Mumbai Court April 2006 Judgments

Bharti Tele-ventures Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for modification of Stay Order No.S/165-166/WZB/CI/2006 dated 6.2.2006 by which pre-deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs was directed on the basis of earlier stay order of the Tribunal is based upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of BSNL Ltd. and Ors. v. UO1 2006 (2) S.T.R. 161 (S.C.) : 2006 (145) STC 91 (SC) setting aside the judgment of the order of the Kerala High Court in the case of Escotel Mobile Communications Ltd. v. UOI 2006 (2) S.T.R. 567 (Ker.) : 2004 (177) E.L.T. 99 (Ker.) : 2002 (123) Taxman 134 (Ker.) relied upon by the authorities below in holding that the applicants herein were liable to pay Service Tax on the value of SIM cards.2. On hearing both sides, we find that no prima facie case has been made out as we note that the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court does not record any finding that the value of the SIM card is not leviable to service tax but held that if the SIM card is sold, then sales tax is leviable, but if service is provided t...

Madanlal Mohanlal Narang Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)104ITD190(Mum.)

1. These two appeals are filed by the same assessee involving the same issues and were heard together. As a matter of convenience therefore, both of these appeals are being disposed by way of this consolidated order.2. We will first take ITA No. 5561/Mum/2002, i.e., assessee's appeal for the asst. yr. 1997-98.3. This appeal is directed against the CIT(A)'s order dt. 19th Aug., 2002 in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) for the asst. yr.1997-98. Although the assessee has raised four grounds of appeal, the only grievance pressed before us is against the CIT(A)'s confirmation of AO's action in declining exemption under Section 10(14) in respect of "uniform making expenses" and 'uniform washing expenses' and 'academic research allowance'. The quantum of uniform making expenses and uniform washing expenses is Rs. 51,554 and quantum of academic research allowance is Rs. 13,560.4. The assessee-appellant is an employee of Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. and is working as electri...

Mahabaleshwar Madhotpadak Sahakari Society Ltd. Vs. Hira V. Dhebe and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR662; 2006(5)BomCR275; [2006(110)FLR394]; 2006(3)MhLj534

V.C. Daga, J.1. P.C.: Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.Perused petition.2. This petition is directed against the order dated 3rd December, 2005 passed by the Industrial Court, Satara in Revision (ULP) No. 43 of 2005 dismissing the revision and thereby confirming the interim order passed by the Labour Court, Satara dated 11th October, 2005 below Exh.2 in Complaint (ULP) No. 3 of 2005, whereby the petitioner herein is directed to allow respondent No. 1- workman to work in their society temporarily till the final disposal of the complaint.3. Both the Courts below have found that there is non-compliance of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('I.D. Act' for short).4. Mr. Pakale, learned Counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court Managing Director, Bombay Film Laboratory Ltd. v. Vasule L.G. : (1998)ILLJ208Bom and the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Punjab State Electricity Board v. Presiding Officer, Labou...

Vidarbha Heritage Society and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)BomCR577

Joshi A.H., J.1. Hearing of the Writ Petition No. 2340 of 2001 together with this petition has been expedited by the Hon'ble Apex Court, as certain interlocutory orders passed by this Court were questioned before the Apex Court. This Court, therefore, by consent of parties, fixed the Writ Petitions for final disposal. Contesting parties have completed the pleadings.By consent of all the parties, the Writ Petitions are taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission hearing.Hence Rule. Rule is returnable forthwith, and is taken up for final disposal as aforesaid. Since three petitions are based on the main cause of finalization of List, retention or deletion in the List of Heritage Structures/Precincts, all these petitions are heard together, are, however, decided by separate Judgment and orders.2. In the own language of the petitioner, it has described in para 2 of petition the nature of lis prosecuted by it as follows:2. The petitioner submits that the petitioner Society is appr...

Saroj N. Patil Vs. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR121; 2006(6)BomCR295; [2006(111)FLR265]; (2006)IIILLJ624Bom; 2006(4)MhLj738

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule. By consent of Counsel, returnable forthwith. At the request of and with the consent of all Counsel, taken up for final hearing.The petitioner joined the services of the First respondent at the Tarapur Atomic Power Station as a Lower Division Clerk on 20th September, 1990. The appointment of the petitioner was on compassionate grounds since it has been stated that her father had died in harness in 1987. The case of the petitioner is that in the middle of April, 2003 she was in a mentally disturbed state. The petitioner has averred that this was 'on account of (a) character assassination campaign all around including in her office arising out of a misunderstanding that she, a married woman with two children eloped with a younger bachelor colleague though she had gone to Pune with him at his request to help him in a family matter of arranging a marriage alliance for his sister'.2. The petitioner was absent from duty from 25th April, 2003. It has been stated th...

Jaisukhlal N. Bhuta and ors. Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Board a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR893; 2006(44)MhLj371

Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The respondents refusal of new electricity connection to the petitioners' premises has resulted in the present Writ Petition.2. The petitioners are the Trustees of Bombay Gow Rakshak Trust (for short 'Trust'), a Public Trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The Trust, after an order of sanction dated 20th November, 2003, passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 361 of 2003 by the Special Court, became the owner of the property in question being the highest auction purchaser in the sale proceedings. The Trust has deposited with the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, total amount of Rs. 4,25,00,000/- i.e. an entire purchase price. On 3rd December, 2003, the Court Receiver, handed over the vacant and peaceful possession of the property to the Trust. The Trust paid all the taxes, cess and other society charges as per the sale confirmation terms.3. The petitioners-Trust found that the electricity supply to the said property had been disconnected by r...

Maker Tower 'H' Co-op. Hsg. Socy. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Leena N. Parekh an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR114; 2007(2)BomCR523; 2006(6)MhLj197

S.U. Kamdar, J.1. The present petition challenges the order dt. 22-7-1999 passed by the Deputy Registrar Co-op. Societies and order dt. 19-6-2001 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar Co-op. Societies being Ex.'D' and 'F' to the petition. By the said order, the Deputy Registrar has held that the respondent No. 1 is entitled to be a deemed member of the petitioner society. Some of the material facts of the present case are briefly enumerated as under:2. The respondent No. 4 was an original owner of flat bearing No. H-21 in the petitioner society being Maker Tower Co-op. Housing Society Ltd situated at Cuffe Parade, Mumbai. The respondent No. 4 is a holder of the said flat and was also a member of the petitioner society and was holding 5 shares bearing No. 26 to 30. The said shares were originally held in the name of three brothers, Shri Nitin M. Parekh, Shri K. M. Parekh, and Shri M. M. Parekh. Sometime in or about 1994, Shri K. M. Parekh and Shri M. M. Parekh resigned from the said ...

Hitesh Kumar Patel Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for waiver of the pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 5 Lakhs imposed upon the applicant herein who was the authorized signatory of M/s. Depila Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. during the period when duty demand was raised and confirmed against the Co., arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai.2. On hearing both sides and noting that prima facie there is no finding in the adjudication order as to the role played by the applicant herein in clandestine removal and evasion of duty, we hold that prima facie case has been made out and accordingly we dispense with the pre-deposit and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal....

Creative Marine Services Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellant is primarily engaged in the business of providing manpower inter alia of supply of officers and crew for engagement on vessels. They entered into agreement with Great Eastern Shipping Company and other shipping companies, under which they were required to provide officers and crew who are of requisite qualification and could satisfactorily execute shipping board duties and attend day to day ship board maintenance and keep of vessel. Besides this the appellants were required to provide various shipping management services which is set out in Annexure 'B' to the agreement which included payment to officers and crew after deduction of income tax and filing of return, arranging and providing food on board, undertaking repairs of the ships and various other ancillary functions. They were registered under the service tax as man power recruiting agency in spite of their contention that the service undertaken by them was a ship management and not that of man power recruitment...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Amishi Drugs and Chemicals Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

3. The issue involved in this appeal is that whether the respondents fire liable to reverse the Cenvat credit on the inputs used for the manufacture of final products which were destroyed in the Fire.4. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Chemicals falling under Chapter 28 & 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 30.06.03 there was a fire accident occurred in the factory premises of the assessee wherein 95kg. of finished goods and 34170.50 kgs. of inputs in process valued at Rs. 3,37,250/'- and Rs. 3,06,555/-, respectively amongst other goods were destroyed. A Show-Cause-Notice was issued to the assessee for reversal of the Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 91,533/- availed on the 34170.50kg.of destroyed inputs in process and Rs. 53,960/- involved in the 95kgs. of final products in the fire. On due adjudication of the matter, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Divn.-I, Ahemedabad-II, vide Order-in-Original No.371/AC/04-05-D dated 31.03.2005 had confirm...