Mumbai Court February 2008 Judgments

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Vinit Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

3. The present appeal involves classification of various products manufactured by Vinit Industries which they claimed to be classifiable under Tariff item 15AA of the then existing Tariff. They were however issued a show cause notice stating that the item in question fall under Tariff item 15AA(1). The dispute pertains to the period November 83 to September 84. It has been brought to our notice that in respect of same products manufactured by the same assessee for the earlier period (March 82 to October 83) immediately preceding the present show cause notice. Tribunal vide its Order No. 743-44/99-C dated 9.8.99 has held that the products were classifiable under Tariff item 15AA only. While doing so the Tribunal relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Silicon (I) Pvt. Ltd .Since the products are identical to the one discussed in the decision of the Tribunal which has not been challenged the respondents claim that the issue is squarely covered by the decision a...

Cozy Interiors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. We have heard both sides on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax of Rs. 91,43,930/- confirmed on the ground that the applicants herein were rendering services as interior decorators during the period 16.10.1998 to 25.9.2003 and penalty of Rs. 100/- per day during which the non payment continues under Section 76 (but not exceeding the amount of Service Tax demanded); Rs. 35,000/- under Section 77; and Rs. One crore under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1988. We find that the applicants' work includes execution of civil work, false ceiling work, carpentry work, painting and plumbing work, electrical and any other interior related work as per the plan and design provided by architects or consultants of the customers. The contention of the department is that this would amount to service relating to beautification of spaces and therefore, the applicants' services are covered by definition under Section 65(59) of the Finance Act and therefore, liable to Service Tax und...

Ramnord Research Laboratories Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The issue in the present appeal is regarding the dutiability of certain products (hypo solution and silver residue) which come into existence during processing of Cinematographic film. The appellants have contested the dutiability of the products contending that they are not marketable and have no shell life and therefore cannot be considered as excisable. Alternatively it was pleaded that both the products are exempted by Notification 264/76 - CE dated 29.10.76 and 19/88 dated 1.3.99. While Notification No 19/88 exempts all goods falling under Chapter 26 of Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 provided no credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of final goods is taken, Notification 264/76 exempt all chemical preparations for photographic uses and unmixed products for photographic uses. From the show cause notice issued to the appellants, we find that silver residue has been classified under Chapter Heading 2620.00 and once the goods falling under Chapter 26 hav...

Hindustan Computers Ltd. Vs. Miss. Natty Rose Pesso

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(4)BomCR839; 2008(4)MhLj669

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Both these petitions impugn the judgment and order rendered by the Labour Court on 16/4/1995 thereby allowing Complaint (ULP) No. 334 of 1987 partly and confirmed by the Industrial Court at Mumbai in Revision Application (ULP) No. 57 of 1995 which came to be dismissed. The first petition has been filed by the employer i.e. M/s. Hindustan Computer Ltd. whereas the second petition has been filed by the employee. 2. It is the case of the employee that she was appointed as 'Personal Assistant' with effect from 29/1/1987 and on probation period of one year. However, on 22/9/1987 her services came to be terminated by the company and, therefore, on or about 22/12/1987 she filed Complaint (ULP) No. 334 of 1987 before the 3rd Labour Court at Mumbai under Item 1 of Schedule IV read with Section 28 of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 ('the Act' for short). The said complaint was allowed by directing reinstatement but without backwages by the Labour Court. The order of denial of bac...

Maharashtra Mandal Through Its Secretary, the Head Master, Maharashtra ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR408; 2009(1)BomCR456; 2008(5)MhLj59

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition arises from the judgment and order dated 29/1/1998 rendered by the School Tribunal at Pune thereby allowing Appeal No. 43 of 1996 filed by the original respondent-appellant. By the said order the appointment of petitioner No. 3 on promotion as Supervisor with effect from 3/6/1992 and as Head Master with effect from 1/2/1997 and the appointment of petitioner No. 4 on promotion as Supervisor on 1/3/1997 have been set aside and the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 have been directed to appoint the appellant on promotion as Supervisor with effect from 3/6/1992 and as Head Master with effect from 1/2/1997 with arrears of backwages. During the pendency of this petition, the appellant died and, therefore, the only issue that remains to be considered is regarding arrears of wages on the basis of the promotions directed by the School Tribunal. 2. The appellant was possessing qualification of M.A. B.Ed. and came to be appointed with effect from 12/8/1974 but in the D.E...

Vasant Raghosheth Tambe and Rajesh Vasant Tambe Vs. Shri Bholadasji Ma ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR277; 2008(4)MhLj275

J.H. Bhatia, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Parties. 2. Revision Application is filed by the original defendant Nos. 1 and 3, who are the tenants on the open suit plot situated at Panchavati belonging to the original plaintiffs, who are the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 before this Court. The suit plot was leased out to one Raghosheth Tambe predecessor of the defendants under the lease deed dated 7-12-1970. The lease period commenced from 1-1-1971. It was for a period of 30 years and the annual rent was Rs. 751/- per year plus education cess of Rs. 82.50 paise. Rent was required to be paid in advance every year. After death of original tenant Raghosheth, his legal representatives continued to be tenants. The plaintiffs filed Regular Civil Suit No. 525 of 1985 on 20-7-1985. It was alleged that the defendant No. 1 had paid the rent upto 31st December, 1982. However, the defendants were in arrears of rent from 1-1-1983. Notice was issued on 1-12-1982 by the plaintiffs to the defendants ...

Shailaja W/O Chandrashekhar Sangvikar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR638; 2008(2)MhLj813

1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the present petitioner challenging the Judgment/Order passed by the respondent Scrutiny Committee dated 22-11-2006 invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to 'Mala Jangam', scheduled caste.2. Perusal of the Judgment of the respondent Scrutiny Committee would reveal that the petitioner has submitted about 22 documents in support of her caste claim. The aforesaid documents are enlisted in the Judgment of the respondent Scrutiny Committee. The respondent Scrutiny Committee found that in respect of the petitioner's real brother, there was an entry in the admission register dated 4-7-1962, in which the caste of the real brother of the petitioner was recorded as 'Lingayat Jangam'. Similar was the case in respect of another real brother of the petitioner, whose caste was also came to be recorded as 'Hindu Jangam' in the admission register dated 9-10-1963. In respect of the relative of the pet...

Hindustan Dorr Oliver Ltd. Vs. P.K. Kedia, Dy. Cit and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)217CTR(Bom)539

F.I. Rebello, J.1. It is the case of the petitioners that they are involved with the work of designing, engineering, supplying and installing plants/structures for various industries 70 per cent of their customers were public sector undertakings and/or Government/semi-Government bodies. In the case of these customers, large quantities of steel were involved and these customers used to provide Essentiality Certificates to enable the petitioners to procure steel from the Steel Authority of India Ltd. This certificate enables the petitioners easily to procure the requisite quantity of steel at lower or concessional rates. The certificates issued are based on requirement of steel on the basis of drawings and designs submitted by the petitioners to the customers. The quotations to these parties include a charge for steel at the controlled/concessional rates. The petitioners placed orders on its vendors for supply of steel equipment. As the petitioners did not have any manufacturing or stora...

Meera Bhagwat Jadhavar and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through t ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR55

P.V. Kakade, J.1. Both these petitions are taken up for hearing and disposal together as the issues involved therein are identical, pertaining to question of approval to the petitioners - students to appear for D.Ed. examinations conducted by the concerned respondents. The petitioners in both the petitions are students of first year D.Ed. course for the year academic year, 2006-07 of two independent institutions namely, Priyadarshani Adhyapak Vidyalaya, Kallamb, Taluka Kallamb, Dist. Osmanabad and Adhyapak Vidyalaya Kotul, Taluka Akole, District Ahmednagar, affiliated under the Bahujan Samaj Prabodhan Shikshan Sanstha Kotul, Taluka Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar. Both the institutions are established and run by Respondent No. 7 in both the petitions. Both the institutions are also established by those persons belonging to minority community people. So far as other respondents are concerned, they are controlling authorities in the matter of examinations, declaration of results and other matter...

Rastriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. a Government of India Undertaking Through It ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008[11]STR453; [2008]14STT328

Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. This is an Appeal filed by the Original Respondents against the impugned Judgment dated 4th July, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in Arbitration Petition No. 364 of 2004 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act-1996 (for short, 'The Act') whereby, the award dated 25th May, 2004 passed by the sole Arbitrator in Arbitration between the parties has been quashed and set aside.2. The Appellants' case is as under:3. The Respondent is a transport Contractor/ travelling agent/ service provider, governed by the provisions of Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961. 4. On 17/06/1993, the Respondent entered into a written contract with the Appellant as 'Handling Contractor' for handling its iron and steel materials at their Kalamboli Stockyards, Navi Mumbai. 5. During the pendency of the said contract, Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 was substituted by Section 88 of the Finance Act, 1997 whereby 5% service tax was introduced on various services including...