Mumbai Court June 2005 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.
istiyak Ahmed Siddiqui Vs. A.N. Roy, Commissioner of Police,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3637
D.B. Bhosale, J. 1. The petitioner in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the order of detention dated 19th August, 2004 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Brihan Mumbai detaining Rashid Ahmed Siddique(for short 'the detenu'), by exercising the powers under Sub-section 2 of section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootlegers, Drug offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (for short 'the said Act'), preventing him to continue his illegal and criminal activities as 'slumlord' in the area of Kamrajnagar and adjoining area within the jurisdiction of Pant Nagar po1ice station, Brihan Mumbai. This petition. is filed by the brother of the detenu. .2. The detention order was passed on 19th August, 2004. It was served and executed on the detenu on 23rd August, 2004. The grounds of detention were served upon him alongwith material in support thereof on 24th August, 2004, Briefly stated the grounds of detention ...
V/O Tvazhpromexport' Vs. Mukand Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR406(Bom); I(2006)BC504; 2005(5)BomCR130
Deshmukh D.K., J. 1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the Award made by the sole arbitrator directing the petitioner to pay the respondent the sum that is mentioned in the operative part of the award.2. The facts that are material and relevant for deciding this petition are that the petitioner had entered into a contract of sale with the respondent for supply of the quantity mentioned in the contract of Low Ash Matallurgical Coke at: the price stated in the contract. Admittedly, part of the agreed quantity was supplied by the petitioner to the respondent, but admittedly the petitioner did not supply the entire agreed quantity. On failure of the petitioner to supply the entire agreed quantity, the goods were purchased by the respondent from other party. Admittedly, this purchase was made by the respondent at a rate higher than the rate at which the petitioner had agreed to supply the material to the respondent. While the material was in the process of being supplied to the re...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mohan Bhanudas Bansode and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC537; 2005(3)ALLMR887; 2006(2)BomCR273; [2005(107)FLR930]; 2005(4)MhLj158
D.S. Zoting, J.1. Heard Shri V. N. Upadhye, Advocate for the appellant and Shri B. R. Warma, Advocate for the respondents.2. This is an appeal preferred by the original respondent No. 2 against the judgment and award passed by Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation and Civil Judge (Senior Division), Parbhani in F. A. No. 8 of 1996 dated 2-5-1998 imposing penalty of Rs. 83,013.75 Ps. and interest at the rate of 12% p.a. and making the appellant liable for payment, in addition to this amount, the compensation of Rs. 1,66,027.50 Ps.3. The facts relevant for decision of this appeal may be briefly stated as under:One Balu Mohan Bansode, who was admittedly in the employment of respondent No. 3, died in a vehicle accident that had taken place on 11-5-1996. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 (original petitioner Nos. 1 and 2) are the parents of Balu. Balu Mohan Bansode was serving as a driver. He was getting in all Rs. 1500/- p.m. and Rs. 600/- towards Bhatta from respondent No. 3. On 11-5-1996, he wa...
Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-2005
Reported in: (2005)(192)ELT658Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The above appeals arise out of a common order-in-Appeal disposing of five Orders-in-Original. Details of the above appeals are annexed to this order.2. The issue in dispute relates to eligibility of modvat credit of duty paid on inputs and capital goods used within the factory of the appellants in the manufacture of Soda Ash falling under Chapter 28 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.4. We have heard both sides. The first ground for disallowing credit is that bills of entry or invoices covering the goods showed the address of the head office of the appellants while the goods were sent to the factory of the appellants. The Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon CEBEC Circular dt. 14.5.1996 providing for credit to be allowed if entire consignment in the original packing is transferred to the manufacturing unit and the duty paying documents endorsed by the Registered office/Corporate office in whose name and address the documents have been consigned, and held...
Tata Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-2005
Reported in: (2005)(190)ELT269Tri(Mum.)bai
1.2 M/s. Telco at Jamshedpur were an assessee under the Central Excise Act, engaged in the manufacture of Motor Vehicle & in April 1998, Excavator manufacture of business was hived off to another, holding unit manufacturing in the same premises. On 30-3-2000, the Axle & Transmission assembly unit was similarly hived as subsidiaries. However manufacturing continued in same premises.1.3 On the day of this slicing out of Excavator unit &/or the Axle & Transmission unit, there was no duty credit amount balance in the RG 23A or/& RG 23C. The hived off units, started with zero balance in their Modvat credit registers. However inputs in balance & in work in progress & finished goods were physically on the shop floor at various stages. No amount transfer of credits was sought.1.4 Revenue initiated proceeding contending due to sale of units, duty credit was required to be reversed. On a national basis for the year 1999-2000 on Excavator parts/inputs finished goods. ...
