Mumbai Court February 1968 Judgments
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Habibulla Saheb
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1968
Reported in: [1968]22STC219(Bom)
Vimadalal, J.1. This is a reference under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, which raises the following questions : '(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the transactions between the respondent and her customers were not sales of chattel qua chattel and were, therefore, not covered under section 2(g) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding the respondent was not a dealer as defined in section 2(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?' 2. The facts out of which this reference arises are set out in paragraph 3 of the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal dated 14th October, 1964, making the reference. The deceased husband of the respondent used to supply charmed tawiz (amulets) to people in distress, and after the death of her husband, which took place some time in the year 1956, the respondent herself has carried on t...
Tag this Judgment!Habib Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1968
Reported in: [1968]38CompCas475(Bom); [1968]69ITR174a(Bom)
Kotval, C.J.1. The questions referred under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act for our decision are : '(1) Whether there was any evidence to support the findings that the house property assets were at all time acquired in the course of the petitioner company's business and not as part of its any allied non- Insurance business and (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the sum of Rs. 2,36,416 (rupees two lakhs thirty six thousand four hundred and sixteen) has been rightly assessed as the income of the petitioner company under para. 6 of the Schedule to the Income-tax Act ?' 2. In stating the second question we have corrected an arithmetical error in that in the original question No. 2 the figure is mentioned as Rs. 2,30,416, but by a note appended to the questions by the Tribunal the correct figure is Rs. 2,36,416. Accordingly, we deal with question No. 2 as corrected. 3. The circumstance under which the questions arise are as follows : The assessee is...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Amar Radio Cabinet Works
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1968
Reported in: [1968]22STC63(Bom)
Vimadalal, J.1. The question that arises in tills reference is as follows :- 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in coming to the conclusion that radio cabinets and loudspeaker cabinets are covered by the residuary entry No. 22 of Schedule E, and that they do not fall within the scope of entry No. 65 of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959.' 2. The respondents sought the determination of the question stated above for the purpose of finding out the rate of tax that would be attracted on the sale of radio cabinets and loudspeaker cabinets in which they deal. It may at the outset be mentioned that the respondents are not radio dealers as such, but their business is that of making cabinets for radios and loudspeakers. The Commissioner of Sales Tax came to the conclusion that radio cabinets and loudspeaker cabinets would fall under entry No. 65 of Schedule C, and he answered the question accordingly. On appeal to the Sales Ta...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Amar Wire and Rolling Mills
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-07-1968
Reported in: [1968]22STC294(Bom)
Abhyankar, J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax made by the Sales Tax Tribunal, referring the following three questions for our answer. The questions are as follows :- '(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the sale of 'fabricated mild steel round/flat bars' is a 'resale' within the meaning of section 2(26)(iii) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1939 (2) Whether there was any evidence before the Tribunal to justify it in law in coming to the conclusion that fabricated mild steel bars are used for the same purpose for which mild steel bars directly produced from the rolling mills are used (3) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case fabricated mild steel round/flat bars fall within the scope of clause (c) of entry No. 3 of Part I of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ?' Before we proceed to answer the questions necessary to be answered and which, in our opinion, are questions Nos. (1) and (3) only, because, it...
Tag this Judgment!Bijibai Saldhana Vs. Rama Mandhar Thannu Mishra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Bom103; (1968)70BOMLR428; ILR1969Bom536; 1968MhLJ901
ORDER1. These two companion matters -raise a common question of law for decision and can be conveniently dealt with together. The facts giving rise to them are briefly these:2. The property bearing Tika No. 16, C. S. Nos. 5 and 6 of Thana, formerly belonged to one Vasanji Padamsi. On a part of this property there was a shed known as the 'Big godown'. By a lease deed dated 13th April 1959 Vasanji leased out the shed and the site under it to one D. B. Naik at a monthly rent of Rs. 225. Under the terms of the lease the lessee was entitled to make improvements, alterations or modifications at his own cost and was also entitled to sub-let the premises subject to the condition that when the lease was terminated the sub-lease would also be deemed to be terminated. Naik converted a part of the shed into four shops. Two of these were let out by him to Mahamood Adbul Rahman alias S. A. P. Mahamood, the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 244 of 1967, at a monthly rent of Rs. 150 and one ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Colour Chem. Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1968
Reported in: [1968]22STC90(Bom)
Vimadalal, J. 1. These are two references under section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, made at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, in the first of which, viz., Sales Tax Reference No. 31, the two questions which have been referred are as follows : '(1) Whether after 1st April, 1961, pigment powders are goods falling within the scope of and are taxable at the rates specified in entry No. 22 of Schedule E to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (2) If the answer to question (1) be in the negative, whether after 1st April, 1961, pigment powders fall within the scope of and are taxable at the rates specified in entry No. 39 of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ?' 2. The questions referred to us in Sales Tax Reference No. 32 of 1965 are identical in terms, except that they refer, not to pigment powders, but to pigment emulsions. The question that we have to determine, therefore, is under which entry are pigment powders and pigment emulsions taxable under the Bombay S...
Tag this Judgment!Vasani Cloth Stores Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1968
Reported in: [1968]22STC179(Bom)
Abhyankar, J.1. The question referred for our decision is worded as follows :- 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that while stitching the customers' cloth according to their orders the applicants sold the materials such as lining cloth, hair canvas etc. used in the stitching jobs ?'2. For clarification we tried to find out from counsel on either side what is the ambit of this omnibus word 'etc.', and it is agreed that it would include thread, buttons, but not the cloth out of which suits or garments are stitched. It is unfortunate that, in making the reference and drawing up the reference order, the Tribunal has not given a clear statement of the case as is required to be done. We have, however, gathered the facts from other materials on record, about which apparently there is no dispute. The facts appear to be as follows : The assessee-firm is a partnership firm carrying on business under the name...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Laxmi Printing and Dyeing Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Inc ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-05-1968
Reported in: [1968]70ITR148(Bom)
Desai, J.1. The short question raised on this reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act relates to the claim of the assessee to set off its unabsorbed depreciation of the past years against the assessable income of the assessment year 1958-59 with which we are concerned. 2. The assessee is a private limited company incorporated in the year 1942. Some of the person interested in this company were also interested in another incorporated company known as 'Bhor Industries Limited' and in the month of March, 1958, the entire block of the shares of the assessee-company were purchased by the Bhor Industries Ltd. and since that time onwards the assessee-company became a 100% subsidiary of the Bhor Industries Ltd. Now, the assessee-company, since its inception in 1942, did the business of processing of cloth. The nature of the business carried on by it, as described by the assessee, was that other parties sent their cloth to the company for being dealt with in the way they desi...
Tag this Judgment!Mather and Platt Ltd. Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-05-1968
Reported in: [1969]24STC496(Bom)
Vimadalal, J. 1. The proceedings from which this reference has arisen were initiated by the applicants by means of an application under section 27 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax for the determination of the question as to whether any tax was payable by the applicants on their contract dated 6th June, 1959, with Messrs Aryodaya Ginning and ., for the installation of their patented automatic plant for protection against fire. The Deputy Commissioner came to the conclusion that the transaction essentially consisted of two contracts one for the supply of materials for consideration, and the other for services rendered and labour done, and he, therefore, held that sales tax was payable to the extent to which the said contract involved the rule of materials. On the matter being taken up to the Sales Tax Tribunal, that view of the Deputy Commissioner was upheld, and the appeal before the Tribunal was dismissed. The applicants then applied to the...
Tag this Judgment!Mozelle RobIn Solomon Vs. Lt. Col. R.J. Solomon
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1968
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR578
Madon, J.1. This is a suit brought with leave granted by the Court under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent by a wife against her husband and the woman with whom she alleges he has committed adultery. In the plaint as originally filed the reliefs claimed by the plaintiff were for judicial separation on the ground of adultery committed by the husband, for custody of two of the children of the marriage who are still minors and for maintenance for the plaintiff and for all the four children of the marriage.2. Both husband and wife belong to the Jewish community and profess the Jewish faith. They were married in Bombay on September 12, 1944 according to the Jewish law. In accordance with the custom amongst the Jews the parties executed a writing known as the Kethuba. These documents are usually in the Aramaic language. I have been shown the original of the document executed by the parties and, except for the signatures of the parties and the date which are in English, the document is in a scr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »