Mumbai Court October 2005 Judgments

Diastar Jewellery Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Appellants are engaged in the manufacture and export of studded jewellery, plain gold jewellery. They hold a private bonded warehouse licence and are situated in SEEPZ, Mumbai, an Export Promotion Economic Zone as an other than a Domestic Tariff Area Unit. They are also engaged in the import and re-export of cut and polished diamonds in terms of para 8.13, read with para 9.21 of the EXIM Policy 1997-2002.The other appellant is the Managing Director.1.2 They filed 9 shipping bills seeking export of 9 consignments of cut end polished diamonds on 22-3-1999, after the said diamonds were imported from M/s. Steevenson Overall Inc., New Jersey, U.S.A., and were cleared on 20-3-1999 and warehoused on same day. On 21-3-1999, they were assorted, repacked and weighed and were sought to be exported to M/s. Diastar Inc., New Jersey, U.S.A., on a value addition of about 6% to the values as in the imported documents, declared and accepted by the proper officer of Customs.1.3 The shipping bills we...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Roha Dye Chem Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(104)ECC521

1. This is a case in which the Respondents (Roha Dye Chem Ltd.) debited the modvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,24,177/- under protest when the auditors had visited their premises though no show cause notice was issued to them. Subsequently, they filed a refund application which was promptly rejected by the lower authority on the plea that the Tribunal's judgment in the case of Polynose India Pvt. Ltd. relied upon by them has been referred to the High Court by the Department.2. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who observed as follows: It is not the subject matter of this appeal whether cenvat credit was admissible to those products imported by the appellants on which CVD was paid through DEPB Scheme. It is revealed from the records, that the cenvat credit was reversed by the appellants on 13.03.2001 under protest and no show cause notice was issued to them demanding duty under the provisions of Section 11A. Therefore, a conclusion has to ...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Consumer Plastics Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(194)ELT214Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The respondents herein who are engaged in the manufacture of goods falling under Chapters 15, 29 and 39 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, cleared a particular quantity of epoxidised oil which is ultimately used as plasticisers in the plastic industry, during the period May to October 1995, without payment of duty by claiming classification under CET sub-heading 1508.90 attracting nil rate of duty. The department was of the view that the item was epoxidised plasticiser under CET sub-heading 3812.00 attracting duty @ 20% and hence issued a show cause notice proposing recovery of Rs. 70,948/- (Rupees seventy thousand nine hundred forty-eight only) and proposing imposition of penalty. The Assistant Commissioner held that the assessees had admitted indirectly that their product was epoxidised plasticiser classifiable under CET sub-heading 3812 00 and hence confirmed the demand and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only). The order was set ...

Suizer Pumps India Ltd. Vs. Joint Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)7SOT533(Mum.)

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27-12-2001 of the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-C, Mumbai pertaining to the assessment year 1998-99."1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of the sum of Rs. 10,42,800 representing Employer's contribution to PF and FPD etc., under section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). He ought not to have done so.2. Without prejudice to Ground No. I above, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of PF, administrative charges of Rs. 67,364, EDLI payments of Rs. 38,296 and Rs. 767 included in Rs. 10,94,920 by holding this to be contribution to PF, EPF etc. He ought not to have done so.3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of the sum of Rs. 9,32,548 under s...

Asstt. Cit, Circle 5(8) Vs. Tanna Electro Mechanics (P.) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)7SOT121(Mum.)

These appeals are by the revenue and pertain to assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96.The common ground urged by the revenue for both the years is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in treating the loss of Rs. 76,000 for assessment year 1995-96 and Rs. 9,01,455 for assessment year 1994-95 arising out of share trading activities as business loss as against speculation loss assessed by the assessing officer under Explanation to section 73 of the Income Tax Act, overlooking the fact that primary activity of the assessee could only be determined by number of transactions, turnover, capital deployed, etc.The assessee is engaged in the business of leasing, giving loans and advances and deriving service charges from the premises and also engaged in the business of purchase and sale of shares /securities. The assessing officer held that during this year under consideration the assessee mainly dealt in shares and securities and it is trading company and not investm...

Essar Investments Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)7SOT378(Mum.)

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 2-4-1993 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Chennai for the assessment year 1986-87. The first dispute in this appeal relates to the taxability of dividend of Rs. 26,63,863 received by the assessee during the previous year relevant of the assessment year under consideration in respect of 11% cumulative preference shares. According to the assessee, the said amount of dividend was in respect of earlier six financial years 1978-79 to 1982-83 and 1984, which years much before the acquisition of the preference shares. Since they were in the nature of cumulative preference shares and by virtue of being the owner of the preference shares, the assessee has received the dividend in question.But nonetheless, it is only a capital receipt which will go to reduce the cost of acquisition of the preference shares. Reliance was placed on the decision in the case of Globe United Engg. & Foundry Co. Ltd. v.Industrial Finance Corp...

Maheshwar Dattatraya Kale Vs. Capt. Atul Wasudeo Divekar and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: IV(2006)BC424; 2006CriLJ606; 2006(1)MhLj700

Abhay S. Oka, J.1. On the last date I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.2. The Applicant is an accused in a private complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881(hereinafter referred to as the said Act of 1881). The respondent No. 1 is the original Complainant in the said complaint. The said complaint was heard by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune. By his Judgment and order dated 27th July, 2005, the learned Magistrate sentenced the Applicant to suffer simple imprisonment of six months and to pay compensation of Rs. 13 lakhs to the Complainant and in default thereof to suffer simple imprisonment for 10 days.3. An Appeal was preferred by the Applicant before the Sessions Court. The Appeal was admitted by the learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Pune. By order dated 22nd August, 2005, the learned Judge directed that the substantive sentence passed by the trial Court is suspended till decision of the Appeal and till then t...

Hindurao Tukaram Shelke Vs. Prakash Kallappa Awade

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2006Bom55; 2006(2)ALLMR332; 2006(1)MhLj745

V.M. Kanade, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent.2. Petitioner has filed this Election Petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951(hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), challenging the improper rejection of the nomination paper filed by the petitioner in respect of the Assembly Election which was to be held in respect of Assembly Constituency at Ichalkaranji, District - Kolhapur.3. Brief facts are as under :-4. The elections to the Assembly Constituency AC No. 278 of Ichalkaranji, District - Kolhapur were announced and the election programme was announced by the concerned authorities. The petitioner filed his nomination papers for contesting the said election on 21-9-2004. The admitted position is that, before he filed his nomination papers, he was convicted by the trial Court on 30-4-2003 for having committed an offence punishable under Sections 147, 353 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and he w...

Vidyadhar Baburao Chodankar Vs. Malini Vidyadhar Chodankar

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR438; 2(2006)DMC609

R.M. Lodha, J.1. This First Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 19th August, 2000 passed by the Civil Judge, S.D. Mapusa whereby the suit filed by the present appellant for annulment of marriage has been dismissed.2. Vidyadhar and Malini are parties to the litigation. The marriage between them was solemnised in the Office of the Sub-Registrar at Mapusa on 13.5.1993. Thereafter the religious marriage was celebrated on 2.6.1993. According to Vidyadhar, from day one of the marriage, Malini was found to have abnormal behaviour. During the midnight on the first day of their marriage, Malini started shouting and making unbearable noise. Baffled with the behaviour of Malini, Vidyadhar remained in the house for about one month to find out any improvement in Malinj's behaviour but no improvement was found. Vidyadhar took Malini to Dr. D 'Souza. He found her suffering from incurable mental disease. Vidyadhar, therefore, prayed for annulment of marriage on the ground that Mal...

Kashibai Laxman Kamble Vs. Rajaram Gomatik and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2006)ACC636; 2007ACJ647

A.P. Shah, J.1. On 2.5.2001 one Lax-man Pandurang Kamble, a resident of Reay Road jhoparpatti had a quarrel with one Bakshi Khan and Rabar Hussein and during the scuffle that ensued Laxman Kamble was thrown on the road and a lorry bearing No. MCY 1756 owned by respondent No. 1 ran over him. He was taken to hospital and was declared dead. The daughter of Laxman Kamble filed F.I.R. with Byculla Police Station and offence under Sections 304, 304A, 323 and 504 of Indian Penal Code was registered against Bakshi Khan, Rabar Hussein and the driver of the lorry.2. The petitioner who is the widow of the deceased Laxman Kamble preferred an Application No. 1255(A) of 2001 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mumbai for no fault compensation under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The application was, however, rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that no nexus is established between the death and rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the lorry. The legality and pr...