought clearances by on such licences obtained and filed BEs accordingly.1.3 On examination, the machines were found to be old and used certified by M/s Phillips to be manufactured 1992 and used for Test Runs and demonstrations. It was therefore alleged by the customs that EPCG licences would not cover the goods and as per para 5.3 of EXIM Policy 1997- 2002 second hand goods were restricted. Proceedings were initiated.1.4 The appellants in reply to the notice submitted, an application for clearance of the ...
Syndicate Bank Vs. Century Electronics and ors.
Court: DRAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 3(2006)BC94
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/original applicant Syndicate Bank being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 7th March, 2003 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT-II, Mumbai in Original Application No. 19/2001. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Presiding Officer, though allowed the application with half costs against the defendant Nos. 1 and 2, he disallowed the Original Application against the defendant Nos. 3 and 4. The learned Presiding Officer ordered defendant Nos. 1 and 2 to jointly and severally pay to the applicant-Bank an amount of Rs. 17, 37, 820/-with interest at the rate of 17% per annum from the date of filing of Original Application till full realization. He also ordered defendent No. 1 to pay to the applicant Bank an amount of Rs. 39, 775/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum with quarterly rests from the date of filing of Original Application till full realisation and also gave certain consequential declarations. The lear...
Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs. Manjara Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: (2004)91ITD361(Mum.)
1. Under Section 255(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act), the President of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called the Tribunal) has constituted this Special Bench to consider the following questions:- "1. Whether provision of Section 40A(2) of I.T. Act, 1961 are applicable to payments made by a Co-operative Society to its members towards purchase price of cane supplied or as Khodki charges? 2. If the answer to Q.No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any portion of the price actually paid by the assessee for sugarcane supplied as fixed by Commissioner of Sugar (who is also the Registrar of Co-op. Sugar Factories representing the State) is liable to be disallowed Under Section 40A(2) as excessive or unreasonable having regard to the legitimate business needs? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any portion of sugarcane price and khodki charges fixed as above and actually pa...
Shri Mallikarjun Gundappa Patil and ors. Vs. Ambadas Baburao Vardekara ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: III(2004)ACC743; 2005(1)ALLMR21; 2004(6)BomCR626; [2005(105)FLR657]; 2005(2)MhLj124
Nishita Mahatre, J.1. This First Appeal arises from the judgment and order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. The Commissioner has assessed the compensation payable to the appellants on the basis that the deceased, who was the son of Appellant Nos. 1 and 2, was drawing an amount of Rs. 800/- as monthly salary. Aggrieved by this finding of the Commissioner, the present appeal has been filed.2. The undisputed facts are as follows:The deceased who was the son of Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 and the brother of the other appellants was working as a driver with Respondent No. 1. On 27.9.1989, he met with an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. The driver succumbed to the injuries suffered by him in the accident. On 1.12.1989, the appellants filed a claim for compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act. They claimed an amount of Rs. 138971/- which included interest and penalty payable. This claim was opposed by Respondent No. 2. It was contended in the written sta...
Nilesh Jap Daru Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MhLj561
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 407 of Cr.P.C seeking transfer of Sessions Case No. 372 of 1996 from the Court presided over by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shri A.R. Mahajan to any other Sessions Court in Mumbai Division. The application filed by the petitioner seeking transfer under Section 408, bearing Misc. Application No. 833 of 2004, has been rejected by the judgment and order dated 16.7.2004 rendered by the Principal Judge of the Court of Sessions for Greater Bombay.3. According to the petitioner, the conduct of the learned Judge and his attitude towards him, most clearly evidenced by the events of 10/6/04 and 11/6/04, has given rise to a strong and reasonable apprehension in his mind that the learned Sessions Judge is determined to take him into custody on some pretext or the other. In short, according to the petitioner, the conduct of the concerned learned Sessions Judge has resulted i...
Tarabai W/O Makbulkhan Bargir and anr. Vs. Tarabai W/O Dashrath Shinde ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALLMR575; 2004(6)BomCR611; 2005(1)MhLj136
D.G. Karnik, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 1st April, 1991 passed by the learned IInd Additional District Judge, Sangli allowing Civil Appeal No. 50 of 1983 and dismissing the petitioner's suit for possession.2. The petitioner is a landlord of the property berating C.T.S.No. 1897/1 Mangawar Peth, Miraj District Sangli. The respondent is a tenant of two rooms (hereinafter referred to suit premises) in the said house on a monthly rent of Rs. 10/-. The respondent was in arrears of rent from January, 1971 to June, 1976. Therefore, by a notice of demand dated 12th July, 1976 the petitioner terminated the tenancy of the respondent and called upon her to pay the arrears of rent. As the rent was not paid within one month, the petitioner filed a suit for possession bearing Regular Civil Suit No. 3 of 1979 in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Miraj. By a judgment and order dated 9th November, 1982 the trial Court decreed the suit on the gr...
Mahindra and Mahindra Limited Vs. Sharad Laxman Dalvi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)BomCR302
Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Heard the learned Advocates of the respective parties. Perused the records.2. The petitioner challenges the order dated 6-2-2002 passed by the Industrial Court, Mumbai in Complaint (ULP) No. 1150 of 1988. By the impugned order the industrial Court has allowed the complaint filed by the respondent No. 1 against the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 against the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 and has declared that the petitioner has engaged in unfair labour practice under Items 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, hereinafter called as the said Act, and has ordered the company to resist from continuing with the unfair labour practices and further to give status, privileges and all benefits attached to the post/grade of an assembler to the respondent No. 1 from the day he completed 240 days of continuous service from October, 1979 i.e. the status of permanency from July, 198...
Ramdas S/O Dashrath Dahat Vs. Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Pari ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(4)BomCR879; 2005(2)MhLj248
A.P. Deshpande, J. 1. Heard.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, taken up for hearing.3. The limited grievance is made by the petitioner which deserves consideration and the same pertains to non-inclusion of the name of the petitioner in a list to be prepared and maintained under Rule 25A of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, by the Education Officer (Secondary), Nagpur. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the year 1971 in the employment of respondents No. 4 and 5 in Laxmi Vidya Mandal School. In the year 1997-98 the services of the petitioner came to be terminated because of reduction in the strength of the teaching staff. Aggrieved by the order of termination, the petitioner carried an appeal before the School Tribunal vide Appeal No. 106/1997 and the tribunal stayed the termination order. As a result of grant of stay to the order of termination, the Management chose to withdraw the terminat...
Ramrao S/O Punjaji Rakha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MhLj1022
S.B. Mhase, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. By this petition, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order passed by the Summary Court Martial, dated 23-5-1984, sentencing the petitioner to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month in Civil Prison and to be dismissed from service, for an offence of absenteeism under Section 39 of the Army Act, 1950 and as a deserter under Section 106 of the said Act.3. The factual matrix in this matter is as under :--The petitioner was employed as a driver with the respondent on 8th February, 1979 and he was posted at Udhampur in the year 1984. While he was at Udhampur, he applied for the leave and before grant of leave, he left the Head-Quarters and remained absent for 25 days. After 25 days, he was apprehended by the Military personnel and thereafter put up to the Court Martial, on the charge of absenteeism and desertion. It is further to be not...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Nasir Chhannumal Shaikh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MhLj1031
A.B. Naik, J.1. By operative order dated 19th August, 2004, we have dismissed the appeal. Now, we record reasons and conclusions for the dismissal of the appeal.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 28th August, 1995 passed by the learned Joint C.J.S.D., Aurangabad allowing the application Exh. 11 by making the award dated 6th February, 1995, given by the sole Arbitrator, as Rule of the Court. Accordingly, the learned trial Judge made the award as part of the decree.3. A very sorry state of affairs was noticed by us. The award was passed by the sole Arbitrator which was an ex parte award. In spite of the notices given, the officer concerned, in charge of the matter, did not bother to appear before the arbitrator and permitted the proceedings before the arbitrator to go ex parte. Ultimately, the sole Arbitrator Shri V.M. Bedse, Chief Engineer (Retd.) passed the award whereby he determined an amount of Rs. 79,92,075/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum f...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »