Mumbai Court September 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.
Viraj Impex Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: (2005)(120)LC106Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appellant's, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 are engaged in the business of import of iron and steel and its whole sale trade. During the year 1998-1999, they in the course of the normal trade, on 20 contracts entered into on DA (i.e. documents on acceptance) 180 days from Bill of Lading date, basis imported and cleared consignments of Hot-rolled Coils defective/secondary. The last such contract entered was for 40,000 MTS, No. 9815 dated 26.11.1998 & the shipments were made and cleared by Customs. A contract no 9817 was, thereafter on date 1.12.1998 for shipments to be made during the period from 1999 to March 1999 totalling 25,000 MTS No. entered, at price of USD 180 DMT.2. By notification No. 34/(RE-1998)/1997-2002 dated 10.12.1998 the EX1M POLICY 1997-2002 & ITC (MS) classification for the subject goods was amended as "Secured and Defective items specified below is permitted for imports free, except those there of which the value in below the value spe...
Dharampal Bros. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: (2005)(180)ELT60Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The valuations adopted by the assessee, a processor of MMF, had been impugned by the department. The basis of the break up of 10% costs, as declared by the assessee's clerk were to be constituted as follows - (i) Cost of Transportation - 0.75% (ii) Transit Insurance - 0.25% (iii) Octroi - 2.00% (iv) Interest on receivable - 1.00% (v) Processing Shrinkage - 6.00% ------- This was found to be incorrect, as far as shrinkage. Shrinkage in processing as per actuals was found to be more than 6% and was Ranging up to 8%. Therefore, in the assessee was issued, demand notices wherein it was proposed that the actual shrinkage should be reckoned and not declared shrinkage of 6% to work out the value. Duty so short paid, by reckoning only 6% shrinkage thereafter demanded and confirmed. That is the subject of their appeals.2. After hearing both sides & on considering that the plea of the clerk having made a mistake, in giving the break up, inasmuch as no Octroi was in force in Mahad, where ...
Associated Hotels Ltd. Vs. Jt. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: (2005)2SOT93(Mum.)
This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 1996-97. The ground raised in this appeal is that the CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order of the assessing officer passed under section 154 wherein the assessing officer has not allowed the deduction under sections 80-IA and 80HHD of the Act.The assessee filed its return of income after claiming of set off of unabsorbed brought forward depreciation. The total income returned by the assessee was nil The unabsorbed depreciation claimed by the assessee for the assessment year 1995-96 was Rs. 21,47,206. This amount has been set off by the assessee against the income of the impugned assessment year 1996-97. The return filed by the assessee-company was processed under section 143(1)(a).Later on the assessing officer found that the correct amount of unabsorbed depreciation attributable to the assessment year 1995-96 was Rs. 15,06,390. In order to rectify the above mistake, the assessing officer issued a notice propo...
Ms. Rubab M. Kazerani Vs. the Jt. Commissioner of I.T.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: (2004)91ITD429(Mum.)
1. When this appeal originally came up for hearing before the Bench, there was a difference of opinion between the Members who constituted the Division Bench. To resolve the controversy, Hon'ble President, in exercise of his powers under Section 255(4) of the Income Tax Act, referred the following question for the opinion of a Third Member:- "Whether or not on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order under Section 263 made by the learned CIT is justified and sustainable? 2. Shri J.P. Bengra, Hon'ble Vice President (M), appointed as Third Member in this case, concurred with the view taken by the learned Judicial Member and held that the learned Commissioner was not justified in assuming jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. The learned Third Member was thus of the view that the impugned order passed under Section 263 of the Act is not sustainable in the eye of law.3. Following the majority view in the matter, we hold that the impugned order under Section ...
Shankar Chima Shinge Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: I(2005)DMC79
V.G. Palshikar J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and conviction passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 331 of 1985 convicting the sole accused under Section 302 of IPC to suffer imprisonment for life, this appeal has been preferred on the ground mentioned in the memo of appeal as also verbally canvassed before us.2. With the assistance of Mrs. S.D. Khot advocate appointed to defend the accused/appellant, and Additional P.P. Mrs. Kejariwal, we have scrutinized the record and re-appreciated the evidence on record, on the basis of which the learned trial Judge passed the order of conviction.3. The prosecution story as revealed by the evidence scrutinised by us is that in the early morning of 15th March 1985 information was received in the police station, Kandivali that there is a suspected death caused in the hospital. The police officials therefore went to the hospital and found a dead body of a woman which was identified as of Smt. Muktabai, wife of the present ...
State of Maharashtra and anr. Vs. Eknath Shankar Dumbare
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALLMR683; 2005(1)BomCR584; 2005(1)MhLj154
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed by the State of Maharashtra and the Director of Soldier Welfare Department to challenge the judgment and order dated 4-10-2001 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'MAT') in Original Application No. 775 of 1995 which was filed by the respondent to the Tribunal. The application was filed by the respondent to challenge the order of dismissal passed by the petitioners against the respondent and under the impugned order; the MAT allowed that application and set aside the order passed by the State Government dismissing the employee by its order dated 4-12-1995 and directing the petitioners to allow him to voluntarily retire. It is this order which is challenged under the present petition.2. The short facts leading to the present petition are as follows :The respondent herein was born on 15-4-1939 and passed his 10th Standard examination but could not pass the 11th standard examination which was the SSC e...
Registrar, University of Mumbai Vs. Lata Bhor and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)BomCR250; (2005)107BOMLR941; 2005(1)MhLj700
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. By consent heard forthwith.2. The petitioner University by the present action seeks to impugn the order of the Industrial Court dated September, 6, 2002 partly allowing the complaint and holding that the petitioners herein are guilty of unfair labour practice under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MR.T.U. and P.U.L.P. Act and further directing the petitioners herein to issue fresh appointment letter to the complainant with continuity of service after expiry of six months period of service.It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that considering Section 59 of the Maharashtra University Act, 1994 the Industrial Court would have no jurisdiction as in the case of termination it is the Tribunal constituted under the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 which alone would have jurisdiction in cases where the services of a teacher or other employee is dismissed or removed or his services are otherwise terminated or reduced in rank. It is pointed out that the responden...
Jeevan Pundlikrao Kendre Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)MhLj475
Naresh H. Patil, J.1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks deletion of respondents No. 2, 3 and 4. Permission granted.2. Rule. The learned A.P.P. waives service for the State.3. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties and taken up for hearing.4. The petitioner is said to be the registered owner of the vehicle MH-24-C-998, tempo trax jeep, manufactured in the year, 1998. On 20th June, 2003, the Police of Police Station Devane (BK) seized the said vehicle in connection with Crime No. 6061 of 2003 registered for offence under Section 66(b) of Bombay Prohibition Act. The vehicle is lying in the custody of the police since then.5. The petitioner filed an application bearing Misc. Application No. 104/2003 before the learned J.M.F.C., Udgir wherein he stated that he is not concerned with the alleged offence and he was a transporter and he earns his livelihood out of transportation business through the said vehicle seized by the police. The petitioner prayed for cus...
Jagdish Chandra Subramanyam Vs. State of Goa, as Represented by the Of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: (2005)107BOMLR721
N.A. Britto, J.1. The appellant herein is the accused in Special Criminal Case No. 25/2000. By judgment dated 7.6.2004 the learned Special Judge, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Court, Mapusa, has convicted the accused under Section 20(b)(i) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 (Act, for short) and by order dated 8.6.2004 has sentenced him to undergo R. I. For a period of four months and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/-, in default to undergo S. I. for two months. The period of detention during the investigation has been ordered to be set off. 2. The accused has challenged the said conviction and sentence imposed upon him the learned Special Judge in this appeal. 3. The case of the prosecution was that on 14.2.2000 at about 15.30 hrs. P.S.I. Prabhu Dessai attached to the Anti Narcotic Cell, Panaji received specific and reliable information that a person from Karnataka, about 25 years of age, thin built, tall, with a small beard carrying a haversack would come to the Calangute beach near t...
Mrs. MinguelIn Lobo Vs. Smt. Archana Sawant and
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
Reported in: (2005)107BOMLR590
N.A. Britto, J.1. Rule. By consent of the parties, heard forthwith. 2. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226, 227 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to claim the following reliefs :(a) To quash the Order dated 31.1.04 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, North Goa, Panaji; and (b) To send the records and proceedings in Cri. Misc. Application No. 117/03/B to the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Mumbai to be dealt with in accordance with law.3. Some facts are required to be stated to dispose of the present petition.The petitioner as well as the respondent No. 1 are residents of Mumbai, The petitioner claim that she had invested a sum of Rs. 2.4 lacs with the respondent No. 1 between 1996 to 1999 and that apart, the petitioner also claims that she had advanced loans to the tune of Rs. 8.8 lacs to respondent No. 1. It is the case of the petitioner that the said investment was m...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »