Mumbai Court February 1971 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Union Land and Building ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR794(Bom)
Kotval, C.J.1. This reference arises out of a common order passed by the Tribunal on 16th July, 1962, deciding five appeals before them. In two of those appeals, Income-tax Appeals Nos. 6036 and 6037 of 1961-62, the department was the appellant and in Appeals Nos. 5108-5111 of 1961-62, the Union Land & Building Society Ltd., the assessee, was the appellant. The circumstances under which these appeals arose and the reference was made are briefly as follows : Messrs. Union Land & Building Society Ltd. is a public limited company which does the business of constructing houses for Government and also of constructing houses for private parties. In the income-tax year relative to the assessment year 1957-58, it constructed seven bungalows on the land belonging to it and sold them to various parties. The details of these sales are not before us except one sale, which the parties agree should be taken as a typical sale and regarding which we will presently state the facts. These seven bungalow...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Dinkar Kulkarni Vs. Shankerappa Ganappa Pasarkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Bom302; 1971MhLJ478
ORDER1. This is a revision application by the defendant and the non-applicant is the plaintiff. The non-applicant has filed a suit under Section 5 (2) of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act claiming therein removal of obstruction alleged to have been put in Survey No. 220 of Mouza Janephal, Tahsil Mehakar, district Buldana, by the applicant. The non-applicant prayed for a temporary injunction against the applicant in that suit and the Court ordered the temporary injunction against the applicant prohibiting him from any attempt to obstruct the non-applicant from using a road. There was a map attached with the order, and the order was that there should not be any obstruction till the final decision of the suit. The complaint of the applicant is that the road was not demarcated in the map. It. however, appears that the applicant did not obey the order of the Court and started digging a pit in the way of the non-applicant. The non-applicant, therefore, again brought to the notice of the Court this ...
Tag this Judgment!Tukaram Hari Chaudhuri and anr. Vs. Mathurabai Pundalik Chaudhari and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-05-1971
Reported in: AIR1973Bom37; (1972)74BOMLR184; 1972MhLJ370
1. There is no substance in this appeal and is liable to be dismissed.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows : The property in dispute are three plots of land bearing S. Nos. 524/1, 541 and 543 and a residential house bearing Gram Panchayat House No. 434, situate at Nanded.3. One Ramchandra Hari and his son Pundlik constituted a joint Hindu family which owned suit property, Pundlik died leaving him surviving has widow Mathurabai the plaintiff, two sons Laxman and Pralhad, and a daughter Jaibai. Laxman and Pralhad died in 1943-44. Thereafter the joint family consisted of three persons, viz. Ramchandra Mathurabai plaintiff, and Jaibai Ramchandra died on November 26, 1948 leaving a Will dated October 25, 1948 whereby he bequeathed the suit lands to defendant No.1 and the suit house to defendant No.2. Accordingly defendants Nos. 1 and 2 took possession of the suit property. By a sale-deed dated June 10, 1958, defendant No. 1 sold S. Nos. 541 and 543 to defend...
Tag this Judgment!Brihan Maharashtra Sugar Syndicate Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-02-1971
Reported in: [1973]87ITR136(Bom)
Chandrachud, J. 1. This is a reference under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 for the decision of the following question. 'Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the reassessment proceedings against the applicant-company for the assessment year 1945-46 were validly initiated ?' 2. The assessee, Brihan Maharashtra Sugar Syndicate Ltd., Poona, which carries on business in the manufacture and sale of sugar, owns a sugarcane farm, the produce of which is utilised for the production of sugar. If the produce is inadequate to fee its factory which had a capacity of 33 tons per day, the assessee would be required to supplement its produce by outside purchases. 3. For the assessment year 1945-46, the corresponding previous year being the one which ended 30th September, 1944, the assessee showed a loss of Rs. 4,61,337. It filed before the Income-tax officer three types of accounts the 'Gur Manufacturing Account', the 'Sugar Manufacturing Account' and the 'Cane Plantation Account...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavnani Bus Service Co., Bombay Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bomba ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-01-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR179(Bom)
Chandrachud, J.1. By its order dated the 8th of March, 1963, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to the High Court under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 29,800 is taxable in the hands of the assessee under section 10(2)(vii) of the Act ?' 2. The assessee, Messrs. Bhavnani Bus Service Company, is a registered partnership firm doing the business of transporting passengers on certain routes. The firm was formed under a deed of partnership dated the 8th of October, 1949, for a period of three years commencing from the 17th day of June, 1949. It was to continue thereafter at the will of the parties. The firm consisted of four partners, Tuljaram Issardas Bhavnani, Hiranand Issardas Bhavnani, Bhagwan H. Mansukhani and Mrs. Lili Mansukhani having a share of 6 annas, 4 annas, 4 annas and 2 annas, respectively. 3. On the 29th of July, 1952, a fresh deed of partnership was exe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›