Mumbai Court June 2006 Judgments

Maharashtra Engineering Plastic and General Kamgar Union Vs. Chamundi ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)BomCR443; [2007(112)FLR721]; 2006(6)MhLj459

D.G. Karnik, J.1. This Writ Petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 20th December, 2004 passed by the Industrial Court dismissing the complaint made by the petitioner Union against the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (for short 'the respondents') of Unfair Labour Practice falling under Items 1 and 6 of Schedule II and Items 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short 'the ULP Act').2. The petitioner is an union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. Under its constitution as it stood at the relevant time, the respondent No. 1 was allowed to represent workmen employed in several industries listed therein which did not include petrol pumps. The respondent No. 1 is a partnership firm running a petrol dispensing outlet (for short 'petrol pump') and the respondent No. 2 is its partner. On 5th June, 1998, the petitioner filed a complaint on behalf of the employees of the respondents allegi...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Mrs. Geetadevi Pasari

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)104TTJ(Mum.)375

1. This appeal of the Revenue is directed against CIT(A)'s order dt.18th July, 2002.2. The only ground of appeal raised by the Revenue is against the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 1,16,81,766 made by the AO on account of capital gain arising out of the transfer of property.3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee was a co-owner of the property at Plot No. 423, Chitrakar Dhahanukar Marg, Khar (W), Mumbai along with three other lady co-owners. The assessee and the co-owners executed an agreement of sale-cum-development with one Shri Thakurdas K. Chawla and others under which the assessee and her co-owners were to be paid the following consideration : (i) four flats of 1500 sq. ft carpet area each and four car parkings in the proposed building to be constructed; (ii) Rs. 4,21,50,000 in cash for the right to use the balance FSI. Pursuant to the said agreement, the developer paid Rs. 30 lakhs towards earnest/ deposit money on 29th March, 1994. As per the agreemen...

Unimed Technologies Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Customs (J.C.H.)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(191)ELT371Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellants are engaged in manufacture of Pharmaceutical products. In June 2000 they imported at JNPT port the following items, in sets, from Germany.They claimed clearance of the goods under licence free conditions vide para 5.2 of Exim Policy. The clearance was denied by holding the goods to be restricted as per Heading 3923 30.00 ITC (HS) Classifications of Imports & Exports. Consequently the goods were held liable to confiscation under section 111(d) & a fine in lieu of such confiscation of Rs. 2 lakhs & penalty of Rs. 25,000/- under Section 112(a) was imposed. Hence this appeal.2.1 The heading under which Revenue classifies for purpose of ITC Policy reads as 3923 30.00 "Carboys, bottles, flasks and similar Articles" being in a set the goods in question are unlike conventional bottles they being imported in 3 pieces/parts. The dropper "bottle" is a container with the Dropper inserts & Closures, each part conforming to a certain specification to render them in tot...

New Look Cosmetic Laser Centre Vs. Commissioner of Cus. (i)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Heard both sides. The issue involved is classification of "RUBY STAR SURGICAL LASER" claimed by the importer to be falling under Heading 90.18 of Customs Tariff and eligible to benefit of Notification No.20/90.Cus. Sr. No. 271 as well as Sr. No. 74 of list 21 there under or whether it falls for classification under Heading 8510.30 without the benefit of Notification No. 20/99 as held by the department vide the orders impugned.2. The entity, as per the Catalogue produced, indicates it to be "A Third Generation System, the "Ruby Star Laser" accommodates the latest in hair removal techniques. The advanced technology and years of clinical experience assure clinicians and their patients of the most reliable hair removal system avail able today "it is designed to provide the most effective, reliable and theorography documented method of treating unwanted hair on a patient. The Catalogue just informs" The optical Q-switch mode allows the clinician to expand the use of "Ruby Star" in the t...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Datamatics Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1.1 M/s. Datamatics Ltd. Respondent herein had filed an Ex-bond Bill of Entry against into Bond Bill of Entry No. 14/94/03.04. 1997, Igm No.A-1813/01.04.1997 for clearance of goods for home consumption declaring 380 sets of "'Hayes' Accura 336 message modern with voice and 760 (380+380) sets of Smartcom Data/Fax software for Accura 336, Smartcom message centre software for Accura 336" with a declared C.I.F. value of Rs. 713153/- & 727437/- respectively and classified the modems under heading 8517.50 with duty@ 30%+ 2%+18% and software under heading 8524.90 of CTA 75 with benefit of Notification of 11/97 Cus. Dated 01.03.1997 S.No. 173 duty @ Nil rate respectively.1.2. Since the product was sold internationally as one package and the operation manual clearly indicated that the modem cannot work without the software in other words the modem was supplied along with the software, It appeared the importers had split up the value of modem and software in order to clear the software at l...

Atul Spices Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1.1 Heard both sides in this appeal. The appellants had imported a consignment of Star Anise of Chinese origin from China and filed two B/Es for a quantity of 6800 kgs. Each declared value of USD.2800/-PMT on each for the B/E dated 18.7.02 and dtd.30.9.02. The valuation was disputed by the department. Their request for provisionally release of the consignment at the declared value was not accepted. They waived a show cause notice and an order dated 16.6.03 was passed holding that the value of the said goods imported under the two B/Es are loaded to USD.4200/-PMT (FOB) and they be assessed accordingly.1.2 Commissioner (Appeal) vide order dated 31.7.03 accepted the appellants plea that the value declared by them cannot be rejected and are liable to be accepted and set aside the order dated 16.6.03.1.3 Vide letter dated 12.9.03 a request to release the said goods was made as the appellant was incurring demurrage charges. They also vide letter dated 24.11.03 requested for not charging dem...

Prabhakar L. Mehta Vs. Commissioner of Customs (P)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Appellants had imported a consignment of 100% Polyester Fabrics and claimed duty free assessment under Notification No. 204/92, dated 19-5-92. They were denied the claim. A notice was issued and the Commissioner ordered as: I therefore confiscate 30,000 yards of polyester fabrics valued at Rs. 1,72,019/- under Section 111(d) & (f) of the Customs Act, 1962. The goods have already been released provisionally and are not available for confiscation. These are consumer goods and are not permitted to be imported without a valid import licence. As the goods have been provisionally released and are not available for confiscation, I order that a penalty of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) be imposed under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. I also order that the goods be assessed finally and appropriate payment of duty be recovered from the importer.1.2. In appeal, this Tribunal vide an order dated 18-7-2000/- remanded the matter for de novo adjudication. The Commissioner, vide his ...

Extrusion Process Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)106ITD336(Mum.)

1. This appeal is filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 1996-97. The appeal is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-IX at Mumbai dated 21-11-2002 and arises out of the assessment completed Under Section 143(3) r.w. Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture and export of aluminium tubes, cans and other extrusion products, since 1957. In certain earlier assessment years, disputes arose between the assessee company and the central excise department regarding the rate at which excise duty was payable on assessee's products. The assessee, on the basis of show cause cum demand notices issued to it by the central excise department, claimed deductions of the disputed demands in its computations of income for the purpose of income-tax. The appellant's claims for such deductions were allowed in the respective assessment years. Such deductions aggregated to Rs. 1,71,35,268 till 31-03-1980.The said dispute between the as...

The Executive Engineer, Rehabilitation Division Vs. Ramchandra Baban J ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR369; 2006(4)BomCR35; [2006(111)FLR50]; (2006)IIILLJ640Bom; 2006(4)MhLj517

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment delivered by learned single Judge on 1-8-2002 in Writ Petition No. 3098 of 1986. 2. The respondent (No. 1) herein was appointed as Peon on temporary basis in the Rehabilitation Department of the Pune Zilla Parishad at Pune under the order dated 10-3-1981, issued by the Executive Engineer of the said Department. The order of appointment discloses that the same shall be for a period of six months. The services of the respondent came to be terminated with effect from 31-5-1982 under the letter dated 15-5-1982. A reference came to be made being Reference No. 148/83 to the Labour Court at Pune consequent to the termination of services of the respondent. The contention of the respondent was that his services were terminated without assigning any reason and without holding any inquiry and, therefore, the same was illegal and he was entitled for reinstatement in the services with continuity of services along with back wages till hi...

Maruti Ramaji Patil (Since Deceased by His Heirs and Legal Representat ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR687; 2006(4)BomCR498; 2006(5)MhLj785

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition filed by the original landlords has brought in question the order passed by the Assistant Collector, Shahuwadi Division, Kolhapur on 28/7/1978 allowing an application filed under Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ( the Act for short ) and subsequently confirmed by the learned Member of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal at Kolhapur on 18/9/1979 by rejecting Revision Application No. 256 of 1978. 2. The facts briefly stated are that the agricultural land located in Survey No. 60/1 admeasuring 2 Acres and 29 Gunthas and in Survey No. 60/2 admeasuring 2 Acres and 4 Gunthas belong to the original petitioners No. 1 and 2 i.e. Maruti Ramaji Patil and Dattatraya Ramaji Patil. Mr. Dhondi Babu Mohite was the tenant on the said land and he died on 20/12/1974. His LRs i.e. present respondents submitted an application under Section 84 of the Act to the Tahasildar on or about 19/7/1976 claiming that Dhondi Mohite was the tenant as on ...