Skip to content

Mumbai Court November 1975 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.

Nov 13 1975

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Wealth Ta ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Nov-13-1975

Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Bom)83

Desai J. - This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, under section 27(1) of the wealth-tax Act, 1957, and the following question has been referred to is for our opinion.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the debt owed by the Standard Vacuum Refining Company of India Ltd. to the assessee was situated in India notwithstanding the arrangement for the repayment of the debt outside India and includible as such in its net wealth for the assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59 & 1959-60 ?'2. A few facts may be stated - We are concerned with the assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1959-60, the corresponding valuation dates being 31st December 1956, 31st December 1957 and 31st December 1958 respectively. At the relevant period the assessee was a non-resident company doing business in the manufacture of petroleum products through its organisation in India. Some time in 1951 there were negotiations between the assessee company and the Government of In...


Nov 12 1975

The Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Bombay City Ii, Bombay Vs. Shri Muljib ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Nov-12-1975

Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Bom)0208A

Per Desai, J. - Counsel are agreed that questions Nos. (1) & (3) are covered by the decision of the supreme Court in : [1966]59ITR767(SC) and may be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. Questions (1) & (3) answered accordingly.Counsel are also agreed that question No. (2) is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court reported in : [1968]69ITR864(SC) and may be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The question is answered accordingly.Parties to bear their own costs of the reference....


Nov 11 1975

Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. New Great Eastern Spinning and Weaving C ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Nov-11-1975

Reported in: [1976]37STC290(Bom)

Madon, J.1. This is a reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, in which the following question is submitted to us for our determination : 'Whether, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the interpretation put by the Tribunal regarding effective date of Notification No. ECO-1060/A-2380(a)-62 - XIII dated 7th April, 1964, amended by the notification issued on 28th December, 1959, is justified in law ?' 2. This question is not happily worded and does not bring out the real question of law which falls to be decided in this reference. Accordingly, we reframe the question as follows : 'Whether, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the interpretation put by the Tribunal with respect to the operative date of the certificate issued to the respondents under Notification No. ECO-1060/A-2380(a)-62 - XIII dated 7th April, 1964, amending Notification No. STA. 1059-(iii)-G-1 dated 28th December, 1959, is correct in law ?...


Nov 11 1975

The Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. New Great Eastern Spinning and Weavi ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Nov-11-1975

Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Bom)93

Madon J. - This is a reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, in which the following question is submitted to us for our determination :'Whether, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the interpretation put by the Tribunal regarding effective date of the Notification No. ECO-1060/A-2380 (a)-62-XIII dated 7-4-1964 amended by the Notification issued on 28-12-1959 is justified in law ?'This question is not happily worded and does not bring out the real question of law which falls to be decided in this Reference. Accordingly, we reframe the question as follows :'Whether, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present-case, the interpretation put by the Tribunal with respect to the operative date of the certificate issued to the, Respondents under Notification No. ECO-1060/A-2380 (a)-62-XIII dated April 7, 1964 amending Notification No. STA. 1059-(iii) G-1 dated December 28, 1959 was issued by the State Government in exercise ...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial