Mumbai Court April 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.
Collector of Sales Tax, Bombay State Vs. Parimal Brothers
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-28-1962
Reported in: (1962)64BOMLR705; 1963MhLJ65; [1962]13STC647(Bom)
Tambe, J.1. These 8 references can be disposed of by one judgment. The dealer who has been assessed to sales tax under the Sales Tax Act, 1953 (hereafter referred to as the Act) is the same person, namely, the firm of Messrs Parimal Brothers, respondents to all these 8 references. 2. The facts giving rise to these references, and the question referred to us are identical in all these references. These 8 references raise a question as regards the interpretation and true meaning of the clause 'any tax payable ....... and remaining unpaid at the time of the transfer' occurring in section 26 of the Act. 3. The facts in brief are : The business was carried on originally by a firm doing business under the name Shroff Parekh & Co. In December, 1952, Shroff Parekh & Co. transferred its business as a going concern to one Mrs. Kusum Mody. On 26th November, 1953, Mrs. Mody in her turn transferred the business as a going concern to the Sunways (India) Private Limited. On 2nd June, 1954, the Sunway...
Union of India and anr. Vs. B.D. Rathi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Bom54; (1962)64BOMLR676; [1962(5)FLR435]; ILR1962Bom830
Ghitale, J.1. These are applications against the decision by he Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, at Bombay (hereinafter referred to as the Authority), on applications submitted by several employees of he Central Railway. The employees applied to the Authority alleging that they worked for 51 hours a week, although according to the provisions and rules framed under the said Act they were required to work only for 48 hours during a week; thus they have worked overtime for three hours per week, and hence they were entitled to extra wages payable as per rules framed under the said Act for the overtime work done by tem during the period beginning with 1-4-1952 upto the date of the applications. It is common ground that the employees are monthly rated employees, and that they are workers in a scheduled employment.2. These applications were opposed by the Central Railway on the ground that the Authority had no jurisdiction to entertain claims prior to 1957, and that the Minimum Wa...
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay Vs. Fairdeal Corp ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC750(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J.1. The questions raised in the present reference at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax are as follows :- '1. Whether the cotton which was subjected to process of cleaning, boiling, bleaching and drying and carding, remained as cotton after the above process and 2. Whether the sale of the said goods known as absorbent cotton wool falls within item 1 of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, as amended by Bombay Act 10 of 1954, or whether the same is liable to tax under the residuary entry covered by item 80 of the said Schedule ?' 2. The respondents are dealers and were at all material times registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. During the period from 1st April, 1954, to 31st March, 1955, the respondents had effected sales of absorbent cotton wool of the value of Rs. 2,23,475-6-2. In their assessment for the said period, these sales were held by the Sales Tax Officer as taxable under item 80 of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, and ...
MohiuddIn Shaikh Chand Vs. Gulam Ghouse Gulam Jilani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1962
Reported in: (1962)64BOMLR560
Tarkunde, J.1. The petitioner on February 9, 1954, agreed to purchase from opponent No. 1 a land Survey No. 168 at the village Bhokerdhan in the Auran-galmd district for an amount of Rs. 5,000. On the same day he paid Rs. 1,000 to opponent No. 1 under an earnest receipt or Visar-Pavati, wherein the terms of the agreement were set out. In pursuance of the agreement the petitioner was placed in possession of the land. On August 11, 1956, the petitioner paid to opponent No. 1 Its. 4,000 being the balance of the purchase-price, and obtained a receipt for the amount. Then on July 12, 1958, the petitioner and opponent No. 1 jointly filed an application before the Tahsildar, from which the present proceeding has arisen, praying that the transaction between them be declared valid under Section 98A of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. During the pendency of the matter before the Tahsildar, opponent No. 1 resiled from the position taken by him in the joint application and alleged...
Union of India Vs. Rathi B.D.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1962
Reported in: (1962)IILLJ655Bom
Chitale, J.1. These are applications against the decision by the authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, at Bombay (hereinafter referred to as the authority), on applications submitted by several employees of the Central Railway. The employees applied to the authority alleging that they worked for 51 hours a week, although according to the provisions and rules framed under the said act they were required to work only for 48 hours during a week; thus they have worked overtime for 3 hours per week, and hence they were entitled to extra wages payable as per rules framed under the said Act for the overtime work done by them during the period beginning with 1 April, 1952, upto the date of the applications. It is common ground that the employees are monthly rated employees, and that they are workers in a scheduled employment. 2. These applications were opposed by the Central Railway on the ground that the authority had no jurisdiction to entertain claims prior to 1957, and that the Mini...
Kwick Stationery Mart, Bombay Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1962
Reported in: [1963]14STC282(Bom)
Desai, J.1. The questions, which are referred to us on this reference, arise out of the transaction of the supply of printed posters by the petitioners to their customers. The petitioners are dealers in stationery materials and publicity printers. They have no printing press of their own and get the printing work relating to the order received by them by other printing presses. The petitioners received orders from their customers for the supply of publicity posters. The petitioners were to supply the paper for the posters. They were also to prepare the designs for the printing according to the instructions of their customers and had to get the printing work done on the posters, which they got executed by other printing presses after paying the charges for the work done. The petitioners issued to the customers separate bills in respect of each of their orders for posters : one for the sale of the paper required for the posters and the other for charges for work, labour and skill. In the...
Celluloid Bangle Works Vs. the State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC611(Bom)
Tambe, J.1. This is a reference under section 34(2) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The applicant Messrs Celluloid Bangle Works is a proprietary concern doing the business of manufacturing bangles and selling them in the market. According to the statement of facts, the bangles are made of waste cinematograph films made essentially from celluloid. The Sales Tax Authorities sought to levy special tax on the sale of these bangles under item No. 34 of Schedule II to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, as it stood prior to its amendment. That entry is in the following terms : ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 'Description of goods Rate of Reduction under special clause (ii) of tax. section 11. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (i) Bengles, bottle caps and Three pies in 1/65th part. buttons made of plastics the rupee. when sold at a rate not...
M.G. Agarwal Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-24-1962
Reported in: (1962)64BOMLR773
P.B. Gajendragadkar, J.1. A criminal conspiracy to which, according to the prosecution, M, G. Agarwal, M.K. Kulkarni and N. Laxminarayan, hereafter called accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively, were parties between December, 1954 and June, .1955 at Bombay, has given rise to the criminal proceedings from which the two present appeals arise. At the relevant time, the three accused persons were attached to the office of the Income-tax Officer, Ward No. A-III in Greater Bombay. Accused No. 1 was designated as the First Income-tax Officer, and accused Nos. 2 and 3 worked under him as second and third Assessment Clerks respectively. The main charge against these persons was that during the relevant period, they had entered into a criminal conspiracy by agreeing to do or cause to be done illegal acts by corrupt and illegal means and by abusing their position as public servants to obtain for themselves pecuniary advantage in the form of income-tax refund orders and this criminal object was achi...
Carona Sahu Company (P.) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Sales Tax, Bombay State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-23-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC693(Bom)
Desai, J.1. The petitioners, who are manufacturers of foot-wear purchased rubber from certain dealers residing in the State of Cochin. In their assessment for sales tax for the period from 1st April, 1954, to 31st March, 1955, these purchases were subjected to tax on the ground that they came within the purview of section 10(a) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act of 1953. The petitioners' contention before the Sales Tax Authorities was that section 10(a) had no application to the transactions in question because they were purchases made from dealers outside the State and clause (a) of section 10 could only apply when the transactions were from unregistered dealers within the State of Bombay. According to the petitioners the only provision in the Sales Tax Act of 1953, which could have application to the present transaction was the provision of section 10C, but since rubber was not one of the items of goods specified by the State Government by notification as required by the said section, secti...
Bherulal Maniklal Kothari Vs. the State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC703(Bom)
Tambe, J.1. This is a reference under section 34(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The facts giving rise to this reference in brief are : A partnership firm consisting of two partners Kundanlal Hansraj Sahani and Balkrishna Mathuradas Sahani, was doing business of bidi manufacture at Sholapur, and sale of bidis under the name and style 'Kundanlal Hansraj'. The bidis were sold under certain labels. It appears that the applicant Bherulal Maniklal Kothari had advanced moneys to the said partnership firm sometime, and over Rs. 32,000 had remained to be paid by the said partnership firm to the applicant. On 23rd October, 1955, the said partnership firm entered into an agreement with the applicant, wherein in satisfaction of the aforesaid loan of Rs. 32,000 and odd, the partnership sold the goodwill of its aforesaid business and the right to use its 10 bidi label marks. The partners further agreed that they would not in future use the 10 bidi label marks in their business, or do any busi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »