Mumbai Court June 2005 Judgments

Majid Ahmedbhai Oomerbhoy Vs. Rashid Sattar Oomerbhoy

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2006]132CompCas382(Bom); [2005]64SCL496(Bom)

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. This Company Application survives only insofar as relief claimed in terms of prayer Clause (b). This is so because the property in question, as is prayed in prayer Clause (a) has already been sold. Two points arise in the present Application, viz.(1) Whether the respondent No. 3 is liable to pay any amount by way of compensation/royalty towards use of the flat situated on the third floor of Gold View Co-operative Housing Society being Flat No. 8 at 126, M.K. Road, Bombay - 20 ?(2) If the answer is in the affirmative, what should be the amount of compensation of the royalty to be recovered from the respondent No. 3 for the user of the said flat till 11th April 2005 ?3. According to the applicants, the respondent No. 3 is liable to pay compensation for use and occupation of the said flat at least from the date of filing of the Company Petition on 5th September, 2001 till the date of sale of the flat or the same was vacated by the res...

Sangayya Panchkatti Matt Vs. State

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2006)ACC52

V.M. Kanade, J.1. The appellant/original accused is challenging the judgment and order passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Panaji in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2002. By the said judgment and order dated 25th May, 2004, the Additional Sessions Judge was pleased to convict the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence him to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 years and also impose a fine of Rs. 2000 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 2 months. The Additional Sessions Judge also convicted the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 month.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 30.3.2001 at about 4.10 hours the accused was driving a Tata Estate car and at that time was under the influence of alcohol and in this c...

Chemosyn Ltd. Vs. Unmesh Kantilal Shah

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2006]134CompCas527(Bom); [2006]68SCL568(Bom)

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. Admit.3. Appeal is heard forthwith by consent of the parties, as short question is involved.4. This Appeal Lakes exception to the order passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi dated April 4, 2005 in Company Application Nos. 170 of 2003 and 89 of 2004 in Company Petition No. 73 of 2000.5. The Respondents took out Application under Section 634A of the Companies Act (thereinafter referred to as the 'Act') read with Regulation 44 of the Company Board Rules and Regulations, 1981 for implementation/execution of the order dated 15th July, 2002 passed in Company Application No. 86 of 2003 and order dated 13th December, 2002 in Company Application No. 71 of 2002.6. By the impugned order, the Company Law Board has observed that to get the said orders executed, it was appointing retired Judge of the Supreme Court as Executing Authority, It is noted in the order that the Appellants own certain properties/assets and the dues...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Toughalt India Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Revenue is in appeal questioning the valuations approved by CCE(A) for the drums manufactured by the Respondents on job work. As regards scrap value, I find that the quantity of scrap is the total steel used less the weight of the drums delivered by the appellant to their buyers. This quantity is included while arriving at the cost of the drum steel given by the oil companies. The quantity of the scrap steel is valued at the rate of the cost of original plates and is loaded in to the cost of the drums delivered by the appellants. Thus the appellants have added a higher value to the value of the drums towards the value of scrap arising during the process of manufacture. As regards inward transportation and crane service changes. I find that, these expenses of the appellants is nothing but expenses like any other expenditure of an organization like salaries and wages, maintenance and repairs, administrative charges etc, and same got accounted by the appellant in expenditure account. ...

Kamalakar Vinayak Raut Dessai (Since Deceased, Represented by Legal He ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(6)BomCR100

ORDERS.S. Parkar, J.1. This application is made by one of the co-owners of the property which was acquired, for deposit in court of his share of the compensation payable by the Government.2. Initially compensation had been granted at the rate of Rs. 5/- per sq. mt. by the Special Land Acquistion Officer. Reference was made by two out of three claimants only under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In that reference, being Land Acquisition case No. 28/93, the Additional District Judge, South Goa, Margao, by his Judgment and Order dated 22nd June, 1998, had enhanced the compensation payable in respect of the acquired land from Rs. 5/- per sq. mt. to Rs. 10/- per sq. mt. The said Order was challenged by the Government In First Appeal No. 86/98 in this Court, which came to be dismissed by this Court on 12th April, 2004, confirming the Order of the District Court of enhancement of compensation. So far as compensation granted by the Collector at the rate of Rs. 5/- per sq. mt. Is ...

Dhansingh Amarsingh Rathod Vs. Haji Abbubhai S/O Haji Suleman Kacchi a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR655; 2006(2)MhLj84

S.T. Kharche, J.1. Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the defendant has filed this second appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 24-9-1985 and decree passed by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., in Regular Civil Suit No. 42 of 1984 directing the defendant to deliver the possession of the suit plot to the plaintiff which has been confirmed by the Appellate Court on 4-1-1985 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 192 of 1985.2. Brief facts are as under :Plaintiff and defendants No. 2 and 3 are real brothers and are owners of the suit plot shown by the letters A B C D in the map annexed with the plaint. This plot was owned by their father Haji Suleman and after his death they have inherited the property and also applied for converting this land into non-agricultural use and accordingly the land was converted into non-agricultural use. The defendant No. 1 had occupied a plot admeasuring 60 x 40 ft. i.e. 2400 sq. ft in this land. He...

Singh Scrap Processing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(192)ELT673Tri(Mum.)bai

1. As per the facts on records, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Billets and Ingots. The major raw material for the same is M.S scrap and Sponge Iron, on which the appellants was availing the benefit of modvat credit in terms of the provisions of Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rues, 1944.2. The appellant's factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 13/08/96, who conducted various checks and verifications. On physical verification of the stock of the main raw material i.e. scrap, the same was found to be 2500 M.T. The said verifications of the stock were done in the presence of authorized representative. Subsequently, also two officers of the appellants were associated and the goods were once again verified in the presence of Shri A.K. Biswas, and Shri P.K.Mishra, so as to avoid any discrepancy and it was again found that the total quantity of the scrap available in the appellant's factory was to the tune of 2500 MT. Subsequently, another chance to cross...

Cce Vs. Philips (i) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Commissioner(Appeals) granted the benefit of notification 108/95 dated 28.08.95 after personally having verified the documents. The respondents had submitted before the CCE(A) - a) A letter dated 12.12.96 from World Bank to National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC) certifying that they are funding the project under consideration. b) Approval dated 16.02.1995 of the Government of India and NTPC project under consideration. c) Certificate dated 07.05.97 issued by NTPC certifying that World Bank has financed the project and the Government of India had approved the same. This also certified the project to have been sub-centralised to Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd (BHEL) for supply of "Equipment & material including associated accessories for control and instrumentation package". d) Purchase order dated 29.11.1997 issued by BHEL in favour of the respondents herein for supply of the goods.2. (a) The personal verification of CCE(A) cannot be doubted.Therefore, there is no force fo...

Flex-o-packaging and Shri B.S. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(192)ELT661Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The issue in these appeals is whether the appellants after having sold the Aluminium foils to various persons without physically removing the same from the premises could conduct the job work of printing such foils on orders of the buyers, claiming benefit of notification 214/86.2. The Commissioner orders & propose to demand duty on the basis of notification 1/93 but actually does so by denial of notification 214/86.The uses the term "supplier of material" & not seller. Therefore absence or presence of sale to the buyers is of no consequence. The Larger Bench in the case of Maruti Udyog Ltd (2000 (118) ELT 43 Trib-LB) in para 8 have held - "8 .... The mere fact that BSL are the supplier of the inputs as well as the job worker doing the job of assembling the section on behalf of MUZ should not be reason to deny the benefit of procedure set by the department." And on finding that the notice itself admits in para 1(ii) that Modvatable invoices were being issued by the appellan...

West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)100TTJ(Mum.)833

1. The two appeals are filed by the assessee. The relevant asst. yrs.1996-97 and 1997-98. The appeals are directed against the orders passed by the CIT(A)-XXVII, Mumbai on 4th Oct., 1999 and 18th Dec, 2000, respectively. The appeals arise out of the assessments completed under Section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961.2. In the appeals filed for the asst. yr. 1996-97 the first issue raised by the assessee-company is that of the disallowance of expenses pertaining to guest house/rest house amounting to Rs. 1,10,707. The expenses disallowed by the assessing authority, consisted of municipal taxes, repairs, maintenance, etc. pertaining to guest house/rest house.The allowability of expenses of above nature incurred for the maintenance of guest house has been considered by Special Bench of the Tribunal Delhi in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2002) 77 TTJ (Del)(SB) 681 : (2003) 84 ITD 49 (Del)(SB). The Special Bench has held therein that Section 37(4) is a specific provision whereas ...