Mumbai Court February 2010 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.
Shri Annasaheb Maroti Dhotre Vs. Sau. Kalabai W/O Annasaheb Dhotre,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-2010
Shrihari P. Davare, J.1. Perused. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties.2. The applicant (original opponenthusband) has preferred the present application challenging the judgment and order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar on 18.8.2003, granting the monthly maintenance of Rs. 500/ to the applicant No. 1 and Rs. 400/ to the applicant No. 2, and also challenging the judgment and order dated 27.6.2005, passed by learned I Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Criminal Revision Application No. 282/2003, dismissing the said revision application and confirming the judgment and order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Shevgaon in respect of the grant of maintenance as aforesaid.FACTUAL MATRIX:3. The marriage between the applicant and the Opponent No. 1 was solemnized on 14.4.1994 as per Hindu rites at village Akhe...
Maharashtra Rajya Prathmik Shikshak Samiti, Through Its District Presi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-2010
A.H. Joshi, J.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader Mr. D.P. Thakre waives service for respondent No. 1, and learned Adv. Mr. G.G. Mishra, for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. Heard finally by consent of parties.3. This is a Writ Petition filed by Association of Primary Teachers in State of Maharashtra.4. The teachers claim to have been aggrieved by the decision of Govt. of Maharashtra announced through the Circular dated 6th October, 2008 [Annex.C]. Petitioner has prayed for setting aside the said Govt. decision and for consequential directions.5. Perusal of the Govt. Circular dated 6th October, 2008 reveals the following:[a] Number of teachers in Zilla Parishad schools has to be decided on the basis of number of students on the roll.[b] 30th September is the date fixed for ascertaining number of students every 3 year.[c] Whenever it is seen that teachers in a particular school exceed the prescribed number of teachers permissible with reference to the numb...
Gajanan Sakharam Gadewar (Being Dead) Through His Legal Heirs and ors. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-2010
F.M. Reis, J.1. Heard.Admit on the following substantial question of law-Whether the lower Appellate Court was justified to determine the shares of the parties by considering that the provisions of Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (as amended by amendment Act 2005), was applicable to the facts of the case?2. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the respondents. The learned Counsel for the respondents waives service.3. This is a second appeal filed by the original defendants challenging the judgment dated 29/7/2009 passed by the learned District Judge-I, Pandharkawda in Regular Civil Appeal No. 69/2004 whereby the appeal preferred by the appellants came to be dismissed but however, the shares of the parties were modified as stated in the impugned judgment and it is held that the respondents are entitled for partition and separate possession of their shares in the suit property as well as suit land.4. The respo...
Sanjay Chauhan Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko: We had directed the appellant to deposit an amount of Rs. 1 lakh within a month and report compliance on 19/02/2010 vide order No. S/04/2010 dated 11/01/2010. Today, there is no evidence, on record, of the amount having been deposited, nor is there any representation for the appellant despite notice. 2. In the circumstances, the appeal gets dismissed for non-compliance with Section 129E of the Customs Act....
Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Mumbai Vs. Mangtani Exports (Indi ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko: This application was filed by the department seeking out-of-turn hearing and disposal of the captioned appeal. Moving this application, learned SDR submits that the appeals filed by all other parties against the Commissioner's order were allowed by way of remand by this Bench but the Revenue's appeal was not taken up at that time. 2. On going through the records, we find that this Bench had set aside the Commissioner's order and remanded the case to him for fresh decision in accordance with law, vide Order No. A/635-640/2007 dated 17/10/2007. The Revenue's appeal is against dropping of proceedings initiated against the 15 respondents. This appellant wants them to be penalised under Section 112 of the Customs Act. In the remanded proceedings, the learned Commissioner can consider this aspect as well. 3. In the above scenario, after allowing the present application, we allow the Revenue's appeal also, by way of remand. Learned Commissioner will consider the Revenue's p...
Shivgovind B Pandey Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Na ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-19-2010
Per: P.G. Chacko: This application is by the wife of the deceased appellant, late Shri Shivgovind B Pandey. It is accompanied by the death certificate issued by Nashik Municipal Corporation, which certifies that Shri Shivgovind B Pandey died on 20/02/2009. The applicant prays for dropping of proceedings against the deceased appellant. Under Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules 1982, the appeal has already abated with the death of the appellant. No action was taken by the respondent to continue the proceedings. The wife of the deceased appellant wants the appeal to abate. 2. The above facts are not in dispute. We record the fact that the appeal has already abated in terms of Rule 22 ibid....
M/S. Henkel Chembond Surface Technologies Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-18-2010
Per : Shri. P.G.Chacko, Member (Judicial) After examining the records and hearing both sides, we find that this appeal filed by the importer is against the loading of assessable value of the goods imported / to be imported by them, ordered by the lower authorities. The Dy. Commissioner of Customs (GATT Valuation Cell) found the importer to be related to the foreign supplier viz. M/s. Henkel (Australia) Pvt. Ltd., Australia and, on this basis, ordered loading of the assessable value by 100% for a period of three years from 13.01.2005 (the date of his order). The appeal filed by the appellant against the Deputy Commissioner’s order was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Learned Consultant for the appellant refers to a letter dated 06.02.2002 of the appellant addressed to the Asst. Commissioner of Customs, which is one of the letters referred to in the Dy. Commissioner’s order. In this letter, the appellant requested the Asst. Commissioner to amend Bill of Entry No. 23...
Sumo Polyconverters and Another Vs. the Commissioner of Central Excise ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-2010
Per: Mr. P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial) 1. These appeals are against the Commissioner’s order wherein demand of duty of over Rs.7.5 lakhs was confirmed against the assessee, viz., M/s. Sumo Polyconverters (Appellant in Appeal No.E/1952/03) for the period July 1997 to March 2002, equal amount of penalty was imposed on them, the amount of Rs.9.00 lakhs paid by them earlier was appropriated towards the demand of duty and penalty and a penalty of Rs.50,000/- was imposed on the proprietor (Appellant in Appeal No.E/1953/03). The Revenue’s appeal is against that part of the Commissioner’s order, whereby the benefit of cum-duty price was given to the assessee under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we find that the assessee was functioning as a small scale industrial unit manufacturing moulds for plastic articles and that they had surrendered the registration certificate in 2000-01 by claiming full exemption unde...
Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva Vs. Sterling Agro Industries Ltd
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-16-2010
Per: Mr P.G. Chacko 1. There is no representation for the respondent in this appeal filed by the Revenue. However, their written submissions are available on record, which says that they do not want to be personally heard and that the substantive issue involved in this case is the same as what was decided in appeal No. C/1274/02. The respondent would like to have this appeal disposed of in the same way. 2. After examining the records and hearing the learned SDR, we find that the original authority, in this case, had enhanced the value of the subject goods (Anhydrous Milk Fat imported from M/s New Zealand Milk Products, a Government Undertaking) from USD 930 PMT (declared price) to USD 1100 PMT on the basis of contemporary imports. We find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Order-in-Original and held the declared value of the goods to be acceptable. Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal was allowed with consequential relief to them. The Revenue is in appeal against...
Hico Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-16-2010
Per: Mr P.G. Chacko 1. This appeal comes up before us for final disposal, in the light of the decision taken by the Larger Bench in Hico Enterprises vs Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai 2005 (189) ELT 135 (Tri-LB) on the issues referred to it by the regular Bench which heard the appeal in the first instance. Contextually, we also note that a rectification-of-mistake application filed by the Commissioner against the decision of the Larger Bench was rejected by that Bench and also that the Civil Appeal filed by the Commissioner against the Larger Bench decision on the referred issues was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide Commissioner of Customs vs Hico Enterprises 2008 (228) ELT 161 (SC). 2. The appellant in this appeal had imported polypropylene and filed a Bill of Entry on 30.03.1994 for its duty-free clearance under Notification No. 203/92-Cus dated 19.5.92 on the strength of an advance licence, which had earlier been transferred to them by M/s Amar Taran Exports. After...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »