Mumbai Court March 1976 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.
Jagannath Marotrao Gavande and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-12-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Bom347; 1976MhLJ247
ORDER1. In the wake of acceleration ameliorative economic measures relating to the equitable distribution of agricultural lands that exceed the ceiling limit, the original Act i.e., the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on holdings) Act, 1961, has undergone several swift amendments in the year 1975. Under the amended provisions of Section 2-A, Tribunals have been constituted for the purpose of holding enquiry and further determining the surplus holding and for taking steps to possess and distribute lands. these Tribunals have been clothed with powers under Section 44-A formerly possessed by the Collector to proceed to take possession of the land as is provide for by Section 21 (2). The provisions of Section 21 (4) declare that such surplus land would stand vested in the State with effect from the date on which the possession of the land is taken and the scheme permits distribution of the surplus land under chapter VI of the enactment. Under the amended provisions the basic struct...
Faruk Yusuf Kandawala Vs. P.G. Gawai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-1976
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR318; 1977MhLJ90
Chandurkar, J.1. The petitioner is a business man dealing in cloth having his shop at Abdul Rehman Street, Bombay, His premises were searched by the Customs Officers on September 27, 1974, At that time the petitioner was not in this shop and, therefore, the shop premises were sealed. The search yielded textiles and wearing apparel of foreign origin totally valued at Rs. 8,957. The petitioner attended the Customs Office on October 8, 1974 and admitted that the goods seized belonged to him. The petitioner was prosecuted in criminal case No. 865/CW of 1974 and he pleaded guilty to the charges in that case. His shop was again raided on January 24, 1975 and textiles bearing foreign markings of the market value of Rs. 8,450 were seized. A prosecution was launched against him and during the pendency of the prosecution, an order of detention dated March 81, 1975 issued under Section 8 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Ii Vs. Daulatran Nayar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1976
Reported in: [1976]105ITR843(Bom)
Tulzapurkar, J.1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in which at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City II, Bombay, the following question has been referred to us for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to substitute the fair market value of the goodwill on January 1, 1954, under the third proviso to section 12B(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?' 2. The question relates to the assessments of the assessee, Shri Daulatran Nayar (HUF), and his seven other partners for the assessment year 1960-61, for which the accounting year is the year which ended on March 31, 1960. The assessee was a partner of the firm carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. India Woollen Textile Mills. There were seven other partners in this firm and each of the partners and equal share in the profits and losses of the firm. It appears that the business carried on by the firm...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-iii Vs. Trustees of Dr. Diveka ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1976
Reported in: [1977]110ITR227(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. By this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the following three questions are referred for our determination :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the maternity homes and the Versova property named 'Abhay' were duly transferred by Dr. M. R. Divekar and his wife in favour of trustees under the indenture of the trust dated August 23, 1954 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income from the running of the maternity homes was rightly assessed to tax in the hands of the trustees in the status of association of persons 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the salary of Rs. 7,500 paid by the assessee to Dr. Mrs. Nalini M. Divekar was allowable as an admissible deduction in the computation of the income of the assessee-A.O.P. ?' 2. These questions in this reference relate to the assessment year 1956-57 and they arise out of an indenture of trust created by Dr. Div...
Premji Haridas and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1976
Reported in: [1977]110ITR315(Bom)
Tulzapurkar, J.1. In all, four questions have been referred to us for our opinion by the Tribunal at the instance of the assessee under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, viz. : (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the levy of penalty under the Income-tax Act, 1961, violated the assessee's fundamental rights as guaranteed under article 14 of the Constitution (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it could be said that the penalty proceedings were not commenced before the completion of the assessment proceedings and that the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) was liable to be cancelled on that account (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty leviable had to be determined by reference to the difference between the income returned and the income assessed or by reference to the amount concealed (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in view of the order of the Tri...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Kolhapur Electric Supply Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Bom)320; [1976]37STC587(Bom)
Kania, J. 1. This is a reference under section 34(3) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), made at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax. 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are as follows : In respect of the assessment period from 1st April, 1954, to 31st March, 1955, the assessees (respondents) claimed a set-off in respect of an amount of Rs. 2,761-4-9, which included, inter alia, an amount of Rs. 437-8-6, being the amount of general sales tax paid by the assessees on the purchase of certain electric meters, which were given by the assessees on rent to the consumers to whom the electricity produced by the assessees was supplied. It may be mentioned that the assessees were registered dealers under the said Act and were engaged in the generation and distribution of electricity. The claim of the assessees for set-off in respect of the said amount of Rs. 437-8-6 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said amount') was disallowed by the sa...
Shankar Laxman Katkar Vs. Sharad Mahadeo Vable and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Bom386; (1976)78BOMLR593; 1976MhLJ911
Lentin, J. 1. This Special Civil Application has been filed by the original judgment-debtor against the original decree-holder (viz. respondent No. 1) and the auction-purchaser (viz. respondent No. 2) for setting aside the judgment and order dated 3rd March 1971 passed by the learned District Judge, Ahmednagar, in Civil Miscellaneous Appeals Nos. 6 and 8 of 1970.2. On 7th November 1968, in Regular Civil Suit No. 29 of 1966, a decree was passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ahmednagar, against the petitioner and in favour of the 1st respondent for possession of a certain strip of land with a structure thereon and for costs in the sum of Rs. 256.15. We are not concerned with the strip of land or structure thereon. On 6th December 1968, the 1st respondent filed a darkhast for possession and recovery of the costs by the sale of certain other lands belonging to the petitioner. On 12th August 1969, during the pendency of the darkhast, the petitioner deposited Rs. 100/- in Cour...
Gulabrao Bablaji Ujjainkar and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Bom363; 1976MhLJ393
Dharmadhikari, J. 1. The five petitioners before us are challenging in this writ petition the notification dated November 18, 1975, issued by the Additional Commissioner. Nagpur Division, Nagpur, Declaring that the lands belonging to the petitioners are needed or likely to be needed for the public purpose , viz., providing of house sites to the landless labourers in the rural areas. By the same notification, the Additional Commissioner further issued a direction under sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act that the provisions of Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act shall not apply in respect of the said lands. This notification is challenged by the petitioners mainly on two grounds; (i) that the Additional Commissioner had no authority to issue the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and , therefore, the notification as well as the direction issued by him is without jurisdiction being ultra vires of his powers ; (ii) the list of the landles...
D.S. Venkatraman Vs. Gujarat Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1976
Reported in: [1977]47CompCas352(Bom)
Aggarwal, J.1. This judge's summons dated 4th February, 1976, is taken out under section 392(2) of the Companies Act, 1956. Its object is that the company having failed to implement the scheme sanctioned by Rege, J. by his order dated 30th September, 1975, whereunder the company had agreed to pay unsecured creditors in the manner provided thereunder, the company be wound up. 2. Some of the salient features of the scheme can be borne in mind at the outset. Firstly, the company was required to set apart and keep deposited with their attorneys, Messrs. Ambubhai and Diwanji, a sum equivalent of the 20 per cent. of the adjustable amount as well as the amount of interest within a period of three months from the date of confirmation of the scheme which means that this amount was to be deposited by the 31st December, 1975. This amount was to be distributed among the unsecured creditors on pro rata basis within 14days from the date of the deposit. Thus, the distribution of the amount among the ...
The Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. P. Ambalal and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Bom)460
Madon, J.1. Both these References under section 34(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, arise out of order of reassessment made against the Respondents who were registered as dealer under the said Act. The period in respect of which the reassessment in question was made was September 19, 1959 to March 31, 1957. 2. It appears that the Respondents maintained their books of account according to Samvat Year, and according to that calendar the period of reassessment would include apart of S.Y. 2012 and also of S.Y. 2013, the year corresponding to S.Y. 2012 according to the Gregorian Calendar being November 15, 1955 to November 2, 1956 and corresponding to S.Y. 2013 being November 3, 1956 to October 23, 1957. In respect of the period in question the Respondents had filed their returns and in pursuance thereof had been assessed to tax under section 14(3) of the said Act. Against this order of assessment the Respondents filed an appeal. While this appeal was pending, the Enforcement Branch ra...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »