Mumbai Court January 1979 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-iii Vs. Forging and Stamping P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-29-1979
Reported in: (1979)13CTR(Bom)127; [1979]119ITR616(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The assessee-company in this case was incorporated on August 13, 1962, for the purpose of manufacturing, fabricating, producing and selling all types of dies and moulds for drop forgings, drop stampings and various other tools like spanners, pliers, screw drivers, etc. During the year ending June 30, 1963, which was the first previous year after the incorporation of the assessee-company, it had purchased plant and machinery of the value of Rs. 3,43,668 and had incurred an expenditure of Rs. 3,981 on buildings which were under construction. The next accounting year of the assessee-company ended on June 30, 1964. Admittedly, the installation of the machinery was completed on August 27, 1963, and the assessee had applied for power connection to the Bombay Surburban Electric Supply Company Ltd. The construction of the factory building was, however, not completed before June 30, 1964. The power connection was secured in the second week of June, 1964. For about four days in ...
In Re: Yashodan Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. and Goel Bros. and Co. Pvt. Ltd. V ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-1979
Reported in: [1980]50CompCas356(Bom)
R.L. Aggarwal, J.1. This is a creditor's petition for winding up. It comes up for admission and arises this way. 2. The petitioners are the tenants of certain premises in Navsari Chambers, 3rd floor, Dr. Dadabhoy Nowroji Road, Fort, Bombay-400 001. By a leave and licence agreement dated 8th May, 1972, they granted permission to the respondent-company, Yashodan Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd., to use and occupy certain area out of the said premises for a fixed period of three years from 31st May, 1972, to 30th May, 1975, on a monthly compensation of Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 400 per month as commission for services through the petitioners and their watchmen and peons. On the execution of the leave and licence agreement, the petitioners received from the respondent company a sum of Rs. 50,400 being the compensation up to 30th May, 1975, at the rate of Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 400 per month. It seems that as and from 1st June, 1975, the respondent-company did not pay the compensation of Rs. 1,000 or Rs. 400 per mon...
Kirtilal Jaisinglal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Cit ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-1979
Reported in: [1980]121ITR279(Bom); [1979]2TAXMAN154A(Bom)
Desai, J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the assessee under s. 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. There are two questions referred to us and they read as follows : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the loss of Rs. 43,285, Rs. 55,781, Rs. 87,280 for assessment years 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62 was loss from speculative transactions within the meaning of the first proviso to section 24(1) read with Explanation 2 below that section (2) Whether in any case a part of losses mentioned in question No. (1) in respect of transactions which could be related to the stocks on hand should be allowed to be deducted in computing the assessee's income for the three years ?' 2. The assessee before us is a registered firm doing business in bullion, both ready and forward. We are concerned with three assessment years, viz., 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62. It may be mentioned that the corresponding previous year of the assessee is the Samvat year. In these three ye...
P.S. Mudholkar Vs. Bar Council of India and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Bom38; (1980)82BOMLR1; 1979MhLJ415
Sawant, J.1. The petitioner was enrolled as a District Pleader in the erstwhile Nagpur High Court in the year 1956 and practised as such Pleader at Akola, After the reorganisation of the States, the sanad issued by the Nagpur High Court was renewed by this Court in the year 1958. In the year 1961, the petitioner entered judicial service as a Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate, First Class. In that capacity he worked at Ahmednagar, Pusad, Nagpur, Gondia and Amravati. In the year 1974, he was promoted as a Civil Judge, Senior Division and posted at Thane. On 7-6-1977 the petitioner resigned from judicial service and applied for a sanad of an Advocate, to the Bar Council of Maharashtra. The Maharashtra Bar Council issued the sanad on 27-6-1977 subject to Rule 7 of the Rules framed by the Bar Council of India under Section 49(1)(ah) of the Advocates Act 1961 which are hereinafter referred to as the said Rules and the said Act respectively. The said Rule 7 prohibits the pe...
Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of In ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-1979
Reported in: [1979]120ITR249(Bom); [1979]1TAXMAN432(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The assessee-company, Messrs. Indian Express News-papers (Bombay) Ltd., Bombay, though it was incorporated on 20th October, 1949, and it was formed mainly with the object of taking over the publication of daily and weekly newspapers, did not have any transactions till 30th April, 1959, and its accounts were closed for the first time on 30th April, 1960. The relevant assessment year for the purposes of this reference is 1961-62 and the corresponding previous year was from 1st May, 1959, to 30th April, 1960. In respect of the assessment year 1961-62, the profit and loss account of the assessee disclosed a net profit of Rs. 2,32,802.95 after making allowance for Rs. 1,95,000 by way of provision for taxation. The ITO, however, assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 5,79,569. The tax payable thereon came to Rs. 2,53,407. In respect of the year in question, the assessee-company had declared a total dividend of Rs. 67,200. The ITO took the view that the amount decla...
Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Bombay Vs. Mahendra J. Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1979
Reported in: [1979]118ITR902(Bom); [1980]3TAXMAN149(Bom)
Chandurkar, J. 1. The question which has been referred to us by the Appellate Tribunal under s. 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the national income in respect of the flat in question returned by the assessee for the two years under reference was liable to be assessed as income under the head 'property' under section 9 of the Act ?' 2. We are concerned in this reference with the assessment of the assessee in respect of the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62. The State of Bombay had originally granted a lease in favour of a company by name Karimjee Properties Limited of an open plot for construction of a building. This lease was assigned on November 6, 1950, by the said company in favour of one Khetan. Khetan formed a company by name Khetan Estate Ltd. with an issued capital of Rs. 17.50 lakhs on November 24, 1950. This company started construction of a building on the land and the building was completed i...
Chesebrough Pond's Inc. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1979
Reported in: (1979)13CTR(Bom)85; [1981]131ITR324(Bom); [1979]2TAXMAN71(Bom)
Desai, J.1. In this reference certain questions have been referred to us at the instance of the Commissioner and one of the questions had been referred to us at the instances of the assessee. Before setting out the questions the facts from which the reference rises may be noted. 2. The assessee is a company incorporated in the United States under the laws of the State of New York. It maintains its accounts according to the calendar year, so that the calendar year would be the previous year for the purpose of its assessment under the I.T. Act. 1961. We are concerned in this reference with the assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66. For the assessment year 1963-64, the assessee was liable to pay super profits tax under the S.P.T. Act, 1963; for the two later assessments years similar liability of the assessee would be required to be considered for surtax under the C.(P.) S.T. Act, 1964. Certain amounts were being shown in the balance-sheets of the assessee under the head 'Earned S...
Parke Davis (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1979
Reported in: (1979)13CTR(Bom)219; [1981]130ITR813(Bom); [1979]2TAXMAN70(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. This reference in which four questions have been referred to us at the instance of the assessee and two questions at the instance of the revenue arises out of assessment proceedings for super profits tax of the assessee-company in respect of the assessment year 1963-64. The accounting year which was the previous year was a period from December 1, 1961, to November 30, 1962. Under s. 4 of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, profits in excess of the standard deduction, which is an amount equal to 6 per cent. of the capital of the company, are liable to be taxed under the S. P. T. Act. The capital is to be computed in accordance with the rules set out in the Second Schedule to the S. P. T. Act. In respect of the assessment year in question, a resolution came to be passed by the board of directors at it meeting held on 15th April, 1963, and the following decisions were taken with regard to the provisions and the reserves to make in the accounts for the year ended 30th Novembe...
Hansraj Veljee and anr. Vs. Maganlal Veljee and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Bom237; 1979MhLJ530
ORDER1. This revision application has been filed against the findings which have been recorded by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati in Special Civil Suit No. 20 of 1971 on certain issues which were treated as preliminary issues. In order to appreciate the rival contentions which have been advanced before me in this revision application, a few facts may be noted.2. Applicant No. 1 and non-applicant No. 1 are brothers and applicant No. 2 is their mother, while non-applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are the sons of non-applicant No. 1. It appears that they were members of joint Hindu family which was carrying on business at Amrapati in three names, namely, Shah Velji Narsi Company, M/s. V. H. Pen Industries and Firm Shah Veljee Narsee. In 1969 some disputes arose between the applicants and the non-applicants with regard to the business they were carrying on and the properties owned by them and in order to resolve these disputes, they appointed Shall Morarjibhai Raisey and Shah Jethab...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. D.V. Save
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1979
Reported in: [1979]119ITR266(Bom); [1979]2TAXMAN68(Bom)
S.K. Desai J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the Commissioner under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, and the following question of law stands referred to us : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in holding that no penalty under section 271(1)(a) could be levied for the alleged default under section 139(1) of the Act when the assessee had filed return pursuant to the notice issued under section 139(2)' 2. A few facts may be stated. The assessee before us in a partnership firm and we are concerned with the assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65. The relevant accounting periods for theses assessment years were the years ending September 30, 1962, and September 30, 1963, respectively. Accordingly, returns of income for the above years were due on June 30, 1963, and June 30, 1964, respectively. It appears that the assessee-firm had applied for extension of time for filing the returns but no orders were passed by the ITO on the application...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »