Mumbai Court December 1975 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Fazalbhoy Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-1975
Reported in: [1977]109ITR802(Bom)
Vimadalal, J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the Commissioner under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which relates to the assessment years 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62, the relevant previous years being the years ending June 30, 1958, June 30, 1959, and June 30 1960, respectively. The assessee is a private limited company, and one of the sources of its income was from a property at Khedgalli in Bombay which, for each of the years in question, aggregated to Rs. 7,671, Rs. 9,355 and Rs. 9,611, respectively. Each of the said sums comprised three items, viz., the ground rent, rent at the rate of Rs. 5 per month in respect of the each of the 44 flats in the said building, and a further sum of Rs. 3 per month per flat towards service charges. The assessee-company was the owner of two contiguous plots of land at Khedgalli which it agreed to lease out to one D. C. Gandhi and one H. K. Rohra for a period of 99 years for the construction of a building thereon on the te...
Tag this Judgment!Kisangopal Vs. Narmadabai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-18-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom236
ORDER1. By the impugned order, Civil Judge, Senior Division, Akola, has referred issues Nos. 7 (b), (c), (d) and (e) to the tenancy Authorities for decision purporting to act under Section 125 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958.2. Few brief facts are necessary to be stated to understand the challenge to the legality, and validity of that order.3. The suit is filed on 31-3-1956 much prior to the coming into force of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 1958 Tenancy Act), claiming reliefs for specific performance of agreement of sale of agricultural land and/or possession of the said land as well as damages. Original defendant No. 2, who is now represented by defendants Nos. 1 to 4 as legal representatives, contended in that suit that there was a Kabulayat Patta of 1952-52 and, therefore, he became the protected lessee within the meaning of the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951....
Tag this Judgment!Enayat Ali Nazar Ali Bhori Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR293; 1976MhLJ667
Chandurkar, J.1. This revision application filed by the accused challenging his conviction under Section 7(i), (ii) and (v) read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, has come before this Bench on a reference by Hajarnavis J. who found that there were conflicting decisions, one by Apte J. in Laxmichand Govindji v. The State of Maharashtra (1975) Criminal Appeal No. 1327 of 1973, decided by Apte, J. on March 4, 1975 (Unrep.) and the other by Gandhi, J reported in Laxmandas Sarvottamdas v. The State (1974) 77 Bom. L.R. 408 regarding the construction of Rule 18 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955.2. It is not now in dispute that on April 11, 1973 P.W. 1 Musale, who is the food inspector working in the office of the Food and Drugs Administration, Satara, purchased at about 12-30 p.m. 600 grams of ice candy from the petitioner, who is the proprietor of Messrs. Blue Star Cold Drink House situated at 98 A/94/95, Sadashiv Peth, Satara. The ic...
Tag this Judgment!Bhaskar Atmaram Joshi Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom206; 1976MhLJ229
Dharmadhikari, J.1. Petitioner Bhaskar Atmaram Joshi in this case was elected as a Municipal Councillor of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation. Besides being a Councillor, he was elected as a member of the Standing Committee of the Corporation in February 1975. On 26th June, 1975, he was detained under Maintenance of Internal Security Act, referred to hereinafter as the MISA, by an order of the Police Commissioner, Nagpur. By a notice dated 30th October 1975 signed by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur Municipal Corporation, the petitioner was informed that as he failed to attend all the meetings of the Standing Committee since July 1975 his membership of the Standing Committee automatically came to an end as per Section 36 of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act. It is this notice and the action taken by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner which are challenged in this writ petition.2. In the return filed on behalf of the Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur, the Municipal Commissioner submi...
Tag this Judgment!N.P. Nathwani Vs. the Commissioner of Police
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR1
R.M. Kantawala, C.J.1. This petition relates to a very important question regarding basic human natural rights to hold a peaceful assembly of some lawyers who are invited by individual invitations to discuss civil liberties and the rule of law while the proclamation of emergency is in operation. On December 3, 1971 the President of India in exercise of the powers conferred upon under Article 352(1) of the Constitution of India by a proclamation of emergency declared that a grave emergency existed whereby the security of India was threatened by external aggression. While this proclamation of emergency was in operation, on June 25, 1975 by another proclamation of emergency issued under Article 352(1) of the Constitution the President of India declared that a grave emergency existed whereby the security of India was threatened by internal disturbance. After the proclamation of emergency declared by reason of danger to internal security, on June 27, 1975, the Commissioner of Police, Greate...
Tag this Judgment!Dharsibhai Panachand Shah Vs. Smt. Samaratbai Lilachand Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1975
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR586
Vaidya, J.1. This is a Special Civil Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India filed by the heirs of the original defendant-tenant in a suit filed by respondent No. 1 to recover possession of the suit premises consisting of one room on the 1st floor of a building in Poona, on the ground that the tenant had damaged the suit room and had constructed a kitchen platform and water storage tank without the consent given in writing from the landlady.2. On a careful consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court, Poona, by his judgment and decree dated January 12, 1971, dismissed the plaintiff's claim for possession as he found that no damage was caused to the room as required under Section 13(1)(a) and the water storage tank and the kitchen platform in the suit-room in cement and bricks were made with the oral consent of the plaintiff and the water storage tank measuring 3'-1' long, 2'-6' height and 1'-9' width and the kitchen ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Chimanlal Hargovinddas, Poona Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Bom)471
Vimadalal, J. - In my opinion, this Reference raises a pure question of fact into which we are not entitled to go. The Tribunals view in regard to the same being binding on us, the question propounded on this Reference must be answered against the assessee. The question before us is not whether mere book entries can effect particular in law. The question, as framed disguises the real question that arises in this Reference which is, whether there is satisfactory evidence to prove the alleged partial partition. That is purely a matter of appreciation of evidence from which a conclusion of fact would have to be drawn one way or the other. The tribunal has arrived at its own conclusion in regard to that same in paragraph 7 of its order dated 21st April, 1965. Its conclusion is that there is 'no satisfactory evidence of any partial partition', and that conclusion is set out in paragraph 11 of the Statement of the Case. Though no such question has been referred to us, it may be stated that t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Anandlal Becharlal and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1975
Reported in: [1977]107ITR677(Bom)
Vimadalal, J.1. This is a reference made at the instance of the Commissioner which relates to the assessment year 1960-61, the accounting year being November 12, 1958, to October 31, 1959. The assessee-firm consisted of 13 partners, and was doing the business of purchase and sale of jewellery and previous stones. On the of November 26, 1952, the said firm purchased a plot of land admeasuring 5,034 sq. yards at Ghatkopar at the price of Rs. 10 per sq. yard. On the of February 16, 1959, that land was sold by the firm at a price which resulted in a profit of Rs. 46,876. Shortly thereafter, it purchased a plot of land at Rajkot, for an amount a little less than the price at which it had sold the Ghatkopar land. The assessee-firm's case was that its object in purchasing the land at Ghatkopar was to construct houses for the partners themselves, but later on it was realised that the locality was unhealthy, and the firm, therefore, sold the Ghatkopar land and purchased the land at Rajkot, whic...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Patel Cotton Co. Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1975
Reported in: [1977]108ITR846(Bom)
S.K. Desai, J.1. This is a reference made to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'C', under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The reference is at the instance of the Commissioner. 2. The assessee in this reference is a company carrying on business in cotton and cotton waste. We are dealing with the assessment year 1962-63, the relevant previous year being the year ending on 31st August, 1961. The assessee-company had been carrying on this business for a number of years on a large an substantial scale. There was another firm carrying on similar business known as Volkart Brothers. In 1961 negotiations were carried on by assessee-company for taking over business in cotton and cotton waste of Volkart Brothers, and such negotiations and reached an advanced stage in the first half of 1961. A preliminary agreement was arrived at between the assessee and the said firm on 31st May, 1961. This was followed by a formal agreement which was entered into on 23rd October, ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Commercial Co. P. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-1975
Reported in: [1977]106ITR465(Bom)
Vimadalal, J. 1. This is a reference at the instance of the Commissioner under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relating to assessment year 1962-63, corresponding to the accounting year ended March 31, 1962. The assessee-company was doing business in various commodities, and also had considerable export business. On 14th August, 1961, it entered into an agreement with M/s. Hindustan Steel Ltd. for purchasing for export 250 metric tones of Hot Pressed Naphthalene, f.o.b. Calcutta. Under clause III, delivery of the goods was to be so arranged that the entire quantity would be shipped from Calcutta before the 30th of September, 1961. Under clause V, it was provided that a letter of credit was to be opened by the assessee-company forthwith. It may be mentioned that clause XIII provided that title with respect to each shipment was to pass to the assessee-company when the Hindustan Steel Ltd. negotiated the documents and received the proceeds from the back. Under clause XI of the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »