Mumbai Court July 1977 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.
Century Spg. and Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1977
Reported in: [1978]112ITR497(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J. 1. At the instance of the assessee the following three questions have been referred to us for our determination : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 6,29,663 shown as a provision for payment of gratuity on the balance-sheet as at December 31, 1956, the valuation date, was a debt owed liable to be deducted in computing the net wealth of the assessee as on the said valuation date under section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 32,22,886 was similarly liable to be allowed as a deduction as a debt owed in computing the net wealth of the assessee as on the said valuation date under section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 1,88,18,634 or any part thereof was eligible for exemption from wealth-tax under section 5(1)(xxi) of the Wealth-tax Act ?' 2. The amounts claimed as deduction ...
Jamarathbee and ors. Vs. Pralhad Dattatraya Dadpe and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom229; 1978MhLJ204
Vaidya, J.1. The above First Appeal is filed by the defendants Nos. 8 and 10, in Special Civil Suit No. 26 of 1963, in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, at Latur, instituted by the original respondents Nos. 1 to 5, as plaintiffs, for a declaration that the registered sale deed, dated 1st Ardibehest 1353 Fasli (March 5, 1944 A. D.), executed by their father, defendant No. 4, in favour of defendant No. 1, was without legal necessity and illegal; and not binding on their 6/7th share in respect of the property sold.2. The case made out by the plaintiffs in the plaint can be briefly summarised as under:3. The suit property viz. Survey No. 323 measuring 19 acres 20 gunthas and Survey No. 332 measuring 15 acres 10 gunthas, situated at Latur, was originally in possession of Ramchandra, the father of defendant No. 4 till his death in 1916. After his death, defendant No. 4 came into possession of the same as his only son; and sold away the property under the suit registered sale dee...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, (Central), Bombay Vs. Bhogilal H. Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1977
Reported in: [1978]112ITR910(Bom)
Tulzapurkar, J. 1. Certain common questions of law arising out of the assessment of three assessees, Pranlal B. Patel, Ichhaben Bhogilal Patel and Bhogilal H. Patel under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, have been referred to this court in this reference made under section 27(3) of the Act. The questions of law in the case of each of the three assessees run as follows : In the case of Pranlal B. Patel : Assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59 & 1959-60 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the A.A. C.'s decision that the value of shares of Renwick & Co. (P.) Ltd. should be taken at fact value of Rs. 10 per share against the break-up value of Rs. 21.85 (Rs. 19.08 as per the note) for the assessment year 1957-58, Rs. 23.3 (Rs. 19.53 as per the note) for the assessment year 1958-59, and Rs. 27.2 (Rs. 20.47 as per the note) for the assessment year 1959-60 ?' ASSESSMENT YEAR 1959-60' 'In the facts and circumstances of the case, wa...
Roha Ashtami Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. Vs. the Judge, Co-operative ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom62; (1977)79BOMLR712; 1977MhLJ712
Deshmukh, J.1. The petition was posted today for hearing the interim rule regarding ex parte injunction but by the consent of the parties, the whole petition is heard and is finally disposed of. It pertains to only one question regarding incurring disability by sitting member of the Managing Committee of a Co-operative Society. For understanding that question few facts that should be noted are these:2. The petitioner Bank is a Co-operative Society, It has a Managing Committee of which respondent No. 3 Dattatraya Desai was an elected member. He obtained a loan from the Bank, which he could. He did not repay the loan within one year, nor within a further period of three months. The last date for payment in this manner with the extended period of three months expired on or about 24th December 1975. He, however, made full payment of the debt on or about 21st Jan. 1976. However, a meeting of the Managing Committee was already called on the 23rd January 1976 where one of the items on the age...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Shankarlal Nathmal Chandak and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1977
Reported in: 1977CriLJ2028
Jahagirdar, J.1. Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 in this appeal are partners of a firm which is added as Respondent No. 6 and are carrying on the business of Kirana at Yeola in Nasik District. On 6th of December 1972 the Food Inspector of Yeola Municipality visited their shop and purchased 750 grams of Tur Dal for the purpose of analysis. At the time of this sale accused No. 2 was in charge of the shop. 750 grams of Tur Dal purchased by the Food Inspector were divided into three parts and after taking the necessary steps prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the Rules made thereunder one part was sent to the Public Analyst on 8th of December 1972. The report of the Public Analyst dated 31st January 1973 was received by the Food Inspector on 3rd February 1973 and it showed that the sample analysed by him contained 13% Lakh Dal which is a commodity the sale of which is banned under Rule 44-A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules. On 6th of June 1973 a complaint was ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Industrial Solventa and Chemicals Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-08-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(Bom)604
Tulzapurkar, J. 1. In this Reference the real question which this Court is called upon to decide is from what date can the business of the assessee be said to have been set up for the purposes of S. 3(1)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In other words, since when can the assessee's business be said to be established and was ready to commence the manufacturing activities. But the necessary facts and a finding on a very important and relevant aspect of the matter does not appear in the Tribunal's order from out of which the Reference has arisen, and that is why we are required to send the matter back to the Tribunal by way of calling a finding on that relevant aspect. 2. Admittedly, the assessee's business was to manufacture industrial solvents; the construction of the building and erection of plant and machinery were all over by the end of Dec. 1960 or Jan. 1961. In Jan. 1961 the assessee had acquired 5,000 gallons of denatured spirit alcohol as a raw product for the production of ether....
Rukminibai Guru Rajdharbuwa Mahanubhava Sukenkar Vs. Nanabuwa Guru Uma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-07-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR593
Vaidya, J.1. The main question which arises in the above First Appeal, is whether the appellant-plaintiff Rukminibai can claim any right title or interest in the suit properties comprising of a house dedicated to Mahanubhava Panth situated in Pimpalas in taluka Niphad District Nasik; another house dedicated to Mahanubhava Panth situated in village. Wadali Taluka Niphad; and in the three pieces of lands which belonged to the other Mahanubhava Panth and to a share in the management of Puja and other archa in the said Math.2. It is well settled that once a Math is established, succession to headship takes place within the spiritual family according to the usages that grow up in a particular institution. In a Math it is the custom or practice of a particular institution which determines as to how a successor is to be appointed. In various institutions the custom is that in order to entitle a Chela to succeed, he must be appointed or nominated by the reigning Mohunt during his lifetime or s...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i, Bombay Vs. Kopran Chemical ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-06-1977
Reported in: [1978]112ITR893(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. This reference can be disposed of by a very short order as the question for determination is not capable of being answered in any other manner except in favour of the assessee in view of the findings of fact given by the Tribunal. 2. Kopran Chemical Co. Ltd., the assessee, was incorporated on April 26, 1958. The assessee-company wa incorporated with the following objects : 'To acquire, purchase and carry on the business of Kopran Chemical company now carried on by Ramanlal v. Shah at 18, 3rd Pasta Lane, Colaba, Bombay-5, and accordingly to enter into and carry into effect with or without modification an agreement with the said Ramanlal Vadilal Shah in the terms of th draft which has for the purpose of identification been initialled by the subscribers to the memorandum and articles of association.' By an agreement dated December 18, 1958, the assessee purchased stock-in-trade and raw materials of Kopran Chemical Co. from its proprietor, Ramanlal Vadilal shah. Kopran Ch...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Iii Vs. Pruthivi Trust
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-05-1977
Reported in: [1980]124ITR488(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. At the instance of the revenue the following question is referred to us for our determination : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the assessee for exemption under section 4(3)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment years 1958-59 to 1961-62 and under section 11(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64 with reference to the income from a business carried on by the trust in which certain processes held under trust are exploited is proper ?' 2. The relevant previous years for the assessment years in question are calendar years 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961 and 1962. M. A. Chaudary had obtained certain patents in respects of certain inventions made by him. He also held 45 shares of Rs. 10 each in M/s. Millers Ltd. On July 12, 1955, M. A. Chaudary created a trust in respect of the shares, patents, inventions and designs and other properties referred to therein for the objects there...
Bapu Ramji Pawar Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-04-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom282
Jahagirdar, J.1. These five petitions seek to challenge acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act pursuant to a notification issued under Section 6 of the Act by the Commissioner of Poona Division,2. By that notification under Section 6 of the Act, the Commissioner of Poona Division declared that several lands mentioned in that notification and situated at village Udtare in Wai Taluka of Satara District were required for the public purpose specified in the notification. That purpose was for resettlement of the persons affected by the Krishna-Dhom Project.3. In Special Civil Application No.2001 of 1972 the lands involved are Gat Nos. 1531. 1613 and 189; in Special Civil Application No. 2029 of 1972 the land involved is Gat No. 272; Gat No. 1020 is the land acquisition of which is challenged in Special Civil Application No. 2028 of 1972; in Special Civil Applications Nos. 2157 and 2158 the lands involved are Gats Nos. 252 and 259 and Nos. 828 and 262 respectively. All the la...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »