Mumbai Court September 2007 Judgments

Mallikarjuanappa S/O. Sidramappa Bidve and ors. Vs. Joint Charity Comm ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR172; (2007)109BOMLR2411; 2008(1)MhLj148

V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. Both the Second Appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment. These appeals were filed as First Appeals and were accordingly registered (F.A. No. 272 of 2002 & F.A. No. 743 of 2002). They were converted into Second Appeals in view of dictum rendered by Division Bench in Shivprasad Shankarlal Pardeshi since deceased by his heirs Shrikant Shivprasad and Ors v. Leelabai Badrinarayan Kalwar since deceased by her heirs and Ors. 1998(1) Mh.L.J.444.2. The appellants in both these appeals are original opponent Nos.1,3,5,8,9,11,13 & 14. Respondent No. 2 - Mahadevappa is original applicant No. 1. Respondent Nos. 3 to 9 are original opponent Nos.2,4,6,7,10,12 & 15. 3. The appellants are members of group which was headed by appellant No. 1 - Mallikarjunappa Bidve. For sake convenience I may call this group as Group 'B'. Respondent Nos.3 to 9 are members of another group headed by respondent No. 5 (original opponent No. 6) Mr. Sambappa Girwalkar, Advocate. This group ...

Raptakos Brett and Co. Ltd. Vs. Workmen Employed Under It Represented ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2008(117)FLR387]; 2008(2)MhLj229

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated August 10, 2007, passed by the learned single Judge in Civil Application Nos. 1554 of 2007 and 1916 of 2006. The first application was filed on behalf of the workmen seeking a direction to the respondents in the petition to provide regular wages and other benefits which were paid to other employees working with the respondent Company while the latter was filed for claiming wages payable under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). On both these applications, the following relief was granted to the workmen. (i) As the Company has decided to reinstate the workmen instead of paying dues Under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, the workmen shall be paid wages at par with unskilled permanent workmen or the statutory minimum wages whichever is higher, from the date of this order. (ii) If no work is provided to the workmen by the employer, they shall be paid wages...

Madanmohan Chandak Kundanlal Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008CriLJ968

ORDERC.L. Pangarkar, J.1. These two applications under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code can be disposed of by common order since they arise out of a common order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class.2. The facts giving rise to these applications are as under:Applicant is the complainant in Criminal Cases instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Respondent No. 2 is the accused. It is alleged that respondent No. 2 had issued cheques in favour of the complainant which came to be dishonoured. Since the cheques were so dishonoured, notices were issued to respondent No. 2 but respondent No. 2 failed to pay amount of cheques in spite of the notice. Hence the complaint came to be filed. Accused after summons was issued, appeared before the Magistrate. The evidence of the complainant was recorded by the Magistrate. Thereafter accused moved several applications which came to be rejected. Ultimately accused filed this application under Section 311 seeking exa...

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ashok Arya

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2008]86SCL205(Bom)

ORDER1. The question raised in this appeal is, when the respondent had confessed to have violated the provisions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 ('FERA' for short) whether the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the penalty levied by the Adjudication Officer?2. In this case the premises of the respondent who is the proprietor of M/s. Arabian Maritime Agency was searched on 20-2-1981 wherein incriminating documents were seized. In his statement the respondent had explained the various entries made on the documents which according to FERA authorities constituted violation of FERA.3. Accordingly, show-cause notices were issued and thereafter adjudication order was passed holding the respondent to be guilty of contravening the provisions of Section 9(1)(a) of FERA and penalty totalling to Rs. 13,50,000 was levied inter alia on the ground that the respondent had made payments to residents outside India without any general or special permission from RBI and that no steps have be...

Chetan Containers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(123)ECC315

1. This appeal is filed against the Order-in-appeal No.KKS(69)69/M-VI/2001 dated 11.7.2001.2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of goods drums falling under Chapter Sub Heading No. 3923 of Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and were clearing the goods from their factory for home consumption as well as export. For clearance of home consumption, they were availing the facility of modvat under Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. For the purpose of export, they were obtaining the inputs for manufacture of such goods for export, under the provisions of Chapter X in terms of Rule 192 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 without payment of duty. The export order was cancelled, thus making their stock of inputs and raw materials received under bond as surplus. Show cause notice dated 29.4.1999 was issued to the appellant demanding duty of Rs. 1,93,840/- on such surplus raw materials on which duty became payable but, was no...

Senzo Engineering (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These are cross appeals directed against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XXIX, Mumbai dated 3-11-2006 for assessment year 2003-04 and for the sake of convenience, both these appeals are being disposed of by this common order.2. Grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No. 1424/Mum./07 read as under: (1) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner (Appeals)') erred in law and on facts in upholding assessment order passed by the assessing officer which was in violation of the principles of natural justice. (2) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in upholding the rejection of books of account made by the assessing officer and further erred in upholding the order passed in the manner laid down under Section 144 by invoking the provisions of Section 145(3) of the Act. (3) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in upholding estimation of unaccounted purchases of the appellant at Rs. 5,07,19,567 restricting the profit on the same at 12....

Kulwant Singh Parmar and anr. Vs. Sher-e-punjab Co-operative Housing S ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR650; 2008(1)BomCR190

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The First Respondent is a co-operative housing society deemed to be registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The elections to the managing committee were held on 1st February, 2004 and the results are stated to have been declared on 7th February, 2004. The tenure of the managing committee was to expire in February 2007. By a government notification dated 16th November, 2006 elections to all co-operative societies were stayed from 16th November, 2006 till 31st March, 2007. By a resolution passed on 28th December, 2006 the managing committee requested the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, K-East Ward to conduct the election for the period 2007- 08 to 2009-10. By a letter dated 18th January, 2007 the society requested the Deputy Registrar to appoint a Returning Officer. By a letter dated 2nd April, 2007 the Deputy Registrar appointed a Returning Officer.2. On 23rd May, 2007 these proceedings were instituted under Article 226 of the ...

Hindi Vidya Bhavan, Vs. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal,

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR231; (2008)IILLJ138Bom; 2007(6)MhLj563

D.B. Bhosale, J.1. This group of writ petitions takes exception to the judgments and orders dated 30.4.2007 passed by the School Tribunal allowing the appeals filed by respondent No. 3 - employees, in all the petitions, challenging their termination by the petitioners. Though the judgments of the School Tribunal are separate, the facts and the reasons recorded by the Tribunal for allowing the appeals filed under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 ('the Act' for short) are similar. The questions raised in these petitions are also similar and, therefore, they are being disposed of by common judgment.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a public charitable trust, registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 runs a school by the name Hindi Vidya Bhavan, now known as HVB Academy ('the school' for short). Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are the Principal and the Secretary of the school respectively. Respondent No. 3-emplo...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Chhajer Packaging and Plastics (P) Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Bom)389; [2008]300ITR180(Bom)

N.V. Dabholkar, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act 1961 ('The Act' for brevity's sake), challenging the judgment and order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune Bench, Pune ('ITAT' for brevity's sake) in ITA No. 1343/Pn/2001, on 22nd March, 2004. reported as Chhajer Packaging & Plastics (P) Ltd. v. Addl. CAT .2. The following factual details are necessary for the purpose of decision of present appeal.Assessment of taxable income of respondent for the asst. yr. 1996-97 (financial year 1995-96) was carried out by the Departmental authorities and concluded with assessment order dt. 30th March, 1999. The AO--Dy. CIT (Investigation), Circle-II, Jalgaon, during the course of assessment, noticed that the assessee had accepted loans/deposits exceeding Rs. 20,000, by modes otherwise than account payee cheques/demand drafts and had thus contravened Section 269SS of the Act. By his letter dt. 30th March, 1999, he referred the matter to Addl. CIT, Range-II,...

Gloman Label Manufacturing Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2008]83SCL112(Bom)

ORDER1. The appellate authority, after considering the submissions on behalf of the appellants, reduced the amount of penalty as imposed by the adjudicating authority. This appeal is directed against the said reduction of penalty. The contention urged is that there was no default at all on the part of the appellants and consequently the penalty imposed is in excess of jurisdiction and liable to be set aside.2. From the record, we find that admittedly the appellants did not have permission of R.B.I. Though there was some documents indicating that there was an application for extension, that by itself would not result in holding that there was no contravention. Once there be a contravention, there was discretion in the adjudicating authority to impose penalty. The adjudicating authority imposed penalty considering the facts on record. The appellate authority considering the submissions as urged, has reduced the penalty. Considering the discretion conferred and exercised, the questions of...