Mumbai Court February 2007 Judgments

Speaking Roses International Inc. Vs. Controller-general of Patents an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR630; LC2007(2)75

Roshan Dalvi, J.1. The Petitioners applied for grant of Patent by an application dated 19 th September, 2002 for providing an image on an Organic Product, being flowers. The Respondent rejected the Petitioners' application by the impugned order dated 19 th April, 2006. 2. The Petitioners' application details the description of their invention, their claim and the summary of their inventions along with several annexures showing the illustrations, their method of providing the image on the Organic Product, being flowers. The Petitioners have also annexed the step-by-step method of providing the image on the flowers as well as the illustrated flowers with the images made by the method shown by the Petitioners. 3. It may atonce be mentioned that the Petitioners' claim for Patent is for the method of providing the image on the organic product and not for the organic product itself. 4. After undergoing the usual procedure prescribed by law of being given the first examination report (FER), w...

Pramila Pandit Sagat Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR781; 2007(6)BomCR853

Borkar P.R., J.1. This is a petition filed by the present petitioner dissatisfied with the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, Bench at Aurangabad in Original Application No. 226 of 1998, decided on 9.7.2001, whereby it was held that the husband of petitioner Pandit Sagat is presumed to be dead as he had been missing for more than seven years, as per Sections 107 and 108 of the Evidence Act and the Departmental Inquiry held against said Pandit Sagat and consequent order of dismissal was illegal, but the petitioner is not entitled to family pension but she would be entitled to extraordinary family pension which claim may be considered by the respondents. By this petition the petitioner challenges the refusal to grant family pension to her.2. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are stated thus:The petitioner's husband Pandit Sagat had disappeared on or about 16.1.1983 and since then his whereabouts were not known to any one. Prior to that he was arrested...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. G.S. Entertainment

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109TTJ(Mum.)54

1. This appeal by the Revenue for the block period 1st April, 1990 to 26th Sept., 2000 is directed against the order of CIT(A). The only issue in this appeal is regarding validity of penalty of Rs. 15 lakhs imposed on the assessee under Section 271D of the Act.2. The learned Departmental Representative has relied on the order of the AO. He submitted that the amount of Rs. 15 lakhs was received by the assessee in cash as is recorded in the CD seized by the Department.He submitted that Shri Gautam Gupta has failed to confirm the transaction in the form of affidavit before the Revenue authorities. He submitted that CIT(A) should have taken note of the fact that cash receipt of Rs. 15 lakhs was towards part payment of the finance agreement dt. 28th July, 1998.3. The learned Counsel for the assessee has opposed the submission of the learned Departmental Representative. He submitted that the amount of Rs. 15 lakhs was assessed by the AO as undisclosed income of the assessee for the block pe...

Mehta Manufacturers Vs. Ito

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)110ITD1(Mum.)

1. This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) on 12-9-2006 in relation to the assessment year 2002-03.2. The main point raised here is against the reduction in the claim of deduction under Section 80HHC. The facts apropos of this issue are that the return of income was filed claiming deduction under Section 80HHC at Rs. 7,38,416. During the course of assessment proceedings the assessing officer noted that there was a net profit of Rs. 14,54,272 on total export turnover of Rs. 2,48,26,964. The net profit included duty drawback of Rs. 21,10,298 and DEPB of Rs. 6,63,942. The assessing officer on verification of report in Form No. 1 OCCAC observed that the assessee has Loss on export turnover at Rs. 10,19,985. He considered Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005, in which amendment has been carried out to Section 80HHC. Since the assessee's export turnover was below Rs. 10 crores and there was loss on the total export turnover, he noted that the asse...

Prashant Bansilal Bamb and ors. Etc. Etc. Vs. the State of Maharashtra ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2008Bom53; 2007(2)ALLMR326; 2007(2)BomCR604; (2007)109BOMLR403; 2007(4)MhLj341

Naresh H. Patil, J. 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Respective respondents waive service of rule. The petitioners in this group of petitions in substance raise identical issue. Therefore, the petitions are heard together and are being decided by a common judgment and order.2. The petitioners seek directions to respondents to follow rotation policy for the general elections to Panchayats in the State of Maharashtra to be held in the year 2007, in compliance with the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis (Manner and Rotation of Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1996.3. The learned Senior Counsel states that the State Election Commission under its supervision held elections to Panchayats for the first time in the year 1997 and thereafter in the year 2002. The election held in the year 1997 was conducted after the Rotation Rules of 1996 were notified i.e. on 30-10-1996. The State Election Commission ought to have rotated the seats for the next election which was held in the year ...