Mahendra H. Patel Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-2005
Reported in: (2005)(187)ELT331Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The above appeals arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad, who has ordered absolute confiscation of 90 silver slabs of foreign origin (bearing the marking "JOHNSON MATHEY REFINERS MELTER LONDON 999") and 274 silver chorsas (melted from foreign made 10 silver slabs) recovered from the factory premises of Babulal Dhanraj Mohta on 20-2-93, confiscated vehicles used for transporting the above mentioned silver with option to redeem the same on payment of fine and imposed penalties as under - 2. These are the 5 persons who are in appeal before us and the others upon whom the Commissioner has imposed the penalties have not preferred appeals before the Tribunal. Shri B.D. Mohta has stated that silver bricks and silver chorsas lying in his factory were smuggled and he has received the same from his brother-in-law Shri Rajendra Bishani. Shri D.R. Yadav and 2 Raghuwanshis melted the silver. In their statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, they have s...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Rhone Poulenc (India) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-2005
Reported in: (2005)(187)ELT336Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Revenue wants to consider sugar syrup arising at intermediate stage in the assessees factory during the course of manufacture of medicaments relying upon the Tribunal's decision in case of M/s.Cadbury India Ltd. - 1998 (104) E.L.T. 457 (T) and Board's Circular No.75/75/94-CX., dated 2-11-94.2. Respondents have filed a cross objection and rely upon report of Chief Chemist of Revenue Laboratory certifying the sugar syrup to be unstable product therefore not having shelf life/marketability as also they rely on the decision of CCE (A) on their own case for an earlier period for which no appeal was filed and plead that the product and process remain the same.3. We find that in this case of Revenue's appeal ignoring the Chief Chemist of Revenue Central Laboratory's report was not called for when the product is unstable & has no shelf life and is therefore not marketable, there cannot be a levy of excisability thereon. Revenue's appeal therefore bereft of merit and is rejected....
Sagar Impex Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-2005
Reported in: (2006)(193)ELT289Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The early hearing application is allowed and the stay application is taken up for disposal.2. After hearing both sides for sometime, we take up the appeal itself for disposal, after waiving pre-deposit of penalty imposed upon the appellants by the Commissioner.3. The brief facts are that the appellants sought to export 4247.56 Cts of Rough Diamonds to Hong Kong by declaring the FOB value of US $ 15 per carat. The department found that the value declared did not correspond to the value of the goods, sought to be exported. The department constituted an Expert Panel to value the goods afresh. It was found that the value arrived at by the Expert Panel was much more than the declared FOB value. In the adjudication proceedings, the Commissioner confiscated the goods under Section 113(i) of the Customs Act but allowed them to redeem on payment of fine of Rs. 15 lakhs.During the adjudication proceedings, the appellants had taken a plea before the Commissioner that the Panel evaluated the e...
Unimark Remedies Ltd., Shri Vs. Commssioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-2005
Reported in: (2006)(204)ELT49Tri(Mum.)bai
1. After allowing the stay petition, I take up the appeal itself for disposal.2. As per facts on records, the Central Excise officers visited the office of one transporter M/s. Aar Dee Cargo Movers Pvt. Ltd. Vapi on 30.05.1999 and found the consignment of EMME dispatches by the appellant M/s. Unimark Remedies Ltd. The said consignment was covered by proforma invoice. Subsequently on 08.06.99 officers visited the factory of the said appellant and conducted various checks and verifications. As a result, the stock of raw materials and finished goods were found in excess of recorded balance in the statutory records. the same, along with the consignment recovered from the transporters premises were put under seizure. Subsequently, show cause notice was issued on 06.12.1999 proposing confiscation of the seized goods and for imposition of penalties upon various persons. The said show cause notice culminated into an order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise vide which he had co...
Vinod Soni and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-13-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3408; 2005(3)MhLj1131
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. By this petition, the petitioners who are married couple, seek to challenge the constitutional validity of Preconception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act of 1994 (hereinafter referred to Sex Selection Act of 1994). The petition contains basically two challenges to the enactment. First, it violates Article 14 of the Constitution and second, that it violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India. At the time of argument, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that he does not press his petition in so far as the challenge via Article 14 of the Constitution of India is concerned.2. We are, therefore, required to consider the challenge that the provisions of Sex Selection Act of 1994 are violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Article 21 reads thus: 'Protection of life and personal liberty - No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by la...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »