Mumbai Court April 2006 Judgments

Manoj Babasaheb Patil Vs. Controller of Examination, Maharashtra Unive ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR77; 2006(6)BomCR386; 2006(4)MhLj810

D.Y. Chandrachud, J. 1. The Petitioner is a student of the Second Year MBBS Degree Course at the Third Respondent institute. On 26th July, 2005, the Petitioner appeared for the examination in the subject of Pharmacology. During the course of the examination, the Petitioner was apprehended by the supervisor while using a mobile phone. The student (Seat No. 84405) sitting immediately behind the Petitioner and the student (Seat No. 84404) sitting immediately in front of the Petitioner gave statements recording that the Petitioner had been apprehended while using a mobile phone, at 4.10 p.m. The Petitioner furnished a statement in his own hand writing admitting that he had been apprehended while he was in the process of using the mobile phone during the examination. The statements of the Chief Conductor / Center Incharge and Center Observer were also recorded. The manner in which the Petitioner was found to be using the mobile phone was described in the report of the supervisor. It was rep...

Wall Street Finance Ltd. a Company Incorporated Under the Companies Ac ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(2)BomCR511; 2006(202)ELT776(Bom); 2006(5)MhLj417; 2008[9]STR419

R.M. Lodha, J.1. The short question that arises in this writ petition is:whether the order dated 3rd February, 2000 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal is a decision in the eye of law? 2. Bereft of unnecessary details for consideration of the aforesaid question, the relevant facts may be noticed by us first.3. The Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Mumbai issued a show-cause notice dated 4.11.1997 to 12 parties specifically and Ors. known or unknown persons generally calling upon them to explain as to why:(i) assorted foreign currency including TCs amount of Rs. ,43,57,730.15 seized on 27.5.97 on board `Ya Hajipir'.(ii) amount of Rs. 58,02,000 seized on 2.6.97 lying in the pay order account of M/s.TTC in Union Bank of India, Versova Branch.(iii) amount of Rs. 10,01,010 seized on 2.6.97 lying in the pay order account of M/s.TTc in Syndicate Bank, Jogeshwari Branch.(iv) amount equivalent of US $ 1,07,450 (Rs. 38,57,455 @ 35.9) available with WSFL.(v) am...

Uday SaThe (Ex-major) Vs. Rahul Rajendra Borundia and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006CriLJ3435; 2006(4)MhLj421

R.S. Mohite, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the original complainant impugning the judgment and order passed by the IIIrd Extra Jt. District Judge and Addl. Sessions Judge, Pune, on 27-5-2004 allowing Criminal Appeal No. 244 of 2003 and setting aside the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and sentence of one year simple imprisonment with compensation of Rs. 6204/-imposed upon the accused by the judgment and order of the trial Court being theJ.M.F.C., Pune, on 6-9-2003 in Summary Criminal Case No. 6032 of 2003.2. The facts of the case are as under:(a) On 25-4-2003, the complainant sold 50 equity shares of J and K Bank Ltd. through respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Accused'). Delivery of the shares were given to the accused on 26-4-2003. By way of payment of the price of the shares, the accused issued a cheque on 30-4-2003 for an amount of Rs. 6,204.50 to the complainant. The cheque issued by the ac...

Varsha Ramsing Dhanavat Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR80; 2006(5)BomCR473; 2006(4)MhLj676

N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 21-7-2005 passed by the respondent No. 2 Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee, Amaravati Division, Amaravati, thereby invaliding the tribe claim of the petitioner, who claims to be belonging to Vimukta Jati (Rajput Bhamata).2. The petitioner was appointed as Shikshan Sevak vide an order dated 238-2004 issued by the respondent No. 4 on the post reserved for Vimukta Jatis. She had obtained the caste certificate dated 3-3-1994 issued by the Executive Magistrate, Buldhana that she belongs to. Rajput Bhamta - a Vimukta Jati. Because her caste claim was not verified at an early date, she had filed Writ Petition No. 7154 of 2004, whereupon this Court directed the respondent No. 2 to decide her caste claim within three months and in the meanwhile her services were protected. Initially, the petitioner had deposited her documents with the Scrutiny Committee at Auran...

Cotton Corporation of India Limited Vs. Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturin ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR105

Mhatre Nishita, J.1. The Plaintiff has claimed in this Suit an amount of Rs. 94,77,722.60 as damages for breach of a contract between it and the Defendants.2. The plaintiff is a Company wholly owned by the Government of India. It is a canalising agent for import of cotton. The Plaintiff imports cotton in bulk on the basis of a bulk import licence. Various consumer mills are then able to avail of this imported cotton on issuance of subsidiary licences to the mills under the arrangement between the plaintiff and the consumer mills. According to the Plaintiff, the consumer mills are required to place orders for purchase of cotton with the plaintiff. The cotton is imported and allocated to the consumer mills as sanctioned by the Textile Commissioner, The cotton is then required to be lifted by the consumer mills on the basis of a subsidiary import licence. A contract is executed between the parties. The contract is normally in a particular standard format, requiring the consumer mills to a...

Nina Y. Mathur Vs. Rupee Co-op. Bank Ltd. and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: III(2007)BC362

R.S. Mohite, J.1. Heard both the sides. Rule.The learned Counsel for the respective respondents waive service of rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith.2. This writ petition seeks to quash proceedings being Criminal Complaint Case No. 1238 of 2005 pending in the Court of 6th J.M.F.C., Thane. It is sought to be argued that on perusal of the complaint, it is self-evident that none of the acts which constitutes the ingredients of Section 138 had taken place within the jurisdiction of the Trial Court at Thane. It was sought to be argued that admittedly, drawing of the cheque was at Bandra, presentation of the cheque by the complainant was at Bandra and the return of the unpaid cheque was at Bandra. The notice was posted at Bandra and received at Bandra and since the drawer has his office at Bandra, the failure of the drawer to make payment is construed as failure to make payment at Bandra. On behalf of the complainant-respondent, it was contended that the complainant had a region...

Al-falah (Exports) Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This matter has been referred to the Larger Bench for decision on the following points: (i) whether the decision in the case of Machino Montell Ltd. 2004 (168) E.L.T. 466 (Tribunal) would apply to penalties under the Customs Act, 1962 as decided in the case of Jindal Vijaynagar Steel 2004 (177) E.L.T. 937 or it would not apply as held in the case of Saheli Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. vide Order Nos. A/681 to 683/2005-WZB/C-III, dated 19.7.2005 [2006 (197) E.L.T. 337 (Tribunal)].1.2 We have heard ld. Advocates and ld. DR and have considered the submissions made. After considering the material it is found. (a) Causes for arriving at penalties under the Customs Act, 1962 and Central Excise Act, 1944 are not similar, inasmuch as the Former Act raises liability to penalty for transgressions and violation of import/export prohibitions without or with Customs duty infringement while the Later Act chiefly concerns itself as a Revenue Generation measure with penalties related & consequent to s...

Colgate Palmolive Company Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)6STT169

1. This is stay application filed by the appellants for dispensing the pre-deposit of the duty demanded by the lower authority. While hearing the said application we find that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal and therefore we decided to dispose off the appeal itself by waiving pre-deposit with consent of both sides .2. The learned advocate for the appellant submits that the appellants based in U.S.A. are engaged in the business of developing manufacturing and marketing consumer brands of toothpaste, M/s. Sterling Home Products Pvt. Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of the dental cream toothpaste. The appellants have entered into the agreement with this company in India to provide technical know how for the manufacturing of their licensed product i.e. dental cream toothpaste.3. It was held that the services provided by them were liable to service tax and accordingly service tax amounting to Rs. 1,43,35,221 /- was demanded and confirmed against them along...

Betts Uk Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)8STT223

1. This is stay application filed by the appellants for dispensing the pre-deposit of the duty demanded by the lower authority. While hearing the said application we find that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal and therefore we decided to dispose off the appeal itself by waiving the pre-deposit with consent of both sides.2. The learned advocate for the appellant submits that the appellant a foreign company is providing technical know how and technical assistance, transfer of technology and services related to the manufacture of certain products by M/s. Betts India Pvt. Ltd. for which they were receiving technical assistance from the appellant for which the royalty is agreed at the rate of 4% of the total net sale price of the products manufactured and sold by the Indian company. This royalty amount received by them was held liable to service tax at the rate of 5% and accordingly was demanded and confirmed against them.3. The learned Advocate for the appella...

J.B. Chemicals and Vs. Addl. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1.1 The learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XXVI (hereinafter referred to aslearned Commissioner (Appeals)) erred in confirming to the value of closing stock without increasing the cost of purchases by Modvat element. 1.2 Your appellant submits that Section 145A does not authorize the increase in value of closing stock without simultaneous in value of purchases were purchases are debited to profit & loss account net of Modvat credit i.e., excluding Modvat element. 1.3 Your appellant therefore, prays to order increase to the debit to Profit & Loss account to the extent of Modvat credit and consequently nullify the addition retained to the value of closing stock. 2.1 The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that profit arising out of sale of steam does not constitute profit of the business. 2.2 The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in upholding exclusion of insurance receipt and Misc. income (arising out of sale of ammonia sulphate) from profits of the business. 2.2A Th...