Mumbai Court June 1978 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i, Bombay Vs. Kamini Kaushal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1978
Reported in: [1978]115ITR694(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. At the instance of the revenue, the High Court directed the Tribunal under s. 66(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, that the following question should be referred to us for our determination : 'Whether, on the material on record, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the addition of Rs. 25,00 should be deleted ?' 2. At the outset it may be stated before stating the facts that the question had not been properly worded and we reframe the same as under : 'Whether, on the material on record, the finding of the Tribunal for deletion of the sum of Rs. 25,000 from the income of the assessee was based on mere conjectures and surmises or was such that no person judicially acting and properly instructed as to the relevant law could have come to the determination reached ?' 3. This question relates to the assessment year 1954-55, the accounting period being April 1, 1953, to March 31, 1954, Kamini Kaushal, the assessee, is a film artist. On December 7, 1953, her account with ...
Tag this Judgment!Balkrishna Binani Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1978
Reported in: (1979)9CTR(Bom)62; [1980]121ITR442(Bom)
Desai, J.1. In this reference the question referred to us for our opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal u/s 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, is as follows : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case any part of the tax paid u/s 68 of the Finance Act, 1965, was a 'debt owed' on the relevant valuation dates within the meaning of s. 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957' 2. The assessee is an individual and is a regular assessee under the Income-tax Act. He follows the Samvat Year as the Previous year for his income-tax assessment. He had been last assessed to tax for the year 1962-63 by the order of the Income-tax Officer dated 16th October 1962. For the assessment year 1963-64 for which the previous year was S.Y. 2018 (ending of 28th October 1962), the assessee had filed a return of income. Similarly he had filed a return of income for the assessment year 1964-65, for which the previous year was S.Y. 2019. The assessments for these two years were, however, pending. ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhawanidas Binani Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1978
Reported in: [1980]124ITR783(Bom)
Desai, J. 1. In this reference the question referred to us for our opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 27(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957, is as follows :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any part of the tax paid under Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1965, was a ' debt owed ' on the relevant valuation dates within the meaning of Section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 '2. The assessee is an individual and is a regular assessee under the I.T. Act. He follows the Samvat Year as the previous year for his income-tax assessment. He had been last assessed to tax for the year 1962-63 by the order of the ITO dated 16th October, 1962. For the assessment year 1963-64, for which the previous year was S.Y. 2018 (ending on 28th October, 1962), the assessee had filed a return of income. Similarly, he had filed a return of income for the assessment year 1964-65, for which the previous year was S.Y. 2019. The assessments for these two years were, however, pe...
Tag this Judgment!Jerama Rubaji Valvi Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-26-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ400
Pratap, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the accused against his conviction and sentence under Section 307 of the I. P. C. as also under Section 25 (1)(a) of the Indian Arms Act, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Sessions Case No. 18 of 1976.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows:The accused and the complainant are brothers-in-law, the complainant's sister being married to the accused. There was some dispute regarding the amount relating to the proposed marriage of the second sister of the complainant with the brother of the accused. On the day in question, viz., July 5, 1975, at about 5-30 p. m., the accused came to the house of the complainant and asked him to come out. When the complainant came out of his house, the accused hurled filthy abuses. The accused also took out a pistol and fired at complainant Mogya from a distance of about 15 to 16 feet. To avoid the shot, complainant Mogya fell on the ground. The bullet, however, caused a burning injury below the...
Tag this Judgment!G and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1978
Reported in: (1983)3ITD566(Mum.)
1. These are cross appeals preferred by the assessee and the revenue.The assessment year involved is 1973-74. The controversy centres round the claim of the assessee under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for weighted allowance of its expenditure under various heads.2. The assessee is solely engaged in the export of textile goods procured by it from mills and manufacturers in India. Its total turnover of the year is Rs. 77,12,111.21 and purchases Rs. 65,51,785.97. In the assessment proceedings it claimed before the ITO, for the purpose of weighted deduction under Section 35B, expenses on account of commission, postage and telegrams, local travelling expenses, sample charges, label charges, salary and bonus paid to the employees in India, sales promotion expenses and Export Credit Guarantee Corporation insurance. It is seen from the assessment order that besides claiming these expenses specifically, the assessees, by a special note, claimed beneficial treatment under the section...
Tag this Judgment!Tulsidas Kilachand and ors. Vs. the Bombay Buildings Repairs Reconstru ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Bom56; (1979)81BOMLR368; 1978MhLJ877
Naik, J.1. As common questions offacts and law are involved in both these petitions, they shall be disposed of by a single judgment. The short point and the only point which arises for our decision in these petitions is as to whether the buildings involved in these two petitions are entitled to exemption from payment of cess provided for in Section 28 of the Bombay Buildings Repairs and Reconstruction Board Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). As the preamble shows the Act provides for a certain time for the repairs or reconstruction of dangerous buildings, to provide for rehousing of un-housed occupiers, and for these purposes to levy an additional cess on buildings and lands and matters connected therewith, A perusal of the provisions of the Act makes it clear that its objects are (1) to preserve the residential and tenanted buildings existing at the date of its enactment, (2) for that purpose, to set up a special agency the Bombay Buildings Repairs and Reconstruction Boar...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty (Central), Bombay Vs. Jaisinh Gopaldas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1978
Reported in: [1980]126ITR114(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J. 1. At the instance of the revenue, the following three question are referred to us for our determination : '(1) Whether, under fact and in the circumstances of the case, there was a valid gift of Rs 4 lakhs by Shri Gopaldas in favour of his minor sons, Krishnaraja ArunKumar, on November 30, 1954 (2) Whether, in the event of question No. 1 being answered in the affirmative on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Provision of section 10 could be applied to the credit balance in the account of Krishnaraja and Arunkumar in the books of M/s. Khimji Pooja & Co. So as to justify inclusion in the estate duty assessment of the sum of Rs. 80,865. or Rs. 38,887-1-9 by making appropriate adjustment, as the case may be (3) Whether, on the facts in the circumstances of the case, in the event of question No. 1 being answered to the affirmative, the debit of Rs 4 lakhs to the account of the deceased was liable to the disallowed out of the debts due by the deceased to the fi...
Tag this Judgment!R.M. Shah Vs. Bombay Port Trust and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1978
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ263Bom
Sawant, J.1. By this petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the order of his dismissal from service. 2. Briefly stated the facts leading to the petition are as follows : The petitioner was at the relevant time employed as a Foreman at Pipeline Manifold, Pir Pau with the Ist respondent, Bombay Port Trust. On receipt of complaints of misconduct by the petition he was suspended from service with effect from March 20, 1973. It appears that the Ist respondent had also handed over the investigation into the misconduct to the Central Bureau of Investigation. Thereafter on May 2, 1974, a chargesheet containing three charges was served upon the petitioner and an enquiry officer was appointed to hold an enquiry on June 25, 1974. Along with the letter appointing the enquiry officer it was also mentioned that one Mr. Pavade, an officer of the Central Bureau of Investigation would act as a presenting officer at the time of the enquiry and one Mr. Singanamalli was designated as a co-ordinating o...
Tag this Judgment!Jacob Harold Aranha and anr. Vs. Mrs. Vera Aranha and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ974
Dharmadhikari, J.1. Respondent No. 1 in this application filed a complaint against the petitioners under Section 494 of the I.P.C. According to respondent No. 1 she was legally married to the petitioner on 10th of May 1964. For some days thereafter they lived together and then she was forced to leave the house of her husband and go to reside with her mother. It is her case in the complaint that since then she is living with her mother. It is also her case that the petitioner No. 1 was in the habit of developing illicit intimacy with different women from time to time. Originally accused No. 2 was employed by him as a domestic servant several years back. However, she was being treated as his mistress. She also came to know that accused No. 2 had given birth to a child on or about 30th Jan, 1975. When she made inquiries in this behalf she came to know from the Church record that accused Nos. 1 and 2 had been shown as father and mother of the child in question and accused No. 1 had stated ...
Tag this Judgment!Purushottam and anr. Vs. Nag Vastra Bhandar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-22-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Bom60; 1979MhLJ87
ORDER1. The short question that arises for consideration in this revision application is as to when the right to apply for ascertainment of mesne profits arises when a preliminary decree directs an enquiry as to future mesne profits from the institution of the suit under Order 20, Rule 12 (1) (c) of the Civil P. C.2. The facts giving rise to this revision application may be briefly stated:--The applicants-plaintiffs hereinafter referred to as decree-holders had insti-tuted Civil Suit No. 756 of 1970 for ejectment and mesne profits in respect of shop premises situated at Sitabuldi, Nag-pur. The suit of the decree-holders was dismissed by the trial Court on the ground that there was no proper notice and the permission of the Rent Controller was not obtained to terminate the tenancy of the defendant. The plaintiffs appealed against the decree and judgment of the trial Court. The learned Second Extra Assistant Judge of Nagpur allowed the appeal and ordered the defendant to deliver possessi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »