Mumbai Court October 2007 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Osram India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: (2008)(124)ECC27
1. This appeal is directed against S/26-27/2000 VA/S 10-01/2000 VA dated 7.2.2000. The relevant facts of the issue that arise for consideration are that the appellant imported one consignment of goods described as "Electrical Lamp making 2^nd fusion machine (3 Tubes)" and "electrical lamp making 2^nd fusion machine (2 Tubes)" and filed bills of entry for the clearance of the same. The appellant claimed that the clearance of the goods under freely importable category in terms of para 5.1 of the ITC Policy 1997-2002. The bill of entry was assessed, under second check appraisement basis on the strength of the declarations made by the appellant. At the time of examination of the goods in the docks the said machinery was found to be old and used and not brand new as declared. The examination report indicated that the machinery was old and used and thoroughly re-conditioned. The said examination report was challenged by the importer and the machinery was re-examined second time. The second ...
Satyabhamabai W/O Bhimaji Dawkher Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Its ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR399; 2007(6)BomCR20; (2007)109BOMLR2263; 2008(2)MhLj104
N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a declaration that the reservation on the land of petitioner has lapsed i.e. the land is dereserved and also directions to respondents to take necessary steps for dereservation of the land in its records so as to enable petitioner to develop the land for the purpose permissible in the case of adjacent land under the relevant plan. 2. Heard respective counsel. 3. Rule made returnable forthwith by mutual consent and the matter is heard for final disposal. 4. The factual matrix necessary for the purpose of adjudication of writ petition can be narrated as follows.Petitioner is owner of Gut No. 44 of Shirasgaon, which is now part and parcel of Municipal limits of Shrirampur Municipal Council, Dist.Ahmednagar. An area admeasuring 5536 Sq.Mtrs. is reserved for playground according to development plan. The draft development plan submitted by Municipal Council to the Government w...
Sardar Hasanbhai Attar Vs. Usman Papamiya Attar Shaikh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR186; 2008(1)BomCR646; 2008(1)MhLj340
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The present Second Appeal is against the order dated 4th May, 2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Niphad (Nashik) in Regular Civil Appeal No. 258 of 2005, whereby the appeal arising out of the order below Exh. 29 in Regular Darkhast No. 41 of 2001 filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Yeola dated 10-3-2005 has been maintained. Respondent No. 1 is the decree holder in Regular Civil Suit No. 10 of 1982 by judgment and decree dated 4-9-1995. In Appeal No. 139 of 1999, the same decree was confirmed on 25-9-2000. Therefore, execution of the same decree came to be filed on 3-7-2001 by the decree holder against respondent Nos. 2A and 3 (Exh. 29).2. The warrant under Order 21, Rule 35 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short, 'CPC') for possession was issued. One Sardar Attar as third party obstructed and therefore, the warrant was returned unserved.3. Meanwhile, the appellant who is one of the co-sharer of the suit property pending the Appeal No. 39 ...
Badriprasad Jamanaprasad Chourasiya Vs. SyeffuddIn Musaji Master and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR697; 2008(2)BomCR772; 2008(1)MhLj326
S.B. Deshmukh, J.1. Heard respective counsel.This petition takes an exception to the judgment and order passed by the trial Court below Exhibit 21 in Misc. Civil Application No. 12 of 1978.2. The petitioner has filed an application under Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, (said Act) in the Court of learned Civil Judge, J.D., Bhusawal. This application is for fixation of standard rent in respect of the suit property. It is alleged that the suit property is taken on rent by original applicant Fazale Ilahi for running a shop. Original applicant died on 10-10-2006. After his demise, petitioner had filed an application Exhibit 21. In this application, it is alleged by the petitioner that deceased was dealing in the business of fruits. Suit premises was used as office for said business. The petitioner was working as a servant with deceased for several years. At the time of demise of applicant, petitioner was staying along with him. After demise of applicant, the p...
Janhit Manch and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR86; 2008(1)BomCR670
1. The Additional Solicitor General has filed an affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 pursuant to the Court's direction. The subject-matter can be considered in two parts. The first part which requires to be given top priority is in respect of problems of unauthorised constructions and illegal occupants which are within the prohibited area. It is stated in the affidavit in reply that in so far as the removal of encroachments and unauthorised constructions in the prohibited area is concerned, the ASI has already taken steps by informing the local authorities like the Municipal Commissioner MCGM and the Collector of the Region to extend all necessary aid and assistance to the officials of the ASI in the matter.2. It has been expressed that land around the monument which falls in the prohibited area does not belong to ASI and is owned by private individuals and other agencies and that The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 does not enable the ASI to...
Robert Heijkamp and anr. Vs. Bal Anand World Children Welfare Trust an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR719
Vazifdar S.J., J.1. The petitions raise common questions and are therefore disposed of by this common judgment and order. For convenience I will refer to the facts in Foreign Adoption Petition No. 89 of 2007.2. The petitioners, husband and wife, are Dutch nationals. They have been sponsored as suitable adoptive parents by their Government agency. They applied to the Dutch sponsoring agency for adoption and through it applied to the respondents. The respondent is a Trust recognized by the Government as a Child Welfare Organization. The respondents are the custodians of a female minor born on or about 13-11-2004.3. The petitioners have sought an order for their appointment as guardians of the person of the child now in the custody of the respondents. The petitioners have also sought dispensation of the notice under Section 11 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.4. The petitioners submitted their documents to the Central Adoption Resource Agency (hereinafter referred to as 'CARA'), an au...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ramnord Research Laboratories P. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: [2008]304ITR95(Bom)
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. In this cross-reference the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has forwarded two questions of law raised by the Revenue and one question of law raised by the assessee for the opinion of this court. The said questions relating to the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 reads as under:Questions at the instance of the Revenue:(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the value of the stock of unsold raw films with the assessee is not assessable as the income of the assessee either on the ground that the assessee had not received the permission to sell them or on the ground that the assessee could value them at cost, in accordance with its past practice, which was admittedly 'nil'?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the limits laid down in Section 40(c) or those laid down in Section 40A(5) are applicable in case of directors who are employed?Question at the instance of the assessee:Whether the Tribunal was not right in susta...
Guru Swarup Srivastava, Deepsikha Guru Srivastava and Mehar Swarup Sri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-02-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR870; 2008(1)BomCR119
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The Petitioner No. 1 is a citizen of India and is doing business of exports and imports in the name of Swarup Group of Industries (SGI). SGI had a contract with China Railways Logistics (CRUL), an undertaking of the Ministry of Railways of Government of China for long term supply of iron /manganese ore to China.The petitioner No. 3 is the son of the petitioner No. 1 and also additional Director of SGI. The petitioner No. 3 in addition had opened foreign Bank accounts in Hongkong, admittedly, without the permission of the Reserve Bank of India.The petitioner No. 2 is the wife of petitioner No. 1. The record indicates that she has no concern with the SGI. In the petition, she is described as principal of a school.2. It seems from the records, including the information produced in the Court in sealed cover, that the entire proceeds of exports worth Rs. 110 crores approximately were not received in the account of the SGI in India. The contention is that there is evidence...
Wockardt Biopharm Ltd., D.G. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2007
Reported in: (2008)(222)ELT97Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue of classification of Recombinant Hepatitis-B Surface Antigen bulk (r-HbsAg) manufactured by the appellants herein is common to both these appeals which are hence heard together and disposed of by this common order. The adjudicating authorities have held that the product in dispute is a purified protein in bulk, falling for classification under Chapter Heading 35.04 which inter alia covers "Peptones and their derivatives; other protein substances and their derivatives, not elsewhere specified or included" and not under Chapter Heading 30.02 of the schedule to the CETA, 1985 covering "Antisera and other blood fractions; Vaccines, Toxins, Cultures of micro-organisms (...) and similar products" as claimed by the manufacturers. In both cases, the demands have been confirmed by application of the extended period of limitation. In the case of Wockardt Biopharm Ltd., the duty demand is Rs. 2,52,62,094/- together with interest and penalty of equal amount and penalties of Rs. 5,00,...
intermedia Cable Communications Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-2007
Reported in: (2008)9STR191
1. We have heard both sides on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of Rs. 3,47,92,576/- and penalty of Rs. 3,44,72,073/-under the provisions of Section 78 and Rs. 100/- per day Under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 (Service Tax demand for the period 16/08/2002 to 13/09/2004 is Rs. 1,90,50,609/- and for the period 01/10/2004 to 30/09/2005 the service tax demand is Rs. 1,54,21,464/-).The demand has been confirmed against the applicants who are cable operators receiving signals from broadcasters such as ESPN, Star, Sony Entertainment Television, etc. and rendering cable services to various subscribers on the basis of their subscriber base.2. It is the contention of the applicants the number of subscribers is not as per the figure shown in the agreement; that they did not receive any amounts over and above the amounts on which they were paying service tax. However, we find that Shri Ejaz Inamdar, Director of the applicant company has admitted that payments are bei...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »