Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-14-1986
Reported in : 1987(1)BomCR281
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. Can countervailing duty be included in the value of Indian made foreign liquor for the purposes of calculating octroi when it is imported under bond into Greater Bombay from a State other than Maharashtra? The question must be answered with reference to the Octroi Rules of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay.2. The Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 defines, in section 2(14) 'excise duty' and 'countervailing duty' to mean such excise duty or countervailing duty, as the case may be, as is mentioned in Entry 51 in List II in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. Thereunder excise duty is leviable on the goods therein mentioned which are manufactured or produced in the State and countervailing duty at the same or lower rates is leviable on similar goods manufactured or produced elsewhere in India. Section 105 of the Bombay Prohibition Act imposes an excise duty or countervailing duty as the case may be, on alcoholic liquor for human consumption at such rate or ra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-11-1986
Reported in : [1986(52)FLR289]; (1995)IIILLJ630Bom
Pendse, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the legality of the order dated March 14, 1985 passed by the Presiding Officer, First Labour Court, Bombay, in an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner filed the application for recovery of various amounts, including the amount of gratuity for the period of 36 years service. The petitioner claimed that he was employed by the respondent Company in the Sales Department and his services were terminated from the month of February 1979. The application was resisted by the Company initially claiming that the petitioner was employed as a typist. The Company denied that the amounts claimed by the workman are due. As regards the claim for gratuity, it was urged that the said claim cannot be entertained by the Labour Court in proceedings under Section 33-C(2) of the Act, but will have to be left f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-24-1986
Reported in : [1987(54)FLR16]; (1994)IIILLJ1007Bom
Pendse, J.1. By this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners are challenging the legality of the order, dated June 28, 1985 passed by the Presiding Officer, 6th Labour Court, Bombay in 31 applications filed by the workmen under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and awarding diverse amounts to the workmen. The facts giving rise to filing of these applications lie in a very narrow compass and are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners.2. The petitioner Company is a public sector undertaking. Prior to Jan. 24, 1976, a Sterling Company incorporated in the United Kingdom, known as Burmah-Shell Oil Storage & Distributing Company of India Ltd. was operating in India For marketing of petroleum products of the Company. Another company known as Burmah Shell Refineries Ltd. registered under the. Companies Act, 1956 was prior to Jan. 24, 1976 carrying on business ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-04-1986
Reported in : 1986(2)BomCR512; (1986)88BOMLR348; (1987)ILLJ9Bom; 1986MhLJ646
1. The Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('the act') is a welfare legislation designed to provide for certain benefits to employees in case of sickness, maternity and employment injury. Sub-section 3 of S. 1 of the Act which deals with the commencement and territorial application provisions enables the Central Government by a notification in the official gazette to bring the act into force for different states or for different parts thereof. The act applied in the first instance to all factories but Sub-s. 5 of S. 1 enables the State and Central Government to extend the provisions of the Act to any other establishment or class of establishments by notification in the official gazette.2. In exercise of powers conferred by Sub-s. 5 of S. 1 of the Act the Government of Maharashtra issued a notification on 18th September, 1978 extending with effect from 12th November, 1978 all the provisions of the Act to classes of establishments given in the Schedule. Item 3 of para 3 of the Schedule ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-05-1986
Reported in : [1986]62STC40(Bom)
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The applicant M/s. Siemens India Limited, are registered dealers under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The applicants filed their returns under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, for the period 1st April, 1964, to 31st March, 1965, within the prescribed period, that is to say, before 14th May, 1965. Thereafter, the Sales Tax Officer by his assessment order dated 20th April, 1967, granted to the applicants a set-off to the tune of Rs. 88.237. In respect of this assessment order of 20th April, 1967, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, in exercise of his power of suo motu revision under section 57 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, issued a notice dated 1st March, 1972, proposing to revise the order of the Sales Tax Officer granting the set-off. Thereafter the Assistant Commissioner, by his order dated 30th April, 1972, revised the order of the Sales Tax Officer and reduced the amount of set-off by a sum of Rs. 8,902.12. The applicants filed an appeal from this o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-06-1986
Reported in : 1986(2)BomCR315
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and others against the order passed by the Principal Judge of the Bombay City Civil Court, Bombay allowing the appeal filed by the respondent and setting aside the eviction order passed against him by the competent authority. It is an admitted position that the respondent Qureshi was an employee of the Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking. He had signed an agreement of leave and license and had agreed to abide by the occupancy rules. He retired from service of the Undertaking on attaining the age of superannuating. The competent authority, therefore, called upon him to vacate the premises allotted to him since the leave and licence agreement stood revoked on the retirement. Since no reply was received from him a show cause notice was served on him to show cause within 14 days as to why the eviction order should not be made against him. The respondent was also given a re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-09-1986
Reported in : [1987]65STC191(Bom)
Dharmadhikari, J.1. As all these writ petitions involve common question of law and facts, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. By these writ petitions the petitioners, who are engaged in the production and manufacture of edible oil, seek to challenge the constitutional validity of the Bombay Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1985, hereinafter referred to as the said Amendment Act, as being ultra vires of articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution of India.3. Initially the Government of Maharashtra announced a package scheme of incentives in the year 1964 vide Government Resolution dated 25th September, 1964, to encourage and induce entrepreneurs to establish industrial units in undeveloped and underdeveloped areas-outside Bombay-Thane and Pune-Pimpri-Chinchwad regions. By this resolution the State Government agreed to give to new industries, during the initial stages of its production, a cash refund of sales tax paid by the indFustry on the raw...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-21-1986
Reported in : (1986)LC654Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s Liberty Oil Mills filed a petition dated 18-1-1982 to the Government of India under old Section 131 of the Customs Act and this has been transferred to the Tribunal under Section 131-B ibid and is to be treated as an appeal before this Tribunal. The appeal is against the Order No. S/10-58/81/A, dated 24-4-1981 of the Collector of Customs, Bombay, under which he exercised the power under old Section 130 of the Customs Act and reviewed the order of the Assistant Collector of Customs Group 'A' allowing clearance of copra valued at Rs. 20,09,461/- c.i.f. imported by the Appellants under Bill of Entry No. 2368/818, dated 20-2-1981 per s.s. ZINOVIY SOLOYEV. Shri Banatwala submitted that this consignment was by way of replacement under OGL No. 4/80 of goods imported earlier. There was no dispute regarding this fact. Shri Banatwala submitted that the Appellants imported 1000 M/Tons of copra from Zanzibar earlier under Bill of Entry No. 1938/10, dated 1-3-1979.On 10-3-1979 there was fir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-01-1986
Reported in : 1987(11)ECC175; 1987(27)ELT19(Bom)
1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging the legality of the demand notice dated June 14, 1983, copy of which is annexed as Ex. 'K' to the petition, issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Bond Department, calling upon the petitioners to pay duty under Section 72(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and the interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum upto May 12, 1983 and 12% with effect from May 13, 1983. The facts giving rise to the issuance of the demand notice are required to be started to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners.2. The petitioners are a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and manufacture several varieties of textile goods. In the process of manufacture, the petitioners utilise Polyster Filament Yarn as a raw material. Polyster Filament Yarn when partially drawn is a variety known in the trade as 'Partially Oriented Yarn', i.e. 'POY'. POY is a delic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-03-1986
Reported in : [1990]68CompCas720(Bom)
..... court in corporation of calcutta v. calcutta tramways co. ltd. : 1964crilj354 and life insurance corporation of india v. escorts ltd. : 1986(8)ecc189 . in the light of the authoritative pronouncements of the supreme court referred to above, we have to consider the provisions of sub-sections (1),(2) and (3) of section 45 of the said act and ..... during march 30, 1984, to september 27, 1985.he critical financial condition is highlighted by the following tabularised statement incorporated in an application :----------------------------------------------------------------------rupees in lakhsas on---------------------------------------------the date of the date of the date ofprevious last lastinspection inspection scrutiny(24-9-1982) (30-3- ..... share have been called and paid). hcb has not declared any dividend since the year 1946. since about the year 1956, it has been working under the directions of the reserve bank of india. it is the case of the reserve bank that in view of the highly ..... act and speak for him qua his rights and the notice to the banking company would be deemed to be a notice to its shareholders . mr. cooper tried to distinguish this authority by saying that the provisions are different and moreover, section 13(9)(b) provides an opportunity to the members to be heard if they so desire. it is not necessary to go into these aspects since we have already held that as regards the order of moratorium even a shareholder has to be given a post-decisional opportunity if demanded.43 .....
Tag this Judgment!