Mumbai Court August 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Gulf Oil (Great Britain) ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1975
Reported in: [1977]108ITR874(Bom)
Tulzapurkar, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-I, Bombay, the following question has been referred to us by the Tribunal for our opinion under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-company derived any income from business connection in India chargeable to tax under section 42 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?' 2. The question relates to the assessment of the assessee which is a non-resident company and it pertains to the assessment years 1947-48 to 1952-53, the corresponding previous years ending on October 31, 1946, October 31, 1947, October 31, 1948, October 31, 1949, October 31, 1950, and October 31, 1951, respectively. The material facts giving rise to the question may be stated. The assessee is a company dealing in petroleum products and is incorporated in the United Kingdom, which for the sake of convenience will be hereinafter referred to as 'non-resident c...
Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Shalimar Tar Products (1935 ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR376; (1976)ILLJ330Bom; 1976MhLJ14
Sapre, J.1. This appeal raises a short but an interesting question of law under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (briefly E.S.I. Act). That question is whether the persons employed by the respondent-company on their site contract jobs outside the factory premises are 'employees' as defined in the E.S.I. Act. 2. The material facts are not in dispute and may be stated briefly as under : 3. The respondents Shalimar Tar Products (1935) Ltd., 16, Bank Street. Bombay 1, are a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. Its registered office is at Calcutta. It has a branch office at Bombay. The company was carrying on water-proofing business since 1940. It has a factory at Bhandup, which came into existence in August, 1961. The factory produces as many as 32 articles or products. The office of the company at Bombay is separately registered under the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act. The company undertakes water-proofing contracts in which it utilises some of...
Jaisingh and ors. Vs. Ganpatbapu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom75; 1975MhLJ743
ORDER1. This revision application a question regarding the maintainability of a proceeding under the Maharashtra (Vidarbha Region) Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1969. The original re- ion petitioner Raghunathsingh whose have been brought on record had no presented an application to the civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur for adjudication that the transfer dated 24-6-1950 was a mortgage and for ancillary rejected. The application was titled as an application under Section 3 read with Section 20 of the Maharashtra (Vidarbha Region) Agricultural Debtors Relief Ordinance 1969 which was subsequently turn into the a Act referred to above.2. According to the petitioner, were was surrounding circumstances connected with the transaction, such as the accompanying agreements to recover the property which show that the transaction which purported to be out and out sale as in fact a mortgage.3. This application was opposed by an non-applicant-creditor, inter alia, on the ground that the same wa...
The ScIndia Steam Navigation Co., Ltd. Vs. the Union of India and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom354; 1976MhLJ700
1. The appellants are the owners of Scindia House situate at Dugali Road, Ballard Estate, Bombay. the Union of India - the 1st respondent requisitioned the entire third floor of the Scindia house for the customs Department, Bombay, in the month of April, 1964, under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The appellants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 2/- per Sq. ft., but the 2nd respondent, by his order dated 9th April 1966, fixed the monthly compensation at the rate of 42 Paise per Sq. ft., with effect from 11th April 1964. The appellants being dissatisfied with the rate of compensation have filed the present appeal. 2. Scindia House was built in 1938, upto the four floors. In the same year, the third and fourth floors were let out by the appellants to Hindustan Lever Limited for a period of about 25 years. the lease expired in October, 1963 and the possession of the 3rd and 4th floors was surrendered to the a...
Western Mechanical Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-11-1975
Reported in: [1977]110ITR703(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. At the instance of the assessee the question referred for our determination is as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the commission amounting to Rs. 88,514 in the first year and Rs. 65,502 in the second year paid by the assessee-company to M/s. Western Manufacturing Co. could be disallowed in determining the business profits for the years in question on the ground that they were items of expenditure of a capital nature ?' 2. The question relates to the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62, the corresponding previous years being the financial years ending on March 31, 1960, and March 31, 1961. The firm of M/s. Western Manufacturing Co. was doing business in machinery equipment and other articles, especially cranes. The firm consisted of five partners and the business thereof was carried on in two section, namely, manufacturing section and selling section. The assessee-company acquired the manufacturing section of the firm on April 1, 1...
Sayyed Hasan Sayyed Mahamad Idrus and ors. Vs. Sayyad Mazarulhakka Say ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-11-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom251; 1976MhLJ101
ORDER1. These two revision applications involve the question of computation of Court-fee payable under Section 6(v) of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959, in respect of Bagayat land with residential houses situated thereon. Both the applications can be disposed of by a common judgment. 2. In Civil Revision Application No. 36 of 1975, the facts are that there is a Bagayat, Wadi consisting of coconuts, betel-nuts, plantain trees etc. Structures like a residential house styled as 'Madina Lodge', guest house, cattle-shed, engine room etc. are built on the Bagayat land. The Bagayat land bears Survey No. 44 Hissa No. 1 having the area of 2 acres and 203/4 gunthas, assessed at Rs. 49-13-0. Madina Lodge and other structures bear municipal out numbers. For the purpose of the Court-fee, the plaintiffs valued the Bagayat land at 121/2 times the assessment levied on them. As regards jurisdiction, the Bagayat land was valued at Rs. 1,50,000/-. the residential house was valued at Rs. 12,000/-, the gues...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Vs. Lalitaben Gulabchand and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-1975
Reported in: [1977]108ITR764(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. This reference relates to a question relating to taxation of capital gains made by the assessee upon assignment of the leasehold interest in favour of certain persons. Reassessment proceedings under section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, were started against the assessees who are an association of persons for the year 1959-60, the corresponding accounting year being the year ending March 31, 1958. The facts in brief are as under : Under an agreement with the Governor of Bombay one G. P. Sonawala and one Hirabhai A. Patel agreed to take on lease from the Government certain plots of land in the Reclamation area in Bombay including plot No. 84 admeasuring 1,267 sq. yds. This agreement was entered into with the Governor of Bombay in the year 1942 or 1943. On May 1, 1945, the solicitors of Sonawala and Patel wrote to the Collector of Bombay stating that they had nominated the assessees as the persons by whom separate leases of plot No. 84 would be accepted and, the...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Iii Vs. Bombay State Road Tran ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-1975
Reported in: [1977]106ITR303(Bom)
Tulzapurkar, J.1. Two questions have been referred to us by the Tribunal under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for our determination at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City III Bombay, and those questions run as follows : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the sums of Rs. 4,30,000, Rs. 4,21,575, Rs. 3,83,600 and Rs. 3,64,700, representing the contributions to the insurance fund made in accordance with rule 11 of the Corporation Rules in respect of third party risk were admissible as a deduction in computing the income of the assessee for the assessment years 1956-57, 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1959-60, respectively (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the unabsorbed depreciation allowance of the earlier year deemed to be a part of depreciation allowance of the current year under proviso (b) to section 10(2)(vi) of the Act can be set off, unlike other business losses, against income under othe...
Gendu Biosan Lodhande Vs. Shamrao Akaji Lokhande
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom109
ORDER1. The respondent filed an application against the petitioner under Section 100 (2) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region ) Act, 1958, for a declaration that the petitioner was not a tenant . In these proceedings an order was made on July 26, 1973 , by the Additional Tahsildar, Balpur, holding that the petitioner was not a tenant of the concerned land. This decision was communicated to the parties on July 312, 1973. The petitioner filed an appeal on October 9, 1973 challenging the decision of the Additional Tahsildar. The appeal filed by the petitioner came up for disposal before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Balapur, who by his order dated January 31, 1974. held that the appeal was barred by limitation. He , therefore, disallowed the petitioner's appeal. The petitioner filed a revision application before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. However, that application also came to be dismissed on September 30 1974. The petitioner has filed the present application...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Asian Dry Dock Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1975
Reported in: [1977]108ITR822(Bom)
Tulzapurkar, J.1. The question that has been referred to us by the Tribunal under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City - I, Bombay, runs as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 75,870 being the difference between the price of acquisition of the dry dock and the price for which it was ultimately sold to the Kandla Port authorities is assessable to tax as profit arising from a venture in the nature of trade for the assessment year 1953-54 ?' 2. The question arises out of the assessment of an entity (Messrs. Asian Dry Dock Co.) treated as an unregistered firm and relates to the assessment year 1953-54, the corresponding accounting period being the year ending 31st March, 1953. 3. A few facts giving rise to the question may be stated : One Bretagne, a marine engineer, initially purchases a concrete floating dry dock which was then lying at the Cocanada Port in Andhra...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »