Mumbai Court April 2006 Judgments

Bholenath Trading Company Vs. State Bank of India

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR207; 2006(44)MhLj37

D.D. Sinha, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of Mr. R.R. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anilkumar, learned Counsel for the Respondent.2. The counsel for the petitioner states that in the instant case bids were invited by the Respondent-Bank for sale of land with industrial shed, plant and machinery of an oil (Vanaspati) Extraction Plant located in the city of Akola vide tender notice dated 9-10-2004. It is further contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was one of the bidder and submitted his tender on 29-11-2004. The bids were opened on 12-2-2005 and the petitioner was the highest bidder. It is further contended that the amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Twenty Five Lacs) was required to be deposited by the tenderer at the time of submitting the tender as per the condition of tender document and therefore, the petitioner has deposited the Demand Draft of Rs. 25,00,000/- along with the tender document which was submit...

Sajanbee W/O Khajamiya Shaikh Vs. Khajamiya S/O Musasaheb Shaikh

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2007)DMC537; 2006(44)MhLj265

S.P. Kukday, J.1. The petitioner filed Application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C') in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Paranda, for separate maintenance. The same was allowed awarding maintenance at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month.2. The respondent herein, filed Revision. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Osmanabad found that Talaq was communicated by notice, therefore, petitioner is entitled to maintenance of Iddat period only and the amount of mehr. In this view of the matter, Revision was partly allowed. This order dated 21-2-1998 has been impugned in the present Revision.3. The short point which arises for consideration is, whether petitioner is entitled to maintenance even after communication of divorce. Learned Counsel for petitioner contends that divorce has not been duly proved, therefore, petitioner is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is not in dispute that the factum of...

Shri Rajinder Nirula and Tilak Raj Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

2. This is an appeal against an Order-in-original dated 30.03.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, C.S.I. Airport, Mumbai.3. The appellants Shri. Rajinder Nirula and Shri. Tilak Raj Sharma were apprehended by the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence on 01.08.2002 at the Air India Executive waiting room situated at the transit lounge of the Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai. Shri Rajinder Nirula was to travel by Air India flight from Mumbai to Ahmedabad as a domestic passenger in the international flight. Shri Tilak Raj Sharma was in transit in the midst of his journey from Bangkok to Dubai via Mumbai. US $ 70,000 and four mobile phones (with chargers) valued at Rs. 20,000/- were seized from them.4. A Show-Cause-Notice was issued to them, inter alia, alleging that the foreign currency was being attempted to be exported out of India in contravention of the provisions of Sections 5 and 7 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 with Section 11(1)...

Rallis India Limited Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(202)ELT540Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of organic Chemicals and bulk drugs. During the course of scrutiny of Central Excise Statutory records i.e. RT 12 returns for the period from August 94 to March, 98 it was noticed that the unit had cleared their product viz, D.V. Ester to their another unit situated at Derabassi and it was further noticed that the same product was cleared by them to their depot at the rate of Rs. 1300/-per kg. vide invoice No. 196 dated 8-11-1995. The appellants were clearing their product on the basis of cost plus margin of profit which was much lowgr. They were therefore issued a show cause notice alleging that once the unit was selling the product at a much higher price the sale price of the product is to be considered as assessable value in terms of Section 4 R/w, Rule 6(b)(1) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules 1975 and accordingly demanded duty amounting to R 1,97,60,973/- for the period August 94 to March 98.This duty was confirmed the Commis...

Shri Vishan Shamlal Milwani and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(109)ECC113

1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of fire works Based on information received, department's preventive party or 28.12.1997 intercepted one four wheeler carrying fire work total!) valued at Rs. 3,51,114/- and found the same being transported without cover of proper Central Excise duty paid documents. The truck alongwith the fire work was consequently seized by the department. In follow up action the appellants' factory premises as well as office were searched where incriminating private documents viz. 52 packing slips and one depot invoice concealed in isolated place of the office premises relating to clandestine removal of the goods for the period December 1996 to December 1997 were found. On the scrutiny it was found that these packing slips contained all the relevant details regarding, description, consignee name, vehicle No. etc. but the assesses was unable to produce the corresponding duty paying documents. The total value of fire work involved in these 52 packing s...

Hariram Packaging and Polymers Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both the sides, we find that service tax has been confirmed against the appellants on the ground that 'Del Credere Agent' is covered by the expression Clearing and Forwarding Agent', thus attracting tax. The period involved is from June, 2001 to May' 2003.The Tribunal in the case of Raja Rajeshwari Intl. Polymers (P) Ltd. v.CCE, Bangalore-III and Sreenidhi Polymers Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore-III and 2006 (3) S.T.R. 597 (Tribunal): 2005 (186) E.L.T. 195 respectively, has held that prior to 1-7-2003, the said services cannot be held to be covered by clearing and forwarding services. In view of the above, we allow the stay petition unconditionally....

M.P. Gandhi Trust Vs. Asstt. Director of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)8SOT808(Mum.)

The appeals of the assessee are directed against Commissioner (Appeals)'s separate orders dated 13-11-1997 for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1995-96 respectively. Since common issue is involved in both the years, the appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common order.The main grievance of the assessee in these appeals is the denial of exemption under section 11(2) of the Act during the relevant assessment years in respect of income accumulated/set apart for application as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act.Brief facts relating to the issue are that the assessee is a charitable trust and it filed its audit report along with the return of income for the relevant previous year. The assessee filed Form No. 10 along with the resolution of the trust. The assessee had requested for accumulation of surplus funds under section 11(2) of the Act. The purpose of accumulation was mentioned as "for making substantial donation to selected institutions after a careful appraisal ...

The A.C.i.T. Vs. Sucham Finance and Investments

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)105ITD353(Mum.)

1. This departmental appeal arises from the order dated 2003 of CIT(A)-IV, Mumbai. The only ground of appeal raised by the Revenue is as under: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to set off the speculation loss of Rs. 63,67,946/- on share transaction where delivery of share has not been taken against the profit on non-speculative shares trading (delivery basis).2. The relevant facts leading to the controversy are that the assessee company is a private limited company engaged in the business of purchase and sales of shares of other companies. The admitted position is that this is the only business activity of the assessee and there is no other source of income. In the return of income filed by the assessee, the assessee disclosed loss of Rs. 63,67,946/- on trading of shares where delivery was not taken and profit of Rs 5,32,963/- on trading of shares where delivery was taken. There is no dispute about the fact that in respect...

C.K.P. Mandal Vs. the Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)BomCR747; (2006)204CTR(Bom)274; 2006(4)MhLj669; 2006[4]STR183

R.M. Lodha, J.1. The following substantial questions of law arise in this appeal: (i) Whether the consideration (donation or by whatever name called) received by the appellant from M/s.Saideep Caterers and Decorators under the two separate contracts giving M/s.Saideep Caterers and Decorators monopoly rights for catering and decoration to the hirer of the appellant's hall (mandap) for official, social and business functions is chargeable to service tax within the meaning of Section 65(90)(m) of the Finance Act, 1994? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the appellant was rendering catering/decoration services within the meaning of Section 65(90)(m) of the Finance Act, 1994? 2. The senior counsel for the parties agreed that the appeal may be heard and disposed of on the aforesaid two questions at this stage. 3. The appellant is a charitable trust registered under the Bombay Public ...

State of Maharashtra Vs. Narsinh Manya Bapu Bhosale

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR371; 2006(4)MhLj768

D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. Rule, by consent of Counsel returnable forthwith. By consent of Counsel and at the request of Counsel taken up for hearing. 2. The State of Maharashtra has instituted these proceedings to challenge a judgment and order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dated 23rd March 2001. 3. In 1983, the Respondent was selected for appointment to the post of Police Sub Inspector as a direct recruit. In 1995, he was promoted as Assistant Police Inspector. The Respondent instituted proceedings before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, claiming entitlement to promotion to the post of Police Inspector with effect from 25th October 2000 and a direction to the State to issue orders of promotion with effect from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted, together with consequential service benefits including seniority and arrears of pay. The application filed by the Respondent was allowed by the Tribunal with a direction to the State Government to promote t...