Mumbai Court May 2012 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.
Commissioner of Customs (import) Vs. M/S. JaIn Exports Pvt. Ltd. and A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-09-2012
M.S. Sanklecha, J. 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) arises out of the decision dated 3/6/2010 of Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the “said Tribunal”). The Respondent No.1 is the importer/assessee and Respondent No.2 is the Tribunal. 2. Following two questions of law have been sought to be raised as substantial questions of law in this appeal: (a) Whether Tribunal was justifiable in dropping the demand of interest leviable under Section 28AA of Customs Act, 1962 for delay in payment of duty by Respondent No.1 in absence of Show Cause Notice for demand of interest? and (b) Whether Tribunal was correct at Para 7 of the impugned Order in holding that Revenue shall not levy interest despite Respondent No. 1 before Commissioner (Appeals) (Page 4 of O -in-A) assuring to pay interest? 3. Briefly stated the facts leading to the present appeal ...
Laxman Alias Laxmayya Gangaram Zinna Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-09-2012
A.S. OKA, J. By this Appeal, the Appellant- Accused has taken an exception to the Judgment and order dated 24th February, 1992, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai by which he has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that the complainant Dilip Ramdhar Yadav (P.W.No.3) and his father were employed by M/s. Royal Security to guard a hill property known as Talzan Hill in the creek of Charkop village at Mumbai. The said Talzan Hill is an island in Charkop creek and it is uninhabited and it is full of trees and bushes. It is alleged that during high tides, it is not possible to walk up to the said hill but only when the high tide is over, it is possible to walk to the hill. 3. In the morning at about 11.00 a.m. on 31st March, 1989, the complainant made a round of the hill and came back at 1.00 p.m. At that time, nothing unusual was noticed by him. On 3rd April, 1989 at about 10.00 ...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Vs. WIndia Power Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-08-2012
Ashok Jindal 1. Revenue has filed this appeal against the impugned order wherein the dropping of charge of valuation was confirmed by the first appellate authority. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a Joint Venture Company (JVC) promoted by M/s.Nedwind Rhenen n.v., Netherland and the Indian Company M/s.Weizmann Ltd., Bombay. The foreign collaborator got 50% participation and 50% participation by the Indian Company. Therefore, a new company naming the appellant was created under the joint venture of Nedwind Rhenen. The appellant desires to assemble, manufacture, fabricate, market and undertake turn-key contract for erection and commissioning with the foreign supplier (Nedwind Rhenen n.v., Netherland) in respect to manufacturer, fabrication and marketing of GCWEG and their components and accessories, an agreement was executed between the appellant and their foreign collaborators. The appellant is having financial and technical agreement with their foreign supplier as the...
Quality Constructions and Another Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Aur ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-08-2012
Ashok Jindal 1. The appellants have filed this appeal along with stay application against confirmation of service tax demands of Rs.18,63,112/- along with interest and penalty under Section 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The appellants are engaged in the activity of erection of wind mills and widening of roads. As the appellants were not registered with the service tax department, after conducting inquiry, a show-cause notice was issued for demand of service tax, interest and for levy of penalty under the various provisions of the Finance Act. 3. During the course of adjudication proceedings a demand of service tax was confirmed on the basis of purchase orders received by the appellants. On appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), the abatement as per notification No.01/2006 was given on gross value shown in the purchase order i.e. 33% of the value of purchase order was held as taxable service. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is before us. 4. On behalf of the appellant,...
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-08-2012
Ashok Jindal 1. The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order demanding service tax of Rs.42,30,352/- under the category of business auxiliary service. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are registered at Bangalore and providing services as sole selling agents for all types of earth moving equipments and other machines including its accessories and spares manufactured by M/s/.Larsen and Toubro Komatsu Ltd. Therefore, they are liable to pay service tax under the category of business auxiliary service on the commission received from their clients. 3. A show-cause notice was issued by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-II for demand of service tax on the quantity for the period April 2005 to March 2006. After verifying the fact that out of total demand of Rs.6,56,47,579/- the appellant has paid service tax liability of Rs.6,14,17,227/-. The demand for balance amount of Rs.42,30,352/- has been confirmed. Against said confirmation of demand, the appellant is bef...
Roha Dye Chem Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-08-2012
Ashok Jindal 1. The appellant has filed this appeal along with an application for stay of the impugned demands. 2. Heard both sides in detail and thereafter it is observed that the matter can be disposed of at this stage, therefore, after waiving the requirement of pre-deposit, the appeal is taken up for disposal. 3. Cenvat credit has been denied to the appellants for the services received by them from the CHA, port authorities and storages and warehousing services on the ground that the service has been received by the appellant outside their factory premises. Therefore, they are not entitled for input service credit on these services. 4. The lower authorities confirmed the demand on account of denial of input service credit as the appellant could not produced the relevant documents showing that the goods have been exported from the port and the port is the place of removal in the case of export of goods. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that they have produced all the rel...
Mahanagar Sudhar Samiti Vs. Akola Municipal Corporation, Through Munic ...
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: May-08-2012
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Looking to the nature of controversy and as interim order has been granted by this Court, we have accepted the request of the parties to decide the matter finally at the stage of admission itself. Accordingly, we have heard Shri Gordey, Senior Advocate with Mrs. Raskar, Advocate for the petitioner, Shri Madkholkar, learned counsel for respondent No. 1, Shri Manohar, Senior Advocate with Shri Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent No. 2, Shri Sambre, Government Pleader for respondent No. 3, Shri Lohiya, learned counsel for respondent No. 4, Shri Dhore, learned counsel for respondents No. 5 and 6, by making rule returnable forthwith. 2. The challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India is to resolution dated 20.03.2012 passed in General Body Meeting of Akola Municipal Corporation, insofar as the determination of respective strength of the members representing the petitioner and Respondent No. 4 on Standing Committee and consequential nomi...
Land Acquisition Officer and Another Vs. Filomena thereza Leitao and A ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: May-08-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. Heard Shri Pankaj Vernekar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the appellants and Ms. Amira Razak, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above appeal challenges the judgment and award dated 25.08.2006 passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 54/2003 whereby a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) filed by the respondents was partly allowed and the compensation for the land acquired was fixed at the rate of Rs.75/- per square metre. Pursuant to a notification under Section 4 of the said Act, an area of 390 square metres situated at Orlim Village of Salcete Taluka was acquired by the appellants for construction of road in Village Panchayat Varca, Salcete Taluka, vide notification published on 12.07.2000. The Land Acquisition Officer by an award passed under Section 11 of the said Act offered the compensation for the land acquired at the rate of Rs.27/- per square m...
Nirlep Appliances Limited Vs. Gautam Metals and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-08-2012
This is a Notice of Motion for interim reliefs in a suit seeking a permanent injunction against the Defendants restraining them from infringing the Plaintiff's registered trade mark bearing No.457876 in class 21, No.635066 in class 09, Nos.932084, 1063686, 1084948 and 1226390 all in class 21 by using the impugned trade mark NIRLEP and/or any other trade mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's registered trade mark NIRLEP upon or in respect of mixer, juicer, grinder, hot plate, hand blender and/or similar goods. Prayer clause (b) of this suit is to restrain passing off and by prayer clause (c), damages to the extent of Rs.10 lacs have been claimed. 2. It is the case of the Plaintiff that it is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at B5, MIDC, Station Road, Aurangabad-431005. The Plaintiff and its predecessors in business are old, established and well reputed manufacturers of and traders in inter alia Kitchen Containers, Cooking Utens...
Mrs. Lata Ramchandra Ubale Vs. Ramchandra Shankar Ubale and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-08-2012
P.C. 1. The Appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated 29th November, 2010 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Judge First Labour Court, Pune. The original Applicant is mother of the deceased namely Lalit Ramchandra Ubale who died in an accident on 13th March, 2000. The deceased was driving the jeep when he met with an accident. Respondent No.1 Ramchandra Shankar Ubale is the father of the deceased and Respondent No.2 is the Insurance Company. Applicant has filed claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The Application was dismissed by the Commissioner mainly on the ground that Applicant has failed to establish her case under Section 3 of The Act. 2. This being an Appeal under Section 30 of The Act, the substantial question is as follows: (a) Whether the Commissioner has committed an error in holding that the deceased son of the Applicant was not in the employment of Respondent No.1 and hence...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »