Mumbai Court July 2005 Judgments

Deendayal Didwania and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1.The above batch of appeals arising out of three separate adjudication orders involve similar issues and are hence heard together and is posed of by this common order.2. The first group of appeals Nos. C/171, 172, 123 to 126 and 175/97 arise out of order-in-original dated 30.7.1996 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive); the second group of appeals, viz.appeal Nos. C/1006 to 1008/98 arise out of order dated 15.7.1998 of the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) and appeal No. C/36/99 arises out of order dated 11.8.1998 of the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication). In the first order, a duty demand of Rs. 1,59,40,455/- has been confirmed against Deendayal Didwania and Navneet Kumar Didwania, holding them to be de facto importers of copper ingots/wire bars and brass scrap cleared against advance licence and DEFC books and disposed of in local market instead of utilization thereof in the manufacture of final products for export, resulting in contravention of the conditions...

Usha Re-rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(191)ELT1060Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These appeals arose out of the order of Commissioner (Appeals) Rajkot.2. The issue relates to admissibility or otherwise of deemed credit under Rule 57G(2) of erstwhile Central Excise Rules. The period of dispute is October 1994 to March 1995. The appellants took deemed credit of Rs. 11.72.650/- and Rs. 3,32,976/- during the said period on the ship breaking scrap in terms of Board's letter F. No T8/36/94 TRU dated 1.3.94. Out of the said amount of credit the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed denial of credit of Rs. 11,72.600/- and Rs. 3,32,976/- imposed a fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- after confiscating the plant & machinery, imposed a penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs on the appellant company under Rule 173Q and imposed a penalty of Rs.10 lakhs under Rule 209A on the power of attorney holder.3. The appellant company was a re-rolling mills. When it came to know of the circular above cited they took credit of the said amounts as deemed credit on 7.11.95 on the inputs procured by them somewhere du...

Anand Polyrotex, Nagraj K. Mehta Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Vide his impugned order, the authorities below has confirmed the demand of duly of Rs. 85,605/- against the appellant and imposed personal penalty of Rs. 71,963/- on the shortage of the modvatable inputs detected during the course of verification conducted on 16.12.1995. The appellant are engaged in the manufacture of Plastic Film and plastic scrap and was availing the benefit of modvat credit in respect of the various inputs. During the verification of modvatable inputs like Plastic Granules and printing inks, declared inputs, the same were found short.2. Proceedings were initiated which culminated into an impugned order passed by the authorities below.3. Shri. V.S. Sejpal, Ld. Advocate explains the shortages by submitting as under : Shortages of Plastic Granules 7425 Kgs. - duty involved Rs. 7 9,819/- 1. 2300.00 Kg. of Sweeping waste of Granules lying within the factory in small HDPE bags. The said stock was not considered as it was neither input nor finished products. We had int...

Anil Govindrao Kulkarni Vs. Sangli Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/original defendant No.6 Mr. A.G. Kulkarni, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29th August, 2003 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of D.R.T.-I, Mumbai in Original Application No. 133 of 2001. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Presiding Officer partly allowed the Original Application with proportionate costs against the defendant No.1 Standard Fabricators (India) Pvt. Ltd. and ordered the defendant No.1 to pay a sum of Rs. 1,20,60,246/- with future interest at the rate of 15 per cent. per annum with quarterly rests from the date of the application till realization of the said amount. The learned Presiding Officer also partly allowed the application with proportionate costs against the defendant Nos. 2 to 6 (guarantors) and ordered defendant Nos. 2 to 5 to jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- with future interest at the rate of 15 per cent. per annum with quarterly rests from the date of demand i.e. fr...

The Maharashtra Cosmopolitan Education Society and anr. Vs. the State ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR31; 2005(3)MhLj1011

D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. Rule, by consent returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents waive service. By consent of Counsel and at their request taken up for hearing and final disposal.2. In this batch of petitions, the Court has been moved by several institutions established by religious and linguistic minorities who are protected by the provisions of Article 30 of the Constitution. These institutions which conduct professional courses in Dental Science, Unani Medicine, Physiotherapy and Education are aggrieved by the decision of the Pravesh Niyantran Samiti to reduce the management quota from 75% to 50% for the Academic Year 2005-06. 3. The facts lie in a narrow compass. The Pravesh Niyantran Samiti has been established by the State Government in pursuance of the directives of the Supreme Court in Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka : AIR2003SC3724 . On 8th June 2004, the State Government issued a resolution prescribing the management quota in mi...

Shri P.A. Inamdar and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR52; 2005(3)MhLj1067

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, by consent returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents waives service. By consent of Counsel and at their request taken up for hearing and final disposal.2. In this batch of petitions, a decision arrived at by the Pravesh Niyantran Samiti on 10th June 2005 of declining to enhance the management quota for admissions at professional institutions established and administered by minorities, from 50% to 100% of the total intake has been called into question. The Samiti was set up by the Government of Maharashtra in pursuance of the decision of the Supreme Court in Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka, : AIR2003SC3724 . The three institutions in question in the three petitions before the Court, provide instruction in Architecture, Pharmacy and Management Sciences. None of the institutions is in receipt of grant-in-aid from the State Government or the Central Government. There is no dispute before the Court about the position...

Anantbhushan Murlidhar Kanade and anr. Vs. Vikas Kashinath Navandar

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR79; 2005(4)MhLj583

Zotting D.S., J. 1. Heard Shri V.D. Sapkal, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri Arunchandra Kapadia, learned Counsel for the respondent.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forth with. Taken up for hearing by consent of both the parties.3. The petitioners are the tenants in suit premises and the respondent is the landlord. Tenants have challenged the order dated 1-12-2004 passed below Exh. 12 in Rent Suit No. 53/2002. The landlord has filed the said suit for recovery of rent and possession of the suit premises. The landlord has claimed that the tenants are in arrears of rent from August, 1999 to August 2003.4. Admittedly, the tenants are in possession of the suit premises on monthly rent of Rs. 6,000/-. The tenants have admitted at para 13 of the written statement (Exh. 11) that they paid rent up to December, 2001. During the pendency of the suit, the landlord has filed the application Exh. 12 under Order 15-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for seeking direction to the tenants ...

Shri Navnath Machindra Kandhare Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: II(2006)DMC121

R.C. Chavan, J.1. Being aggrieved by his conviction for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, and the resultant sentence imposed upon him, the appellant has preferred this appeal.2. Facts which led to prosecution of the accused for harassment and murder of his wife are as under:-3. Complainant Changdeo's daughter Rajabai was married to accused about 11 years prior to the incident and the couple was blessed with three children. The accused was, however, in habit of consuming liquor and used to ill-treat his wife suspecting her character. In spite of attempt by relations, there was no improvement in the behaviour of the accused. This led the appellant's wife to leave for her parental home, a few days before the incident. However, just a day before the incident, she returned to her matrimonial home when her son came with message of his grand-father.4. On 28/12/1996, the deceased had gone to fore...

Dr. Yeshwant G. Bodhe Vs. Shri D.S. Rajapurkar, Court Receiver, High C ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)107BOMLR161

Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The petitioner-tenant has invoked Article 227 of the Constitution of India and sought to challenge the impugned judgment and order dated 21st March, 1992, passed by the Additional District Judge, Pune, (for short appellate Court), thereby, the appeal preferred by the respondents-landlord was allowed and suit for recovery of possession was dismissed. The Cross-appeal No. 147/64 filed by the petitioner was also dismissed. Therefore, the present writ petition filed by the tenant.2. Heard the learned Counsel Mr. C.R. Dalvi with Mr. S.M. Mhamane for the petitioner. None for the respondents 2A to 2F, though served. None for the receiver. The writ petition was on the board of final hearing on 23/6/2005, 20/6/2005, 11/7/2005 and lastly on 13/7/2005.3. The premises in question are situated in 'Udyan Prabhu' at C.T.S. No. 6298/A-2, Shivajinagar, Pune-2. The suit premises comprises of (A) Flat on first floor-Hall Brooms W.S. (B) Flat on Second floor-Hall, Bedroom, Kitchen, W....

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. K.C.A. Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Bom)331; [2006]283ITR65(Bom)

V.C. Daga, J.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, ('the Act'), the Tribunal has referred for the opinion of this Court questions of law arising from the order dt. 28th May, 1987 in ITA No. 1769/Bom/84 for the asst. yr. 1980-81 reproduced hereinbelow :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount received under the Central Government's Outright Grant of Subsidy Scheme of 1971 for industrial units get up in selected backward districts or areas did not go to reduce the actual cost as defined in Section 43(1) of the IT Act, 1961, for the purpose of computing the depreciation for the asst. yr. 1980-81 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that deduction under Sub-section (1) of Section 35CC could not be denied to the assessee although the statement of expenditure which was required to be furnished under Sub-section (3) of Sectio...