Mumbai Court April 2005 Judgments

Communidade of Saligao Vs. Addl. Deputy Collector and L.A.O.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR344

Britto N.A., J.1. This appeal is by the unsuccessful applicant in L.A.C. No. 91/1992 and is filed against, the judgment/award dated 27-12-2000 by which the applicant's reference for enhancement of compensation for the acquired land has been rejected.2. Briefly stated, by virtue of Notification dated 6-3-91 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and published on the Gazette dated 7-3-91 the Government acquired 9650 sq.m. of Survey No. 115 and 49750 sq.m. of Survey No. 116 of Saligao village, belonging to the applicant for the purpose of setting up the State Remote Sensing Centre at Saligao by award dated 10-3-92 the L.A.O. fixed compensation payable for the said acquisition at the rate of Rs. 14.21 per sq.m.3. Dissatisfied with the amount awarded by the L.A.O., the applicant sought a reference made to the District Court and in the said reference sought enhancement at the rate of Rs. 100/ per sq.m. and in support of the case for enhancement, the applicant examined it...

Mattel Toys (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(187)ELT504Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The applicant is a manufacturer of toys falling under Heading 95.02 and 95.03 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.During the process of manufacture of such toys, an intermediate product, viz. plastisol, comes into being. Plastisol was then shifted to a container of the dispenser machine which dispenses it in the rotocast moulds in desired proportion. It is the department's contention that plastisol is excisable goods liable to duty in view of the fact that the final product in which it is used is exempt from payment of duty. The learned senior advocate for the applicant pleads that plastisol is not a marketable commodity and hence is not excisable. The condition in which plastisol comes into existence is such that it has a very limited shelf life and has to be used in the manufacture of toys within a specified time. He relied on the decision in the case of Wimco Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta-III [2002 (141) E.L.T. 661 (T)] wherein the Tribunal held that the onus to prove...

Aquaguard Plastics and Polymers Vs. Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The prayer in the application is for condoning the delay of about 3 1/2 months in filing the appeal. As per facts on record the appellant had earlier challenged the impugned order before the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by the Court on 25th October 2004 with directions to the appellant to file an appeal there against before Tribunal within a period of four weeks from that date was, the appeal subsequently filed within the said period. In view of the forgoing, we condone the delay in filing the same.2. The demand of duty of Rs. 3,16,98,655/- has been confirmed against the first applicant M/s. Aquaguard Plastics & Polymers Pvt. Ltd. along with imposition of identical amount of penalty. In addition penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs has been imposed on Shri G.D. Mundhra Director of the Company.3. Arguing on the applications Shri P.M. Dave Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of HDPE and LDPE Dr...

Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. R.K. Swamy Bbdo Advertising Pvt.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(186)ELT291Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The respondents herein are advertising agents holding certificates of registration. The Advertising Club at Chennai, of which they are one of the members, have filed a writ petition before the Madras High Court challenging the levy of Service tax on advertising; the High Court granted interim stay; the stay was vacated on 20-12-2000 and hence the appellants paid the Service tax for the period in question. The Superintendent of Service Tax assessed the Service tax returns but levied interest amounting to Rs. 13,61,000/- approx for delay in payment of Service tax. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the contention of the Respondents that Service tax for the period October 1999 to March 2000 amounting to Rs. 19,53,181/- was covered by the stay but the same was liable for payment on the date when the stay was vacated and actually paid only later, and therefore the appellants were liable for interest after excluding the period covered by stay order.According to Revenue, which is in appe...

Apurva Aluminium Corpn. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The stay applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty arose out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara-II. In the impugned order, the Commissioner demanded duty amounting to Rs. 20,44,903/- towards duty payable on the goods clandestinely removed and confirmed demand of Rs. 67,51,495/- towards modvat credit fraudulently taken by the applicants. He imposed equal amount of penalty, i.e. Rs. 87,96,398/-under Section 11AC.3. The learned advocate for the applicants argued that the demand of Rs. 67,51,495/- which forms the major portion of the duty confirmed in the impugned order prima fade does not stand, as the Commissioner relied on certain show cause notices which were issued to parties other than the applicants while passing the impugned order. In spite of request from the applicants that the related matters be heard together, he passed the impugned order separately. It is argued that the Commissioner's reliance on the material contained in the sho...

Cc Vs. Momaya Capacitors

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(101)ECC385

1. The dispute is about classification of Phenyal Xylyl Ethane (Nisseki Condenser Oil-S). The Deputy Commissioner under his Order-in-Original dated 31.1.97 held that the correct classification would be under Customs Tariff heading 3824.90. In appeal, Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) (No. 481/99 MCH) reversed the classification and accepted the respondent's plea for classification under sub-heading 2902.90. The present appeal of the Revenue seeks restoration of the classification approved under order in original.3. Heading 2902.90 relates to "Cyclic Hydrocarbons", while heading 3824 relates to "Prepared binders for foundry moulds or cores; chemical products and preparations of the chemical or allied industries (including those consisting of mixtures of natural products), not elsewhere specified or included".4. Both sides are relying on note 1(b) to chapter 29. That note reads as under. - "1. Except whereas the context otherwise requires, the headings of the Chapter apply only to: (b) ...

Khalil Choudhary Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)99TTJ(Mum.)249

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee arising out of the order of CIT(A)-XXXIX, Mumbai, dt. 31st Dec., 1997. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has informed that several grounds raised as per grounds of appeal are repetitive as well as argumentative however, revolve around a single issue of an addition of Rs. 4,80,000 made on account of cash found in possession of the driver of the assessee.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that cash of Rs. 5,50,000 was seized from driver namely Mohammed Abdul Rahim of the assessee on 6th Aug., 1993 by the police. On enquiry it was stated by the driver that the said cash belonged to the appellant. Due to this reason IT Department was informed so cash was seized under Section 132A of IT Act. Before the police authorities the appellant has admitted that the money belonged to him and the said cash was in respect his wholesale mutton business.Names of ten persons stated to be relatives of the appellant were given in respect of sum of...

Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Vs. Vilas Kisan Nehete and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(3)ALLMR524; [2005(106)FLR1088]; (2005)IIILLJ321Bom; 2005(3)MhLj371

S.B. Mhase, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge passed in Writ Petition No. 5530 of 2002 on 8th October 2002 whereby the said writ petition was rejected summarily.2. The brief facts in the present matter are:That, the Respondents have filed Complaints bearing (ULP) Nos.11 to 16 of 1992 before the Industrial Court, Pune under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognised Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. Since all these complaints involved a common question of law, common judgment was delivered by the Member, Industrial Court, Pune on 30th January 1997. The Appellant -Maharashtra State Electricity Board (Hereinafer, in short referred to as 'MSEB') and its Officers were the respondents in the said complaints. They all were represented by Advocate (Dr.) Ghanekar. However, Advocate (Dr.) Ghanekar remained absent at the time of hearing of these complaints, and therefore these complaints were procee...

Sardar Refreshments Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(4)ALLMR30; 2005(4)BomCR63; [2005(107)FLR219]; 2005(3)MhLj792

Chandrachud D.Y., J.1. The Bombay Shops and Establishments Act 1948 inter alia defines the expression commercial establishment in Clause (4) of Section 2 to mean an establishment which carries on any business, trade or profession or any work in connection with or incidental or ancillary to any business, trade or profession. The definition also excludes certain establishments and among them are residential hotels, restaurants, eating houses, theatres and other places of public amusement or entertainment. Clause (8) of Section 2 defines the expression 'establishment' inter alia to mean a shop, commercial establishment, residential hotel, restaurant, eating house, theatre, or other place of public amusement or entertainment to which the Act applies. Section 7 of the Act provides for the registration of establishments. Section 19 inter alia provides for the opening the closing hours of restaurants and eating houses. Sub-section (1) of Section 19 provides that notwithstanding anything conta...

Mukesh Ramchandra Bhardwaj Vs. Usha Vasantrao Kathale

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(4)ALLMR266; 2005(6)BomCR426; 2005(3)MhLj425

D.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Mr. Samarth, learned Counsel for the Applicant and Mr. Jibhkate, learned Counsel for the non-applicant-respondent.2. Civil Revision Application is directed against the Order, dated 16th December, 2000, passed below Exh.79 by Trial Court, whereby the application moved by the non-applicant-respondent under Order 22 of the Civil Procedure Code came to be allowed and the respondent is allowed to contest Regular Civil Suit No. 222 of 19992, as prayed.3. Mr. Samarth, the learned Counsel for the applicant, submitted that the original plaintiff - Umabai widow of Mahadevrao Hirde filed Regular Civil Suit No. 222 of 1992 against the applicant and during the pendency of the suit, on 22nd October, 1996, Smt. Umabai expired. Mr. Samarth, the learned Counsel for the applicant, submitted that it is the case of the non-applicant-respondent that Umabai executed the alleged registered Will, dated 25th August, 1992 in favour of the non-applicant-respondent and as per the alleged Wi...