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Flora Santuno Kutino and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR652; 2007CriLJ2233

D.G. Deshpande, J.1. Heard learned APP Mr. Pol for the State Appellant and, learned advocate Mr. Ingawale for the Accused - Respondents. 2. This appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 28.08.1989 of the IIIrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Kolhapur by which the learned Addl.Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused of the offences under Sections 318, 176, 201 r/w 34 and of the offences under Sections 304, 315, 314, 316 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. By the said judgment accused No. 1 was also acquitted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The prosecution case, in brief, is as under:Victim in this case is one Yallubai. She was the daughter of Babu Naik (PW 7). He was living in Arjunwadi with his family members. He has two houses in the said village. Yallubai used to cook food for them and used to go to other house for tethering cattle. Accused No. 3 used to go to the house of Yallubai for taking food and she used to serve food to him. Illicit relationship was develo...

Vitthal Rakhumai Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and anr. Vs. Shri Suresh Chi ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR539; 2007(2)BomCR625; 2007(4)MhLj147

A.P. Deshpande, J. 1. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for hearing by consent of the parties.2. The Petitioners in both the petitions is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act so also a Public Trust governed and regulated by Bombay Public Trusts Act. The Petitioner is running a school by name V.M. Manjare Vidyalaya at Manjarewadi (Pimpal) at Rajgurunagar, Pune. The said school is a secondary school and the service conditions of the employees working in the school are governed by the provisions of The Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and the rules made thereunder. The Respondent No. 1, at the time of his initial appointment was a Trained Graduate Teacher. The Respondent No. 1 was appointed with effect from 13th November 1996. The Respondent No. 1 came to be terminated from the service with effect from 31st June, 1999. Being aggrieved by the said termination, the first Respondent herein preferred an appeal be...

Prism Pigments and Colour Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal against Order dated 30-12-2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Customs, Vadodara.2. The appellants herein were served with a show cause notice dated 31-10-2002 alleging illicit removal of Alpha Blue and Beta Blue falling under Chapter 32 valued at Rs. 23,53,235/- involving duty of Rs. 3,79,583/-. The charge was based on examination of purchase and consumption of raw material. It is alleged that as per letter dated 10-8-1996 intimating adoption of new French technology and that the input/output yield from 78% to 80% in respect of Alpha Blue and Beta Blue as against conventional yield of 80% to 90%. Therefore, it is alleged clandestine removal based on the consumption of raw material.The allegations showing less production was sought to be supported by the statements of Shri Salim Mohammad Salim Sheikh, authorized signatory and Shri K.K. Sundaram - Director. Shri Salim Mohammad Salim Sheikh has informed that he is unable to give any clarif...

Behr India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)12STT57

1. At the outset we note that for the period prior to August, 2002 when the service tax demand was confirmed against the foreign company viz.M/s. Behr GmbH & Co. pre-deposit of about 25% of the service tax was directed by Stay Order No. S/67/WZB/2007/C-I, dated 12-1-2007. The period in the present case is post 16-8-2002 when the service tax demand has been confirmed against the Indian company. In the light of the earlier stay order, we direct 25% of the service tax demand in this case also ie. Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only). Such deposit should be made within a period of four weeks from today and on such deposit, the balance tax and penalty shall stand waived and recovery thereof stayed pending the appeal. Failure to comply with this direction shall result in vacation of stay and dismissal of appeal without prior notice....

Commissioner of Customs (i) Vs. Pioneer Agritechnoscan and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(116)ECC195

1. The Revenue assails the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), by which he has accepted the claim of the importers for classification of Calcium Nitrate Fertilizer as Chemical fertilizers under Customs Tariff Heading 3105.90, set aside the Dy. Commissioner's order of classification under Heading 2834.29.2. We have heard the Id. departmental representative and perused the records', none appears for the respondents in spite of notice.3. By Note 1 (b) to Chapter 31, separate chemically defined compounds other than those answering to the descriptions in Note 2(A), 3(A), 4(A) or 5 of the Notes to the same Chapter are excluded from the coverage of Chapter 31. It is not disputed that the imported goods are separate chemically defined compounds. It is also not in dispute that the goods do not answer the description in Notes 2A, 3A or 4(A)(sic). The contention of the Revenue is that although certain separate chemically defined compound as specified in Note 3A will fall for classifi...