Mumbai Court June 2005 Judgments

Sagar Moreshwar Satpute and ors. Vs. Sharda Industries and Engineering ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)BomCR419; [2006(108)FLR439]; (2006)IILLJ21Bom; 2005(4)MhLj824

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India challenge is to the order dated 26-2-1991 passed by respondent No. 2 Deputy Commissioner of Labour in application (IDA) No. 3 of 1988 under Section 33-C(1) of Industrial Disputes Act. Said application was filed by present petitioners claiming salary for the period from 1-9-1987 to 31-8-1988.2. Respondent No. 1 is an engineering industry covered by provisions of Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. It manufactures steel bars and a unit manufacturing bigger bars is known as Bada Mill while the unit manufacturing steel bars with less gauge is known as Choti Mill. The petitioners are employees engaged in Choti Mill. The number of employees is above 100 and the respondent No. 1 was not extending same service conditions to his employees working in both Mills. It appears that petitioners were getting 8.33% bonus while the employees of Bada Mill were being paid 20% bonus. Petitioner state that ...

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Devendra Puranlal Bir ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(3)ALLMR184; 2005(4)MhLj1011

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner-employer challenges the order dated 8-9-2004 passed by Industrial Court, Nagpur in Complaint U.L.P. No. 241/1998 whereby the said Court has directed the petitioner to provide job to the present respondent No. 1 on compassionate ground in class IV category within a period of six months.2. The petitioner is a State Government undertaking and present respondent No. 1 filed complaint under Section 28 of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as MRTU Act) contending that his father Puranlal was working as Watchman/Chowkidar with petitioner since 1968 and he expired on 30-4-1975. He stated that as per settlement entered into between the petitioner and its employees and circulars issued by petitioner from time to time, his mother made application on 24-6-1975 for the post of Clerk and in pursuance there...

Abdul Kalam Abdul Rashid Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(4)ALLMR400; 2006(1)MhLj218

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner, an ex employee of Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation has challenged the judgment dated 17-2-2005 passed by Industrial Court Amravati allowing the Revision U.L.P. No. 92/2004 filed by respondent No. 2 thereby reversing the order dated 2-9-2004 passed by the Labour Court Amravati in his favour ordering his reinstatement with full back wages and continuity with effect from 20-11-2003. Respondent No. 2 did terminate services of petitioner by order dated 20-11-2003 consequent upon the judgment of Industrial Court in earlier revision U.L.P. Revision No. 5 of 1993 whereby the learned member of Industrial Court set aside the order dated 24-12-1992 of Labour Court in favour of petitioner. During pendency of the U.L.P. Revision 5 of 1993, petitioner who was reinstated back came to be dismissed once again on 9-10-1999. His departmental appeal against subsequent dismissal ...

Anandrao Raghoji Malewar Vs. Heilmittel Pharmaceuticals

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR637; 2005(4)MhLj868

Dharmadhikari B.P., J.1. In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner/original defendant in the Regular Civil Suit Number 1039 of 1998 challenges the order dated 23-11-2004 passed by 7th Joint Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Nagpur, rejecting application for permission to amend his application raising objection Under Section 47 of C.P.C. It appears that present respondent filed on 29-7-1998 a suit for recovery of possession under Section 6 of Specific Relief Act against present petitioner. The respondent has stated that it is tenant in the premises of petitioner and it continued in peaceful and actual possession of said premises up to 20-7-1998. On that day they found that their locks on tenanted premises were broken and the respondent had taken forcible possession of suit premises and, their machinery installed in suit premises and other goods and raw material were found thrown in adjacent premises belonging to one Shri Pohane. After making police co...

R.K. Processors and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(191)ELT1111Tri(Mum.)bai

1.1 Appellants, M/s RK processors (hereinafter referred to as RK) are processors of man made fabrics and are assesses under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The other appellants are Merchant-manufacturers who supplied grey fabrics to RK for processing and individual appellants are Directors and other including Excise clerk of the aforesaid appellant RK.1.2 Gray fabrics for processing is received on job work basis from merchant/traders after compliance and as laid down in Notification No.27/92 CE(NT) dated 9.10.92. Being a job work, the computation of assessable value of processed fabrics was based on the information given by the traders/merchant manufacturers by furnishing the requisite price declarations along with cost sheet of gray fabrics. R K along with the merchant manufacturer were filing joint declaration about assessable value in terms of Notification No. 27/92-CE(NT) and Circular No. 39/93 dated 10.12.93 issued by the Department. R K also was availing the deemed Modvat credit i...

J.M. Industries Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal against that a portion of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by which he has upheld the adjudication order confirming duty demand of Rs. 1,04,184/- on bunkers, on the ground that they were present on board the vessel and not found in the machinery, but stored in separate tanks.2. The appellants were asked for decision on the basis of the written submission which we perused. We also heard Ld. DR and perused the other records. The adjudicating authority has recorded a clear finding that the average consumption of oil when the ship is in full run i.e. the ship is not idle, is Furnace Oil 7 MT per day, Diesel Oil 7.5 MT for 24 hours, Lub Oil 40 Kgs for 24 hours, Cylinder Oil 63 Kgs for 24 hours and other oil 5 Kgs for 24 hours. On this basis, he found that the excess quantity as declared by the Master of the Vessel at the time of arrival of the vessel at Along Anchorage was more than the required quantity and the excess quantity was found stored in separate tanks...

Manjara Shetkari S.S.K. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(188)ELT311Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The above appeals arise out of the common order of Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Pune. The issue pertains to Valuation of Molasses, a by product which arises during the process of manufacture of sugar.2. Appellant in E/2807/2000 is a manufacturer of sugar. He has a distillery where molasses manufactured by him is consumed captively.The appellant determined the value of molasses at the rate of Rs. 401 PMT under Rule 6(b)(i) of Central Excise Valuation Rules. The Commissioner observes that value cannot be determined under Rule 6(b)(i) because comparable prices of similar/identical goods were not available during the relevant time. He rejected the comparable prices at which molasses is sold by other sugar factories on the plea that all sugar factories undervalue molasses and proceeded to accept the opinion given by the Chief Sugar Technologist who opined that cost of production of one M.T. of molasses is Rs. 850/-. The present appeal is against this order of the Commissioner....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Promact Plastics

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(193)ELT509Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These two appeals are filed by the Revenue against the Orders-in-Appeal Nos. 1082 to 1083/99 (205 to 206-Ahd-II) CE/Commr. (A) Ahd. dated 6-8-99 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Ahmedabad.2. M/s. Promact Plastics Ltd. filed refund claims for Rs. 49,45,029/- for the period from 12-1-87 to 31-3-91 and for Rs. 35,43,549/- for the period from April 1991 to March 1992 consequent to resolution of the dispute of classification of HDPE tapes under Chapter 54 and sacks made out from such tapes. The Assistant Commissioner after examining the reclassification of the products worked out Modvat credit available to the appellants on HDPE granules and total duty paid by them on HDPE tapes and worked out the duty payable on strips after reclassification under sub-heading 3920.32 and found that excess amount of Rs. 17,64,579/- for the period from April 1991 to March 1992 and Rs. 29,17,364/- for the period from 12-1-87 to 31-3-97 was refundable to M/s. Promact Plastics Pvt. Lt...

New Shorrock Mills Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(188)ELT291Tri(Mum.)bai

1 This appeal is filed against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The appellants were manufacturer of texturised yarn falling under sub-heading 54.03 of the Central Excise Tariff. Texturised yarn was exempt from duty till 28-2-1994. The exemption granted to texturised yarn was withdrawn from 1-3-1994 and duty at the tariff rate was imposed. There was stock of texturised yarn with the appellants on 1-3-1994. Out of this stock of 3966.805 Kgs. of texturised yarn lying with the appellants as on 1-3-1994, they cleared two consignments of 947.050 Kgs. and 648.905 Kgs. of texturised yarn on 3-3-1994. They did not pay any duty on these texturised yarn. Therefore, they were asked to pay the duty on the said texturised yarn at the tariff rate amounting to Rs. 115627/- which was paid by them on 5-3-1995.Subsequently, show cause notice was issued to them for contravention of Rules 9(1), 173F and 173Q of the Central Excise Rules for not paying the correct duty on the clea...

The Khatau Makanji Spinning and Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The issue in dispute in these two appeals is whether the duty is to be paid on yarn prior to sizing or after sizing.2. We have heard both sides. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the present impugned order relied upon his earlier order in appeal No.SDK (1141) 850/98 Dated 30.9.98 in the case of Bombay Dyeing Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd to held that duty was payable on the yarn after it was sized. However, this order-in-appeal in the case of Bombay dyeing Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd., was taken up in appeal to the Tribunal and set aside as seen from 2000 (120) ELT 182 (Tri.), wherein the Tribunal held that duty was to be calculated on the value of sized yarn and not on the value of the sized yarn removed for consumption in the premises of assessee for use in weaving. Following the ratio of the above order, we set aside the impugned order and allow these appeals....