Mumbai Court July 2005 Judgments

Punja S/O Narayan Polade Deceased Through Lrs. Pandharinath S/O Punja ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(2)BomCR283; 2005(4)MhLj621

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner challenges the order rejecting his application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act' and the same was disposed of by the award dated 5-7-2003.3. Few facts relevant for the decision are that the property which originally belonged to the petitioner's father came to be acquired in the year 1980 and the award in that regard came to be passed on 16-3-1981. Being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the father of the petitioner filed an application for reference under Section 18 of the said Act. However, the proceedings in the said reference were not diligently conducted on behalf of the father of the petitioner and the said reference came to be rejected under the order dated 1-4-1987. The father of the petitioner had expired on 28-2-1987. Subsequently the petitioner filed an application under Section 28-A of the said Act ...

New India Assurance Company Ltd., Branch at Chandrapur, Through the Br ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007ACJ610; 2005(4)ALLMR348; 2006(2)BomCR223; (2005)107BOMLR1571

S.T. Kharche, J.1. Heard Mr. Pophaly, learned Counsel, for the appellant and Mr. A.V. Bhide, learned Counsel, for respondents 1 to 3 finally. This appeal takes an exception to the judgment and Award dated 28.7.2004 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Yavatmal, in Claim Petition No. 221 of 1994 whereby the appellant/insurance Company is also held liable along with other respondents jointly and severally to pay the amount of compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased.2. Mr. Pophaly, learned Counsel, for the appellant contended that the accident occurred on 28.1.1994 and the victim Sharad died as a result of accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, i.e. Truck bearing registration No. MHG-6852. He contended that the insurance Company had issued Cover Note on 8.9.1993 after receiving cheque on account of premium from respondent No. 5. He contended that the cheque was dishonoured on 16.9.1993 and therefore the Cover Note was cancelled by issu...

Shakuntalabai Wd/O Bhagwantrao Dhongadi - Dead and ors. Vs. the State ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)107BOMLR1599; 2006(2)MhLj104

S.T. Kharche, J.1. By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the unsuccessful plaintiffs takes an exception to the judgment dated 5.8.1987 and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Wardha, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 79 of 1984 whereby the appeal has been dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court on 31.3.1984 in Regular Civil Suit No. 48 of 1973 was confirmed by which the suit instituted by the plaintiffs for possession and damages has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts are required to be stated as under: Agricultural land bearing Survey No. 105/3-K, area 4.15 acres, situated at mouza Ashti, district Wardha was previously owned by Ashti Ginning Factory. This land was shown in green boundaries in the plaint map. The said Ginning Factory carried its business till the year 1912. Thereafter it went into liquidation as per the order of the District Judge, Wardha and the above land along with the buildings and machin...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Devshi Trust

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)199CTR(Bom)600; [2005]279ITR519(Bom)

V.C. Daga, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short). The question referred by the Tribunal is arising out of its order passed in I. T. A. No. 3053 (Bom) of 1985 for the assessment year 1982-83. The same reads as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-trust was a non-discretionary trust for the purposes of the applicability of appropriate rate of tax ?'2. The factual matrix reveals that the respondent (assessee) was assessed in the status of an association of persons. On May 25, 1979, one Pushpa F. Shah created a trust by handing over Rs. 5,000 to two trustees, viz., Shri Bipin Amritlal Kothari and Smt. Bharati Bipin Kothari, in the presence of one Shri Hasmukhlal Panachand Sheth. It may be mentioned that Pushpa F. Shah is a sister of Shri Bipin, while Smt. Bharati is a wife of Bipin A. Kothari.3. On May 25, 1979, each of the two trustees and t...

Sambhaji Waghoji Asole and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(4)ALLMR949; 2006(2)BomCR233; 2006(1)MhLj392

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioners challenge the order of reversion dated 17-6-2005 on three counts; firstly, that the promotion which was granted to the petitioners could not have been on conditional relaxation of the qualification pertaining to the passing of the professional examination; secondly, the Government policy does not permit reversion of the employees in reserved category where the promotional cadre does not have the prescribed percentage of reserved category employees, and thirdly, that the backlog created on account of failure to fill-up the posts meant for reserved category does not justify the reversion of the petitioners.3. The learned Advocate for the petitioners, drawing attention to Rule 5(2) of the Recruitment Rules, submitted that the authority is not empowered to grant conditional or restrictive relaxation of the required qualification for promotion in the absence of specific provision empo...

Shri Venkateswara Cans Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The issue involved in these appeals is whether turnover tax and additional sales tax payable but not paid to taxing authorities should be allowed as deduction under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act 1944, or not. The appellants are having a factory in Backward area and are enjoying the package scheme of incentives declared by Government of Maharashtra wherein they are eligible to defer (retain) the liability of payment of sales tax, purchase tax turnover tax and additional sales tax up to certain ceiling and the taxes were liable to be paid after a period of 12 years. The authorities below have held that since the assessees have not paid the amounts, they are not entitiled to deductions. Hence these appeals.2. On hearing both sides. We find that the Ld. Counsel for the appellants has rightly relied upon CBEC Circular No. 378/11/98-CX dt/12/3/1998 in which it has been clarified that sales tax is deductible from the wholesale price for determination of assessable value for levy of ...

Asahi India Glass Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(112)ECC350

1. The CESTAT Final Order No. A/1615 & 1666/WZB/06-C-III (EB) dated 17.8.2006 passed by the Tribunal in the aforementioned appeals, in the said order the following paras 2, 3 and 4 shall be substituted: 2. The aforesaid two appeals arise out of two Order-in-Original Nos. 29 & 30/COMMR/04-05 dated 18.1.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur involving identical issue for different period i.e. October, 1996 to June, 2000 and July, 2000 to March, 2003. 3. The issue involved in the aforesaid appeals is as to whether the freight and insurances charges are includible in the assessable value. The appellants submit that the issue is now settled in their favour by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts JCB Ltd. reported in 2002 (146) 31 (S.C) and Associated Strips Ltd. v. CCE-2002 (49) RLT 506 (T) approved in wherein it was held that freight and transit insurance charged by the customers are not includible in the assessable value. 4. Since t...

Tarapur Coatings and Adhesives Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(190)ELT44Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These three appeals arise out of two separate orders by Commissioner (Appeals) Appeal No. E/1386/98 arises out of the demand confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Appeal No. E/1387/98 arises out of classification of goods manufactured by the appellant and Appeal No.E/1388/98 arises out of the penalty confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Briefly the facts are that the appellants M/s. Tarapur Coatings and Adhesives Ltd. manufactured goods called Tacodur T-75 and Tacodur TL 15 and 75. Second named goods are mixed along with solvent with the Tacodur by the ultimate purchasers. Both the items are cleared for use by the industrial users. Where as the appellants claim, that Tacodur falls under Chapter Heading No. 2942.00 leviable to duty at the rate of 15% and Tacodur under Chapter Heading 3506 leviable to duty at the 25% the department contends that even Tacodur attracts a levy at 25% as these goods are put in sets. The department relies on Section Note 2 to Section VI which rea...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Yash Pharma Chem Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(188)ELT185Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These 6 appeals and one cross objection arise out of Show Cause Notice dated 26-2-1991 which was adjudicated under Order-in-Original No. V-Adj(Ch.29) 15-268/90, dated 20-12-1991. The Adjudicating Commissioner had decided the matter in favour of the respondents and subsequently, the Tribunal by its Order Nos. 859 to 864/99-C, dated 24-8-1999 [2001 (135) E.L.T. 1206 (T)] dismissed the appeal filed by the Department. The Department filed a further appeal to the Apex Court which by its Order dated 6-3-2003 has remanded the matter for fresh decision by the Tribunal. We have heard both sides and perused the case records as well as the written submissions filed by both sides.2. The relevant portion of the Apex Court Order remanding the case back to the Tribunal is reproduced below : "From the various affidavits, which are on record, it appears that during manufacture of Ethambutol Hydrochloride I.P. the two substances DL-2 Aminbutanol and Tartaric Acid have to be mixed together. As stated...

Dena Bank Vs. Bankim Mehta and ors.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

Reported in: III(2006)BC248

1. This appeal is filed by the appellants/original applicants Dena Bank being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 25th August, 2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the D.R.T.-I, Mumbai in Original Application No. 641/2001. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Presiding Officer dismissed the Original Application. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.2. I have heard Mr. Chothani for the appellant Bank and Mr. Desai for the respondents. I have also gone through the proceedings including the impugned judgment and order and in my view, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. It is the case of the appellant Bank that the defendant No. 1 Bankim Mehta had requested for a cash credit against the hypothecation of book debts of Rs. 40 lacs, which was granted to him by the applicant Bank. The defendant No. 1 had executed demand promissory note, agreement of hypothecation, letter of continuity, general letter of lien and set-off and letter of undertaking. H...