Mumbai Court July 2007 Judgments

Commr. of C. Ex. and Customs Vs. D.R. Gade

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008[9]STR348

ORDER1. On the question of law as formulated in para 4(a), we find that on a consideration of Sections 76 and 80, there is discretion in the authority of not imposing penalty. In the instant case, the Tribunal considering the facts on record has recorded a finding that the enhancement of penalty is arbitrary. This was within its discretion.2. This is purely an exercise in discretion based on a finding of fact which it was empowered. No question of law, therefore, arises.3. The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs....

Commr. of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Shree Bilimora Modh Ganchi Samasta Panch ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008[9]STR226

ORDER1. Admit. Heard forthwith.Reliance was placed by the learned Tribunal on the decision of the Larger Bench in CE, Gurgaon v. Machino Montell reported in . That judgment was set aside by learned Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court .2. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the respondents that in this case it does not involve excise duty but service tax and what the Tribunal ought to have considered is Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 which is not considered.3. In the light of that, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for de novo hearing and more so for consideration of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994....

State of Maharashtra Vs. Ishwarsharan Kedarnath Bhargava and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR757

Kumar Swatanter, C.J.1. In the year 1963-64, the Government of Maharashtra took a decision to acquire the lands on eastern and western sides of Thane Belapur Road for a public purpose viz. development and utilisation of the same in Thane Harbour Panvel and Trans Thane Creek, for industrial, commercial and residential development. This project was to be named as New Bombay City Project. In furtherance to this public purpose, notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', was issued for acquiring different lands belonging to different land owners out of Gate Nos. 14, 28, 35, 39, 166, 170 and 285 of village Rabale in Thane District during the period 13th September, 1968 to 2nd December, 1972. The Land Acquisition Officer, vide his awards of different dates, awarded compensation to the claimants at Rs. 5.40 per sq. metre for acquisition of their respective lands. Different amounts were claimed by the owners of the land in Land Acquisit...

Mr. Mukund S. Gokhale Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. After hearing both sides for some time on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of Rs. 35,660/- together with interest and penalty of Rs. 1,000/- imposed in terms of Section 77 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994, we find that it is possible to decide the appeal itself at this stage and hence proceed to do so after granting the prayer for stay.2. In this case the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise passed the ex-parte order confirming the demand and imposing penalty as set out above without recording any reasons for such confirmation. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that it was barred by limitation; there was a delay of 48 days in preferring the appeal before the lower appellate authority and the lower appellate authority held that the delay has not been satisfactorily explained.3. We find that the delay in preferring the appeal before the lower appellate authority has been explained satisfactorily, namely,...

Adarsh Ginning and Pressing Factory, a Partnership Firm Through Its Pa ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR364; 2007(5)BomCR618; (2007)109BOMLR1615; 2008(1)MhLj300

P.R. Borkar, J.1. The petitioner which is a debtor of respondent Nos. 4 Peoples Co-operative Bank Limited, has filed this petition for declaration that the Government Circular bearing No. Bank/Recovery/Suits/t-3/2000 dated 8.1.2001 and No. Admn/2A/M.S.A./2002/Suit/2002 dated 16.1.2003 be quashed and set aside as ultra vires, and also for direction to quash and set aside the recovery certificate issued by respondent No. 3 on 28.10.2002 in Application No. 200/2002. Civil Application No. 7918 of 2003 is filed by respondent No. 6, which has purchased secured assets pending this petition, for refund of purchase money.2. Admittedly the petitioner is a partnership firm which had started Adarsh Ginning and Pressing factory at Pimpalgaon-Divshi, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad. Respondent No. 4 Peoples Cooperative Bank Limited Hingoli is a Multi State Cooperative Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank'). The Bank was initially registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperat...

NitIn S/O Anand Anbhule Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Its Desk ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR535; 2007(5)BomCR552; (2007)109BOMLR1456

P.R. Borkar, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties taken up for final hearing. 2. The petitioner was a lecturer in English in Shri Datta Arts and Commerce College, Hadgaon, Taluka Hadgaon (respondent No. 6) run by Hadgaon Taluka Shikshan Prasarak Mandal (respondent No. 5). The college was affiliated to respondent No. 4 University and getting 100% grants from respondent No. 1. 3. By this petition, the petitioner has sought direction to respondent No. 1 to de-reserve the post of English subject at respondent No. 6 college and for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner on the said post. 4. There are three posts of full time lecturer in English at Senior College Level and all the posts are for reserved category. Two were reserved for the S.T. (Scheduled Tribe category) and remaining were for N.T. (Ladies) i.e. Nomadic Tribe (Ladies) which is against the Government Resolution dated 24.4.1995. The Government Resolution dated 24.4.1995 lays...

K.M. Palve, Engineers and Contractors Vs. State of Maharashtra through ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR305; 2008(1)ARBLR646(Bom); 2007(5)BomCR575; 2007(6)MhLj583

R.M. Savant, J.1. This Appeal challenges the order dated 13.8.2001 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Nanded by which order the application being Misc. Civil Application (RJE) No. 157 of 2000 filed by the Respondent no. 2 State of Maharashtra through the Executive Engineer, Upper Division, Had gain came to be allowed and the award passed by the sole Arbitrator M.S. Dandwate dated 9.9.1999 came to be set aside.2. The facts in brief are stated thus:I. The Appellant is a license contractor registered with the Respondent. The Respondent had invited tender for carrying out work of Kayadhu branch canal in 1984-85. The offer of the Petitioner being the lowest was accepted for an amount of Rs. 39,32,000/-. The period of completion of work was 30 months. However on account of the fact that the work was not completed the Respondent had granted three extensions for completion of the work. The last of such extension was upto 30.6.1989. However prior to the completion of the said last exte...

Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs Vs. Padmashri V.V. Patil Sa ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR1604; 2007(121)ECC27; 2007LC27(Bombay); 2007(215)ELT23(Bom)

N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. We have admitted the appeal on following substantial questions of law:(1) Whether there is any discretion with the authorities to exempt penalty under Section 11AC and interest under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944, while confirming the demand for evaded excise duty? (2) Whether such exemption can be justified merely because the evaded excise duty is paid before issuance of show cause notice by the department ?2. Respondent -assessee is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods i.e. denatured spirit. According to department, respondent had undervalued the excisable goods to the extent of Rs.55,28,417/ and evaded the excise duty to the tune of Rs.8,84,547/-for the period from June 2000 to June 2001. Respondent - assessee admittedly paid the said duty in two instalments, amount of Rs.8,37,728/-on 28.5.2004 itself upon deficit being pointed out by the audit party. They had assured to pay the balance and accordingly paid the balance Rs.46,819/- on 5.8.2004...

Naresh S/O Baliram Sonwane Vs. Kishor S/O Kashinath Patil and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR759; 2007(6)MhLj801

R.M. Savant, J.1. Rule, made returnable forthwith and with the consent of parties, heard.2. This petition impugns the order dated 12-3-2007 passed by the IInd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon in Reference No. 1 of 2007. By the said order, the Reference No. 1 of 2007 made by the respondent No. 8, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon has been allowed and consequently, a declaration has been issued that the respondent No. 1 herein stands disqualified as a Municipal Corporator of the Jalgaon Municipal Corporation on account of he having a third child after the cut of date.3. The factual matrix involved in the petition is stated thus -The election of the petitioner was held sometime in September, 2003 and the results were declared on 14-9-2003. The petitioner herein and the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have been declared as elected Corporators of the said Municipal Corporation. The respondents Nos. 1 to 4 herein on 10-10-2005 filed an application under Sections 10, 11 and 12 of...

Metro Shoes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)8STR502

1. This is an application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax amounting to Rs. 78,50,491/- for which Cenvat credit was denied along with a penalty of equivalent amount and interest payable on the amounts demanded.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is engaged in the activity of manufacturing as well as trading of footwear and its accessories. Insofar as its manufacturing activities are concerned, the applicant purchases footwear from small manufacturers in loose form and thereafter carries out the activity of packing and labelling on the said footwear. This activity amounts to manufacture under the Central Excise Act, 1944. In addition to manufacturing and selling such footwear, the applicant also trades in shoes which are manufactured by other manufacturers such as Floresheim, Red tape, Lee Cooper, etc. The bulk of its business (approximately 70%) comprises of goods manufactured and sold by it and only small portion of its turnover relates to the trading activi...