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.
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Vs. Harun Jafer Sheikh and Shri D.M. Tale ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALLMR254; 2004(6)BomCR629; (2005)ILLJ808Bom; 2004(4)MhLj1056
Nishita Mhatre, J.1. This Petition raises the issue as to whether the Labour Court acting under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'MRTU & PULP Act') has jurisdiction to entertain a Complaint filed against the Petitioner, Bharat Petroleum Corporation. The Labour Court found that the 'appropriate Government' is the State Government and, therefore the MRTU & PULP Act can be invoked by the first Respondent. According to the Labour Court, merely because an industry is a controlled Industry, it would not mean that the MRTU & PULP Act could not be invoked since the Company was registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The Labour Court has come to the conclusion that, although the Petitioner may be a controlled industry, it is not directly under the authority of the Central Government since it is incorporated as a commercial Corporation under the Indian Companies Act, 4913. On the basis of this...
Ramchandra Jamnadas Katariya Vs. Nuruddinbhai S/O Mazhar Ali and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Bom107; 2005(1)BomCR650; 2004(4)MhLj178
B.R. Gavai, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Small Causes Court, Nagpur, dated 2nd December, 1996, thereby decreeing Regular Civil Suit No. 907 of 1988 filed by the present respondents, and the judgment and order passed by the learned 5th Additional District Judge, Nagpur, dated 21st July, 1997 thereby dismissing the appeal of the present applicant, the applicant approaches this Court by way of the present revision.2. Mazhar ali s/o Sk. Mohsin Bhai, the predecessor in title of the present respondents, filed Civil Suit No. 907 of 1988 against the present applicant, claiming that he was the landlord of the suit premises and that the defendant was his tenant, after obtaining permission from the Rent Control authorities, which came to be confirmed upto the Apex Court. Prior to that a notice dated 27th May, 1988 was issued to the defendant-tenant thereby terminating the tenancy with effect from 30th June, 1988 and asking the defendant to deliver the posse...
Nazma Shafi Shaikh and anr. Vs. Ashok Pannalal Gandhi and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: III(2005)ACC145; 2005ACJ1743; 2005(2)BomCR898; 2004(4)MhLj555
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. Original claimants, feeling aggrieved about quantum of compensation awarded, have approached this court in the First Appeal. Hasan Yasin Shaikh, husband of claimant No. 1 and father of claimant No. 2, died in an accident on 22-7-1987. He was employed with present respondent No. 1 as a Driver on his Matador MXD 7960. Other details of the accident need not be stated.2. Claimants claimed compensation under Section 4 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. It is admitted by respondent No. 2 - Insurance Company that the vehicle in question was insured with it, the policy was in force on the material date and it covered the risk of the driver. It was a policy of vehicle under Motor Vehicles Act, 1923, covering risk of nine passengers plus one driver. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Judge, Labour Court, Ahmadnagar, vide his judgment dated 24-4-1990, in Application WC 3/1988, has awarded compensation of Rs. 69,910/-, penalty Rs. 5,000/- and simple interest @6% p...
Subhash Vithalrao Gatlewar and ors. Vs. Dattatraya Keshavrao Shinde De ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALLMR757; 2005(1)MhLj43
A.H. Joshi, J.1. This second appeal is filed by unsuccessful defendants No. 3 to 8 who had succeeded in the Trial Court, however, failed in the first appellate Court.2. The plaintiff Dattatraya had filed a suit for recovery of possession of the suit house. According to the plaintiff:Defendant No. 1 Tukaram was a tenant of monthly rent of Rs. 1.50 paise leased out by the plaintiffs brother Govindrao who was formerly Karta of the family. The defendant No. 1 Tukaram is the real uncle of the defendants No. 2 to 5, 7 and 8. Defendant No. 6 is the widow of Vithalrao, the deceased brother of the defendant No. 1. The defendant No. 1 was staying in the suit property by raising a grass hut, later on constructed a Tin shed on it, with whom later on Vithalrao the brother of the defendant No. 1 also joined him. The defendant No. 1 got alternate premises. However, Vithalrao continued to stay in the premises though the defendant No. 1 continued to pay the rent. Vithalrao died about 10 years prior to ...
Chemtex Engineering of India Limited Vs. Municipal Corporation of Grea ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)BomCR320
Khandeparkar R.M.S., J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. Rule. By consent, the Rule made returnable forthwith. The petitioners challenge the Order No. S.C.R./21/2000-2001, dated 23-2-2004 and the notice dated 31-3-2004 issued by the respondent No. 1- Corporation in respect of increase in the rateable value and recovery of proper tax.2. Few facts relevant for the decision are that the petitioners are the owners of an immovable property known as Chemtex House, situated at Hiranandani Gardens, Main Street, Powai, Mumbai. The respondent -Corporation amended on or about 28-3-2002 the assessment bulk by increasing the rateable value of the said property with effect from 1-4-2000 to Rs. 1,11,67,410/- while the prior ratable value was Rs. 42,81,315/-. Pursuant to receipt of intimation regarding revision of the rateable value, the petitioners lodged a complaint to the concerned authority of the Corporation and the respondents by their order dated 18-4-2002 res...
Omi Textile Vs. Commissioner of Customs and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC527
1. The appellant company is a 100% EOU licensed to manufacture all types of sized yarn, grey fabrics, readymade garments, made-ups etc.The unit is required to export its entire production excluding rejects and permitted DTA sales as per the Exim Policy in force. The unit was granted a private bonded warehouse licence under Section 58 of the Customs Act, 1962 and was permitted to manufacture the said goods under bond as per Section 65 of the said Act by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalgaon division. The appellant company executed a bond with the Superintendent of Central Excise having jurisdiction for the due observance of the conditions laid down in the licence. Shri Rajesh Chhaganlal Choudhary is the proprietor of the appellant company.2. The officers of DGCEI collected intelligence that the unit was procuring duty free polyester yarn and diverting the same into DTA. A search of the premises revealed that a quantity of 6,138 kgs. polyester texturised yarn imported duty ...
Hico Products Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
Reported in: (2004)(174)ELT166Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai, confirming a duty demand of Rs.35,73,437.17 on Polyethylene Glycol 300 to 600 (different grades), as a result of holding that they were classifiable under CETA sub-heading 3907.20, rejecting the appellant's contention that they were residual products of chemical industry under CETA sub heading 3823.00 and confiscating goods with option to redeem on payment of fine of Rs. 1,23,250/- and confirming the duty demand on the seized goods, and imposing penalty of Rs.35 lakhs on the appellants herein.2. None appeared for the appellants in spite of notice and hence, we have heard the Ld. SDR and perused the records.3. We note that the products 400P and 600P were tested and found to be an Organic Polymeric Compounds (Polyethylene Glycol) having more than five monomers. As regards the products 300P and 350P, Shri Nene, Excise Officer of the appellant's company has clearly stated they were nothing but Polyethyle...
Mazda Industrial Chemicals Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
Reported in: (2004)(97)ECC726
1. These appeals arose out of the order of Commissioner (Appeals) who in the impugned order set aside the order of the lower authority the assessable value of slurry and Naphtha submitted by the assessee on cost construction basis during the period December 1988 to March 1991.While remanding the case back to the original authority he directed that a special audit be conducted by Assistant Director (cost) to arrive at the appropriate assessable value. The Commissioner (A) further directed that on receipt of such a report (Assistant Director Costs' report) provisional assessments be finalized and duty liability determined. This direction of the Commissioner is dated 23.10.2003. The matter pertained to April 1988 to June 90 in appeal No. E/3393/03 and April 90 to July 91 in appeal No. E/3392/03 before us. During the relevant time the appellants manufactured goods falling under Chapter heading 3402.90 and 3202.00. They had captively consumed products namely slurry and Naphtana manufacture...
Bhagyanagar Metals Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT370Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants are importers of a consignment of CDMA Fixed Wireless Telephone (hereinafter referred to as FWT) and declared them as "Hardware Parts and Accessories of CDMA WLL Cellular Phone (LSP=340E).The goods were supplied by M/s L.G. Electronics Inc., Korea. The classification was claimed under Customs Tariff Heading 8525.20.17 with benefit of exemption under Notification 21/02-Cus (Serial No.313/Serial No 427) as amended by Notification No. 26/2003.2. On a perusal of the sample and after browsing the user's Manual guide detailing the features and functions of the FWT, it appeared to the department that the item under import was a complete CDMA Fixed Wireless Telephone Model No. LSP=340E with parts and accessories, and exemption Notification 21/02-Cus (Serial No 313/Serial No 427) as amended which covered inter alia "Cellular Phones", was not available.The department seeks to interpret the scope of the term "Cellular Phones," which in appeared them to refer to only hand held m...
Bombay Gas Co. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
Reported in: (2005)1SOT35(Mum.)
The assessee has raised the following effective grounds : "I. 1. The learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 7,490 and Rs. 85,000 made by the DCIT. In respect of Registrars fees for formation of new company and legal expenses in connection with the amalgamation of Bombay Gas PLC with the appellant company respectively. II. 1. The CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of the DCIT in not deciding upon the nature of the appellants income on the alleged ground that there is no requirement to do so because the expenditure claimed by the appellant was capital in nature and erred in holding that sub-letting of part of premises is not a business income. III. 1. The CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance made by DCIT of Rs. 3,00,000 being 1/10th of the amount paid as compensation and brokerage on the alleged ground that payment was made to LIC (owner of the officer premises) mainly to give premises on sub-lease land, therefore, was capital-in-nature. IV. 1. The CIT (...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »