Mumbai Court July 2005 Judgments

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal and Sons

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Bom)324; [2006]282ITR457(Bom)

V.C. Daga, J.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the CIT(A) expressly or impliedly applied his mind on the issue of the allowance of relief under Section 35B on reassortment charges when the claim for deduction on this account had already been allowed by the ITO in the assessment order and consequently did not figure in the appeal before the CIT(A).2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that after an appeal was decided by the CIT(A) against the assessment order, the assessment order merged in the order of the CIT(A) and thereafter the CIT could not exercise his jurisdiction under Section 263 of the IT Act, 1961, for revising the assessment on the ground of its being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest...

Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. B.M. Shah and Company

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2005]142STC291(Bom)

S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. In all the above references following common questions of law have been referred :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the true and correct interpretation of Section 2(4) of the Sale of Goods Act, was the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal justified in law in holding that delivery orders issued by bankers to the respondents in pursuance of airways bills are documents of title to the goods, which are also negotiable ?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a true and correct interpretation of Section 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, was the Tribunal justified in law in holding that the disputed transaction under sale invoice No. 16 dated April 9, 1987 was allowable under Section 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 on the ground that sales are effected by transfer of documents of title to the goods before the goods had crossed the customs frontier of India ?'2. To decide the above question of law r...

Syed Zakir Ali and Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005CriLJ4085

P.S. Brahme, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. Rule returnable forthwith.3. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties.4. In all these writ petitions, a common question of law as to legality of the order passed by the Additional Collector in exercise of powers Under Section 6-A(1) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short called 'the Act') as to confiscation of goods' truck belonging to the petitioner is involved. As such, by consent of the parties, all these petitions are decided by this common judgment.5. The factual position in all these petitions is almost the same. To appreciate the question involved, for the sake of convenience, the facts in Writ Petition No. 350 of 2005 are stated in brief. In the midnight of 16-8-2002, the truck owned by the petitioner was raided by the Police Station Officer, Akot File Police Station, Akola (respondent No. 2). The truck was seized on the allegation that blue kerosene was used in the said truck as a ...

Ranjana Anil Ringay and ors. Vs. Government of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR400; 2006(1)BomCR909

Rebello F.I., J. 1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The following issue arises in this petition :Are the respondents right in changing profession tax under the provisions of the Maharashtra State Tax on Professions, Traders Callings and Employment Act, 1975 from the petitioners on the basis of ex gratia received under a scheme of optional voluntary retirement, even after the relationship of employee, employer has come to an end on the employee retiring under the scheme of voluntary retirement on the ground of drawing constructive service between the date of voluntary retirement and the actual date of superannuation.3. All the petitioners were working with the Reserve Bank of India at its Nagpur Branch. The Reserve Bank of India floated a scheme known as Optional Early Retirement Scheme. The salient features of the scheme were that it was introduced with effect from 16th May, 2002 and was applicable to employees who have completed 25 years of full time regular service in the bank and have also...

Cit Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal and Sons

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)198CTR(Bom)324

V.C. Daga, J.By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Commissioner (Appeals) expressly or impliedly applied his mind on the issue of the allowance of relief under section 35B on reassortment charges when the claim for deduction on this account had already been allowed by the Income Tax Officer in the assessment order and consequently did not figure in the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that after an appeal was decided by the Commissioner (Appeals) against the assessment order, the assessment order merged in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and thereafter the CIT could not exercise his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for ...

Koch Rajes C.D. Industries Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. (i) The applicants are engaged in the manufacture of Compact Discs such as Compact Discs (Audio), Compact Discs (Video) and Compact discs (ROM) also known as Computer Software. The applicants undertake this activity of replicating the Compact Discs, hereinafter referred to as CD on behalf of various Music and Software Companies, on job work basis. These companies, supply the applicants what is known in the Trade, a Source Master, in the form of either Digital Audio Tape or Compact Discs or Floppies. The applicants prepare Compact Discs out of Source Master by converting them into moulds (stampers), which are put into injection moulding machine from which a raw CD is obtained. This is put into a sputtering machine where a thin layer of aluminium is applied to the raw CD by vaccum metalising process. After this, the CD is coated with lacquer, checked for quality and then printed. The printed CD is then packed with the Inlay Cards, supplied by the customers on which the names of the c...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Reliance Silicone (i) Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(189)ELT177Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Revenue is in appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who has accepted that the product in dispute, viz. rubber premix is not a product falling under CET sub-heading 3910.00 as contended by the Revenue, but under GET sub-heading 4006.90 as claimed by the assessee. He has come to this conclusion on the basis of earlier order of the Tribunal [2002 (148) E.L.T. 496 (Tribunal)]...

Shirpur Shetkari Ssk Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants is a Co-operative Society registered with Maharashtra Co-operative Act, engaged in the manufacture of sugar. Shortages of 5193 bags of sugar were detected by their jurisdictional range superintendent on physical verification conducted on 5-11-1998. As the appellants could not explain the said shortages, they agreed to pay Central Excise duty of Rs. 4,41,405/- under protest. Subsequently, they also lodged FIR with Police on 10-11-1998 as regards such shortages.Thereafter, enquiries were made and it was found that the Chief Chemist of the appellants, who was required to record the production, had recorded the entries wrongly in order to take more production incentives. On the said basis, charge sheet was filed with the police on 12-5-1999 against such chief chemist for recording the wrong production claiming production incentives and thereby making loss to the company.2. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated by the Central Excise department by way of issuance ...

Alok Leasing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(190)ELT92Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants herein imported goods declared as moulds and dies vide bill of entry dated 26-12-1995. the goods were assessed as dies under Customs Tariff Heading 8477.90 and duty was charged at the rate of 25% + 15%. The importers claimed reassessment and consequential refund of duty paid on the ground that the goods were classifiable as moulds under Customs Tariff Heading 8480.10 and hence chargeable to duty at the rate of 25% + 10%. The reassessment claim has been rejected on the ground that the goods are parts of extruder and hence correctly classifiable under heading 8477.90.2. The appellants have asked for a decision on merits; hence we have gone through the written submissions, heard the learned DR and perused the records.3. The goods in question are used in plastic extruder. During the process of manufacture, the imported plastic gel releases through an extruder head and passes through the die and thus the plain surface plastic pipe is extruded from the extruder. The functi...

ito Vs. Laul Steels (P.) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)4SOT521(Mum.)

In all the aforesaid appeals, the department has raised identical grounds of appeal, which read as under : "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per the law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in directing the assessing officer to recompute the Income from house property as determined by the assessee, holding the Standard Rent as determined by the Municipal Authority to be the correct value.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the finding of the assessing officer that the assessee had let out the flat to one of its Directors at a rent which is lower than the Fair Market Rent of the flats in the neighbouring area.3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has further erred on the facts of the case by not taking into cognizance the fact that the Annual Value of the Property declared by the assessee is more than Annual Value as per the Rent Control Act." (i) The assessee-company ow...