Mumbai Court March 1962 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.
Mckenzies Limited Vs. the State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC602(Bom)
Desai, J.1. Two questions have been referred to us by the Sales Tax Tribunal in this reference under section 34 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act of 1953, which are as follows :- '1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the applicants were dealers within the meaning of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, in respect of their activities as body-building contractors, and 2. Whether the transaction referred to in bill dated 29th June, 1955, is liable to the sales tax under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953.' 2. The applicants Messrs Mckenzies Limited execute engineering jobs such as building structures and body-building on motor chassis. They entered into a contract for the construction of 218 bodies with the Government of India. Under this contract the bodies were agreed to be supplied at the rate of Rs. 1,730 per body. In pursuance of this contract the applicant presented a bill for the five bodies supplied by them on the 29th June, 1956, for Rs. 8,650. Under section 27 of the B...
Ramrao Ramchandra MaraThe and anr. Vs. Jairam Kondajee MaraThe and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Bom61; (1962)64BOMLR549; ILR1962Bom549
1. This litigation has had a conquered his tory after the suit was filed. The appellants are We original plaintiffs. The plaintiffs sued for possession of certain fields and houses from the defendants and cer tain sums from defendants 3 and 1 for damages. The property originally belonged to one Ramchandra Patel or Shelu. He died on 23-3-1937 leaving behind him his married wife Anusuya and mother Bhimabai. Anusuya had no issues and soon after the death of Ramchandra sne remarried. On her remarriage, Bhimabai became the owner ot the property. Bhimabai died sometime in 1950 and a was after her death that the present litigation started in 1951. The original plaintiff No. 1 Ramrao claimed that is was the son of the deceased Ramchandra from one Mama-bal. Ramrao pleaded that his mother Mainabai was marnea to Ramchandra in the Gandharva Form somewhere in fasi and therefore he was a legitimate son of Ramchandra ana claimed possession of the property under that title. He put up an alternative ca...
Vishnu Agencies Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Ci ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR444(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J. 1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act at the instance of the assessee. The assessee is a private limited company and, during the previous year relating to the assessment year 1956-57, it acted as transport contractors for foodgrains and fertilizers on behalf of the Government of India. Under the agreement, which the assessee had with the Government, it had to provide transport for transporting sugar from the docks to the sugar godowns. For the purpose of this work which the assessee had undertaken to do, according to the assessee, the Government was to send it a programme of lifting up sugar from the docks, giving the quantity of weight to be lifted and the number of trucks required. After carrying out the work for some time, the assessee found that the Government were unable to provide the requisite load for the assessee's trucks. The assessee brought this fact to the notice of the Government and asked the Government to take suitable ac...
Bansilal Gangaram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR973(Bom)
Tambe, J.1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The assessee, inter alia, does the business of money-lending, general merchant, and is also an agriculturist. The property with which we are concerned is the property which has come to the assessee in the course of his money-lending business. The assessee maintains two sets of accounts separately-one for this general business and the other for money-lending. But inter-connecting the two sets of accounts, there is a current account. As already stated, during the course of money lending- business, the assessee acquired certain agricultural properties. After the acquisition of those properties in lieu of debt, the account of the debtor in money lending-business was closed, and the agricultural property account in the other set of books was debited in the amount of debt due from the debtor. In the account pertaining to the agricultural properties, the day to day expenses for agricultural operations were enter...
Gordhandas Mathuradas Matani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Ci ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1962
Reported in: [1963]49ITR449(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J.1. The question referred to us on this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act arises out of the assessments made on the original assessee, Mathuradas Canjee Matani, who has died during the tendency of the reference and is represented by his heirs and legal representatives, relating to the assessment years 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1957-58, the previous years for which were Samvat Years 2010, 2011 and 2012. The assessee was carrying on business in kirana goods under the name and style of Messrs. Canjee Dwarkadas as its sole proprietor till the end of the Samvat Year 2005, i.e., till 21st October, 1949. In the year 1944 he purchased a property at Waudby Road for a sum of Rs. 3,70,000. As the funds for the said property came out of the business, he opened an account in his books of account in the name of 'Waudby Road Property Account' and debited the purchase price to that account. In the same year, it appears, the assessee made an arrangement to take an overd...
Habib and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Ii
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1962
Reported in: [1963]49ITR792(Bom)
Tambe, J.1. Tax has been levied on the assessee firm in this case in its capacity as agents of Messrs. Jamal Ramji & Co., a non-resident firm. Section 43 of the Indian Income-tax Act provides : '43. Any person employed by or on behalf of a person residing out of the taxable territories, or having any business connection with such person, or through whom such person is in the receipt of any income, profits or gains upon whom the Income-tax Officer has caused a notice to be served of his intention of treating him as the agent of the non-resident person shall, for all the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be such agent. 2. Under the said provision of section 43, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice to the assessee firm declaring his intention to tax the assessee in its status of agents of M/s. Jamal Ramji and Co. The assessee then stated that it had no objection to being treated as an agent. The assessee was assessed accordingly. It appears that a similar order was passed for the next ...
D.D. Shroff and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-16-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR780(Bom)
Tambe, J.1. On drawing up a statement of case the Tribunal has referred the following three questions under sub-section (2) of section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) : '(1) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the two sums of Rs. 11,250 (rupees eleven thousand two hundred and fifty) and Rs. 5,000 (rupees five thousand) paid to D. N. Dastur and J. R. Kanga respectively were not in the nature of recoupment for the loss which they suffered by reason of the premature termination of the partnership and premature deprivation of the partnership rights before the full expiry of the term of five years of the partnership (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the said sum of Rs. 16,250 (rupees sixteen thousand two hundred and fifty) is liable to be apportioned under the first proviso to section 26(1) among four partners including the said Dastur and Kanga (3) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the In...
Joint Committee of Action, B Group Merchants, Bombay Vs. Commissioner ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR427(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J. 1. The question referred to us on this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act relates to the order of assessment on the assessee for the assessment year 1946-47. The assessee in the case is described as the joint committee of action B group merchants, Bombay. this association came to be formed some time on or about 1st June, 1945, in the following circumstances : On the introduction of cloth control in the year 1945, the cloth dealers in Bombay were divided into four groups, viz., (1) group A comprised of wholesalers who obtained their quotas for selling cloth only in bales, (2) group B who were semi-wholesalers who received bales from A group dealers and sold cloth by whole takes to the retailers, (3) group C was comprised of the retailers, and (4) group D of commission agents for sales outside Bombay. There were three associations of the clothe dealers, viz., (1) The Bombay Piecegoods Merchants Association; (2) The Bombay Country Fancy & Grey Pieceg...
Mulkraj Bodhraj Chabra Vs. Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-1962
Reported in: AIR1965Bom30; (1964)66BOMLR456; 1965CriLJ148; ILR1962Bom625
(1) The Nagpur Corporation has imposed octroi tax under section 114 (1) (e) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948. The Corporation filed a complaint which was received by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur, on 1-9-1959 against the applicant. Paragraph I of the complaint stated that the applicant took delivery of a new truck outside the octroi limits after the Kamptee Road that the truck was for immediate export to Kelzar and obtained a transit pass on the same day. After having the truck registered with the Regional Transport Authority the applicant took the truck to Exit Outpost No.8 on the Wardha Road, Surrendered the transit pass there and then went outside the octroi limits with the truck. The applicant is then alleged to have brought back the truck within the octroi limits. Before doing so, however he is alleged to have changed the temporary number plate and fixed on the truck the number place with the registration number issued by the Regional Transport Authority ...
Khimchand Amarchand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR102(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J.1. The short question which arises for determination on this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is whether the reassessment order made on the assessee under section 34 was barred by time. 2. The assessee is a firm of share and stock brokers and it also has its own business of dealing in shares and securities. During the previous year relating to the assessment year 1951-52, the assessee firm obtained a surplus of Rs. 31,065 on the redemption of certain sterling securities which it had held as stock-in-trade consisting of M. & S. M. Railway stock and Cawnpore Electric debenture stock. For the assessment year 1951-52, in the return which the assessee filed, the taxable income shown by it was Rs. 71,399 which did not include the aforesaid amount of Rs. 31,065. It appears that the Income-tax Officer, however was aware of the said surplus from the information which was laid before him on the record of the case. The assessment order for this year ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »