Mumbai Court November 1981 Judgments
Khandelwal Engineering Co. Vs. Modern Usha Colony Co-operative Housing ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1981
Reported in: (1981)83BOMLR601; 1982MhLJ129
Lentin, J.1. [After narration of facts and events His Lordship proceeded.] The petitioner is not concerned with the seizure of the moveables of the Society. The petitioner, however, takes umbrage to the seizure of the lands and structures from the petitioner's possession and over which it claims a charge and lien by virtue of the documents referred to earlier. The petitioner's grievance is that the land and structures in the petitioner's possession were incapable of seizure, as immoveable property is not contemplated by Section 160(2) or Section 80(1) of the Act which according to the petitioner, pertain only to moveable property. It is not difficult to repel this contention. Section 160(1) provides for the retiring chairman handing over records and property of the Society to the new chairman of the committee. Sub-section (2) on which great emphasis was laid on behalf of the petitioner, reads as under:If the retiring Chairman fails or refuses...to hand over the papers and property of t...
Tag this Judgment!Chetan Kotan (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-13-1981
Reported in: (1982)1ITD652(Mum.)
1. The only question for consideration in this appeal is, whether the amount of Rs. 8,500 paid by the assessee to the sales tax department as interest for the belated payment of sales tax is an allowable expenditure.2. For the assessment year 1978-79, the assessee-company did not pay the sales tax due from it to the sales tax department within the statutory period. The sales tax department, therefore, charged interest amounting to Rs. 8,500 from the assessee. The ITO disallowed the claim of the assessee for allowing Rs. 8,500 as business expenditure under Section 36(1)(iii) or Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act"). The order of the I TO has been upheld by the AAC. The assessee has filed the present appeal.3. After going through the record and hearing the learned representatives of the parties, I am of the opinion that the assessee deserves to succeed. Sales tax is a trading liability and the payment of interest in respect thereof is of the nature of a financing charge all...
Tag this Judgment!D. Swarup, Income-tax Officer, Companies Circle, Bombay Vs. Gammon Ind ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-13-1981
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(Bom)264; [1983]141ITR841(Bom); [1982]10TAXMAN159(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. This is an appeal by the ITO, Companies Circle, Bombay, against the order of the learned single judge quashing the notice of penalty issued on July 4, 1969, by the ITO to the respondent company under s. 273 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Since pure questions of law arise in this appeal, it is not necessary to refer in detail to the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1959-60 out of which the penalty proceedings had arisen.2. Originally for the assessment year 1959-60 the income of the assessee company was determined at Rs. 20,53,407 by an assessment order, dated April 16, 1963. Earlier, notice under s. 18A of the Indian I.T. Act. 1922, was issued to the assessee in May, 1959, demanding advance tax of Rs. 8,65,592 to which the assessee in May, 1959, demanding advance tax of Rs. 8,65,592 to which the assessee had objected, as according to the assess the correct amount of the advance tax payable was Rs. 3,23,732. Notice under s. 274 of the I.T. Act, 1961, came to be is...
Tag this Judgment!Second Income-tax Officer Vs. A. Johnson
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1981
Reported in: (1982)2ITD463(Mum.)
1. This is a departmental appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), in Appeal No. CIT(A)-X/A-III/28/1979-80 dated 2-6-1980 holding that the addition made under Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, ]961 ('the Act') should be cancelled. The facts of the case are as follows. The assessee is an individual having business in export of frog legs. In the course of the year, he had purchased frog legs from two parties, i.e., one Sethia & Co. at Secundera-bad and one Majid J.Kasli at Navsari. Barring a few payments in draft or cheque, the rest of the payments made for the purchases were in cash. The ITO was of the opinion that these payments would be hit by Section 40A(3). He added Rs. 1,79,787 on this account.2. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. According to him, the assessee's purchases would be saved from the provisions of Section 40A(3) by virtue of Rule 6DD. This rule exempts payments in cash from the purview of Section 40A(3) if the payments were made fo...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnaran Anandran Dhayagude and ors. Vs. Khandala Taluka Shetkari Sa ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Bom410
Bhonsale, J.1. This petition is filed by the petitioners under Arts, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging two order dated Dec., 26, 1979 and Apr., 19, 1980 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune in Election Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune in Election Petition No. 17/79. The petitioners contested the election to the Board of Directors of respondent No. 1, i,e, Khandala Taluka Shetkari Sahakari Kharedi Vikri Sangh Ltd., Lonand, District Satara. The respondents Nos. 3,4 and 8 to 12 are the returned candidates in the election the results of which were declared on Nov. 21, 1978. The respondent No. 1 is a Specified Society and as per provisions of S. 73-G of the Moharashtra Co-operation Societies Act. 1960. It is the Collector of District who holds and conducts the election in a manner laid down in Chap. XI-A of the said Act.2. The petitioners filed Election Petition No. 17/79 before the respondent No. 13, i.e the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, ...
Tag this Judgment!Kamlabai (Smt.) W/O Laxman Sarode Vs. Laxmanrao S/O Sadashio Sarode an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR183
S.W. Puranik, J.1. Both these revisions are directed against the same judgment arising out of Criminal Revision Application No. 15/83 decided by Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur on 11-7-1980. Hence both these applications are disposed of by common order.2. These applications relate to maintenance proceedings between husband and wife. The Criminal Revision Application No. 276/80 is preferred by Smt. Kamlabai w/o Laxmanrao Sarode, the alleged wife of non-applicant Laxmanrao while Criminal Application No. 452/80 under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code is preferred by the husband Laxmanrao against his alleged wife Kamlabai and daughter Ku. Geeta. Initially Smt. Kamlabai along with her minor daughter Geeta had preferred proceedings under section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code against Laxmanrao claiming maintenance from him on the ground that she was the legally married wife of Laxmanrao; that Geeta is the daughter born out of the said wedlock and that Kamlabai being unable to maintain...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Engineering Works Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1981
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT859(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The petitioners manufacture at Kolhapur connecting rods for diesel engines and tractors. They also engage in job work by processing forgings supplied to them into connecting rods, of sizes required by the suppliers, recovering in that behalf only labour charges. Their total investment on plant and machinery is Rs. 1,61,000/-; they are, therefore, a small scale industry.2. In 1975 item 68 was introduced into the First Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Under the terms thereof all goods not elsewhere specified, manufactured in a factory, subject to some stated exceptions, became liable to excise. At the time of introduction of the said item the rate of the excise payable was 1%, it is now 8%.3. On 18th June, 1977 a notification was issued under the Central Excise Rules whereby goods falling under item 68 cleared for home consumption on or after the first day of April in any financial year by or on behalf of a manufacturer from one or more factories were ex...
Tag this Judgment!Ajaykumar S/O Wiralal Gupta Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR176
S.W. Puranik, J.1. The appellant stands convicted for the offence under section 411 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and six months by an order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Sessions Case No. 63 of 1978 decided on 24-1-1979.2. Originally the appellant along with three others were prosecuted for the offence under sections 392 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed a robbery and also having used deadly weapons at the time of commission of the said robbery. The victims of the robbery are Shri and Smt. Bhaskarmurti who are working at the National Environment Engineering Research Institute, at Wardha Road, Nagpur.3. The prosecution case is placed before the learned Sessions Judge was that, on 1st February, 1978 the couple, Shri and Smt. Bhaskarmurti, were proceeding at about 9 P.M. in a cycle rickshaw from Dharampeth area towards their residence at Laxmi Nagar. The said rickshaw was surrounded by two person initial...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra Vs. Kishore Ramji Rokade
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR282
S.W. Puranik, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the State for enhancement of the sentence imposed upon the respondent accused for his conviction under section 307 Indian Penal Code by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Akola, in Sessions Case No. 32/78 decided on 2-1-1979 whereby he only sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default R.I. for one year. The respondent was also convicted under section 332 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs. 200/- in default R.I. for 2 months while ordering both the sentences to run concurrently.2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that an offence of theft was registered at Ramdaspeth Police Station, Akola on 12-3-1978 and one Balu was arrested in that connection. The said Balu gave information to the Police Inspector Shinde about the connection of the present respondent Kishore to the said offence. The Police Inspector Shinde, therefore, directed H.C. Shabbirkha and two...
Tag this Judgment!European GraIn and Shipping Ltd. Vs. Bombay Extractions Private Ltd. a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-04-1981
Reported in: AIR1983Bom36; (1982)84BOMLR246
Chandurkar, J.1. This appeal arises out of an order passed by a learned single Judge rejecting petition filed by the appellants for enforcement of a foreign award u/s. 6 of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act. 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1961 Act').2. It is not necessary for the purpose of the appeal to refer to the details of the transactions in respect of which a contract in writing was entered into on 16th Sept. 1976 between the appellants and the respondents through the brokers Marshall Produce Brokers Co. Pvt. Ltd., under which the respondents agreed to ship to the appellants 250 metric tons of ground-nut extractions of the quality specified in the contract at a price of ... 99 per tonne. The delivery was to be made to the petitioners at Bombay in Jan./Feb. 1977 at the appellants' option. One of the terms of the contract is made under the terms and conditions effective at the date of the Grain And Feed Trade Association (GAFTA), Baltic Exchange Chambers,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »