Mumbai Court September 1977 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha and Marathwada Vs. Vasant Screens
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1977
Reported in: [1980]124ITR835(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. Messrs. Vasant Screens, the assessee, entered into an agreement to take on lease a godown belonging to Richpal Rungta. That agreement was entered into on March 29, 1958. Under the terms of the agreement of lease, Richpal was to hand over possession of premises consisting of parts of Rungta godown and open plots on both the sides of the godown for converting it into a cinema theatre. The agreement of lease provided that the rent from the opening of the cinema theatre for the first period of five years was to be Rs. 1,250 per month and then for the subsequent period of five years was to be Rs. 1,383-5-4 per month. The rent was to be paid at the end of each month before the 10th day of the following month. Clause 3 of this agreement, inter alia, provided that Richpal agreed to allow the assessee to spend a sum of Rs. 40,000 to Rs. 50,000 for effecting necessary alterations for converting it into an 'A' class theatre and equipping it with all necessary equipments includin...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha and Marathwada Vs. Vivian Bose
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1977
Reported in: [1979]118ITR989(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. Vivian Bose, the assessee, was married to Miss Irene Mott, a Canadian lady, on December 18, 1930. It is common ground that, under the Canadian law, there must be a pre-nuptial agreement between the couple to the effect that the lady would acquire, after marriage, one-half share in the properties of her husband. Unless Miss Irene Mott could acquire such a right in the properties of the assessee, she could not have any right in her properties in Canada. The assessee, therefore, entered into a pre-nuptial agreement with Miss Irene Mott on August 20, 1930. This agreement, inter alia, provided that the assessee should transfer into the joint and several names of his wife and himself with rights of survivorship between them all his accounts, securities, shares and properties of every sort and kind of which he shall happen to be possessed in his own right at the date of the marriage. The agreement further provided that whatever properties might be acquired by the assessee af...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Maharashtra Vs. Shanti Prasad Jain
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR184; 1978MhLJ227
Deshmukh, J.1. This is a reference by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, third Court, Esplanade, Bombay, under Section 395(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. He has formulated the following three points for decision of the High Court;(1) Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay, being invested with all the judicial powers of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, whether Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate can be considered on par with the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for the purpose of Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code?(2) Whether in Sub-clause (i) of Clause (a) of Sub-section (5) of Section 306 viz. '... or if the Magistrate taking cognizance is the Chief Judicial Magistrate', the expression 'Chief Judicial Magistrate (Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Bombay)' includes Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate?(3) Whether if the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence under Section 306 is Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, he like the Chief Met...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh Vs. Central Provinces Manga ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1977
Reported in: [1978]112ITR734(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. At the instance of the revenue the following question is referred to us for our determination : 0'Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, deduction in the sum of Rs. 29,33,886 by way of additional export duty for the assessment year 1959-60 is warranted ?' The assessee is a public limited company incorporated in Great Britain and is having its registered office at London. It is engaged in the business of winning and selling manganese ore. In the relevant assessment year the company was assessed as a non-resident. The company was assessed to provisional duty on the consignments of manganese ore as indicated in the letter dated September 29, 1952, from the Collector of Central Excise, Madras, addressed to the assessee. A relevant extract of the Tribunal (sic). The letter clearly stated that it was proposed to reassess the consignments on the basis of the known cost of the goods of the like kind and quality which could be delivered at the time and place o...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vidarbha Vs. Godavaridevi Saraf
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1977
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT624(Bom); [1978]113ITR589(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 and in view of the decision in the case of A.M. Sali Maricar : [1973]90ITR116(Mad) , the penalty imposed on the assessee under section 140A(3) was legal ?'2. The assessee submitted a return of income for the assessment year 1968-69 declaring therein income of Rs. 29,038 on August 30, 1969. Having regard to the provisions of section 140A(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), she was required to make self-assessment by September 29, 1969. The amount of tax payable by way of assessment was Rs. 4,342. The assessee did not pay the said tax till the Income-tax Officer made assessment for the assessment year 1968-69 by his order dated August 31, 1971. As no tax was paid by way of self-assessment, an opportunity to show cause why a penalty should not be imposed under section 140A(3) was giv...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha Vs. General Motor Owner's Associa ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR674(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The three questions which have been referred by the Income-tax, Appellate Tribunal are as follows : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the additions made to the income of the assessee by applying the proviso to section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, are includible in the commercial profits of the assessee for the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60 for the purpose of section 23A of the said Act (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-company could not declare any dividend in view of the past losses, tax liability and smallness of profits (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 23A were not applicable for the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60 ?' 2. These questions arise on the following facts : In the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60, the assessee had filled returns showing a loss of Rs. 9,889 in the assessment year 1958-59 and income...
Tag this Judgment!Nagorao Vishwanath Inge Vs. the State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR156; 1978MhLJ152
Deshmukh, J.1. This is an application by an accused person who was committed for trial to the Court of session and Against whom a charge has been framed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, under Sections 409, 465 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code.2. When such charges were framed, the accused applied to the learned Assistant Sessions Judge stating that the alleged offences are not exclusively triable by the Court of Session and the learned Assistant Sessions Judge should not try him, on the contrary, he should pass an order transferring the case to the tile of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. After hearing the accused, this application was rejected by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge. Against that order the accused has filed the present petition.3. A charge-sheet was filed against the present accused-petitioner on January 15, 1975 by the Paithan Taluka Police Station under Sections 409, 420, 464, 465 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code. After examining the record, the ...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Maharashtra Vs. Czechoslovak Airlines
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR495
Dighe, J.1. This Revision Application raises a question of International Law, regarding the scope and extent in India, of the application of the principle of sovereign immunity.2. The State of Maharashtra, represented by Labour Enforcement Officer (Central)-I, Government of India, Department of Labour and Employment, Bombay, filed a complaint against M/s. Czechoslovak Airlines, as accused No. 1 and its General Manager, Mr. M. Vopravil, as accused No. 2, under Rule 21 of the Payment of Wages. (Air Transport Services) Rules, 1968, for non-maintenance of Muster Roll at the Establishment and Wages Register at the Establishment, as required by the Rules. Even before service of the summons, the accused No. 2 appeared before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, taking cognizance of the complaint and gave an application asserting that Czechoslovak Airlines is a State owned enterprise of the sovereign State of Czechoslovakia, the Government of Czechoslovak enjoyed full and complete immuni...
Tag this Judgment!Jamunabai Motilal Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom200; 1978MhLJ93
Masodkar, J.1. The critical controversy raised by these two cases mainly impinges upon the jurisdiction of the Commissioner under the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to call for the record of the inquiry of the Collector so as to find out the liability of the holder to file- returns and make appropriate orders under Section 45 (2) thereof. In each case the record that was called for and taken into account consisted of the orders made by the authority under Section 13 (2) holding that the petitioner in each case was not liable to file the land return under Section 12 of the Act. The central submission is that Sub-section (2) of Section 45 does not permit exercise of revisional power by the Commissioner with regard to the orders so made under Section 13.2. Turning to facts, the same are few. In Special Civil Application No. 703 of 1972 proceedings were initiated under Section 13 of the Act by a notice a...
Tag this Judgment!Jaikumar Chhaganlal Patni and Ors. Vs. Mary Jerome D'souza and Ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom239; (1978)80BOMLR95; 1978MhLJ164
Deshpande, J.1. By its judgment dated 12-7-1973 the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for Greater Bombay awarded a sum of Rs. 40,000/- with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of claim by way of compensation for the widow and two sons of deceased Jerome D'souza. The deceased was a taxi driver and at the relevant time had parked his taxi on Section V. Road at Bandra on 22-5-1970, while on his way from north to south. As he was crossing the road on foot to the opposite side towards Bandra Talkies, a car belonging to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 rushed from Khar side and fatally hit him and threw him at a distance causing his instantaneous death. Owners of the car, respondents 1 and 2, entered appearance at the trial but did not display any interest in contesting the claim, which came to be contested only by the Insurance Company after securing permission to that effect under Section 110-C of the Act. At the trial, the widow of the deceased examined herself to prove the income of the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »