Mumbai Court April 1981 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. C.K. Thakore
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: (1981)24CTR(Bom)162; [1982]136ITR464(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The question which has been referred to this court under s. 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, reads as follow :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the excess amounts of local fund cess earlier received by the assessee and later on refunded by him to the company under the court's decree constituted his income of the respective years under reference liable to tax ?'2. The assessee, who is an ex-Talukdar of Shivrajpur Estate in the State of Gujarat, had granted a lease of mining manganese ore from the lands at Shivrajpur and Bhat, originally on December 11, 1947, and on the expiry of that lease, a new lease was granted for twelve years thereafter. It is not necessary to refer in detail to all the terms of the lease which have been extensively quoted in the decision in Chhatrasinhji Kesarisinhji Thakore v. CIT : [1962]45ITR512(Bom) , which decision arose out of a dispute with regard to certain amounts received by the assessee during the assessmen...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. Sandoz Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: [1983]140ITR867(Bom); [1981]7TAXMAN403(Bom)
Sawant, J.1. This reference pertains to assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64. The controversy relates to the interpretation of s. 101(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), as it stood at the relevant time. Since the question involved for both the years is the same, it will be sufficient to state the facts with reference to the assessment year 1962-63.2. In the assessment year 1962-63, the assessee's total income was Rs. 8,66,886 which consisted of interest from loans to the tune of Rs. 2,02,886 and dividend of Rs. 6,64,000. The super-tax payable on the dividend at the rate of 5% was Rs. 33,200 and that payable on the interest at the rate of 38% was Rs. 77,097. The total super-tax thus worked out to Rs. 1,10,297, which was 12.72% of the total income of the Rs. 8,66,886. In the total income from dividend, namely, Rs. 6,64,000 a sum of Rs. 3,22,172 was the dividend earned which was entitled to relief under s. 101(2) of the said Act. There is no dispute abou...
Tag this Judgment!Union Carbide India Ltd. and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: 1982(10)ELT316(Bom)
1. The Petitioners have Petrochemical Company at Chembur, Bombay, where they manufacture low density polyethylene and various chemicals. The petitioners also manufacture acetylene black which is chargeable under Central Excise Tariff Item 64. Acetylene black is manufactured by the petitioners in a continuous, integrated and uninterrupted process by a stream of production using naphtha or another stream using calcium carbide and both continuing to produce acetylene black. In one continuous stream naphtha is thermally cracked in furnaces for production of ethylene and its ultimate conversion into low density polyethylene. During the continuous process of cracking of naphtha, several gases including acetylene gas are released. The petitioners have annexed Ex. 'A' which a flaw chart showing the manufacturing process of acetylene black.2. 'Acetylene gas' was brought under the Central Excise Tariff Item No. 14H(vi) with effect from June 18, 1977 and attracted excise duty at the rate of 12% a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. International Computers Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: [1981]131ITR1(Bom); [1981]7TAXMAN128(Bom)
Chandurkar, J. 1. The assessee is admittedly not an Indian company and iff a company registered under the United Kingdom Companies Act.It manufactures data processing equipments and these machines are sent overseas on hire. The assessee had a wholly owned subsidiary company in India by the name of M/s. International Computers and Tabulators (India) Private Ltd. The data processing machines are let out by the assessee-company to its Indian subsidiary and rental is charged by the assessee-company. The Indian subsidiary company hires out the equipments and the machines to other customers in India on rental basis. Out of the hire amount earned by the Indian subsidiary, from each customer in India, 45% of the rental charges are paid by the subsidiary company in India to the company in U.K. for obtaining from them the machines on hire.2. In the relevant assessment years, i. e., from 1963-64, the entire hire charges payable by the Indian subsidiary to the assessee-company have been remitted t...
Tag this Judgment!Court Receiver, High Court Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR564
Sharad Manohar, J.1. The revision application has got a chequered career so far as this Court is concerned. Stated with the barest minimum exposition, the point involved is as to whether the Court exercising jurisdiction under the Land Acquisition Act can allow patent injustice to be perpetuated on account of technical flaws and further whether they should not expect strict compliance with the acquiring authorities.2. The fact of the case are as follows :Puranik family is an illustrious family in this part of Maharashtra, having extensive lands near village Panvel. There was a dispute regarding the partition of the joint family properties and Suit No. 399/70 has been pending in that behalf in this Court even till this day. Admittedly Receiver was appointed in respect of the property and the receiver was in possession of the lands till 30-3-1970, but before that on 3-2-1970 notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act has been issued by the Government for acquisition of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Navnath Siddhappa Koli Vs. Siddheshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limite ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: (1981)83BOMLR470; 1981MhLJ888
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. The facts leading to this petition must be mentioned before the points of law and of jurisdiction which have been raised can be appreciated. The petitioner was at the relevant time working with the first respondent, hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent', as a watchman. He has been described as a round watchman which means I am told, that he has to take rounds of the premises of the respondent and not merely to do the watchman's at a single place. There was discovered in the premises of the respondent a theft of ten coconut trees in the early hours of 1st of November, 1977, and since immediately preceding the discovery of this theft the petitioner was on duty as around watchman. It was alleged that he was guilty of negligence in the discharge of his duty. On this basis, a charge-sheet was served upon him and on being found guilty in an enquiry about which no grievance has been made either in the Court of first instance or later, a discharge order was passed o...
Tag this Judgment!Sushila Bhiku Shinde Vs. Sulochana Baburao Bhoj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: (1981)83BOMLR267; 1982MhLJ598
Masodkar, J.1. This appeal questions the decree made by the trial Court with regard to survey No. 398 of village Kasabe Pedgaon, Taluka Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar, holding that the said land belonged to one Bhiku and plaintiff No. 1 was born to him before his death and was his legitimate daughter. Bhiku died sometime on April 24, 1970 at Pedgaon. The suit was filed thereafter, claiming the right of inheritance by plaintiff No. 1 as his daughter and by plaintiff No. 2 as his real elder brother, while plaintiff No. 3 as the sister.2. The plaint alleged that the present appellant Sushila was the kept mistress of Bhiku and she was residing with Bhiku since before two-three years before 1961, i.e., since about 1958, as Bhiku had no wife nor any son. Bhiku was completely under the control of Sushila, defendant No. 1, and he was unable to think freely and on his own. The plaint further alleged that by deceit and by exercise of undue influence promising that she would maintain him well, Su...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavarlal Pruthviraj JaIn Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1647
ORDER1. The petitioner before me was the accused in the Courts below against whom an allegation was made that he was carrying on money lending business in the village Ambet without the requisite licence in that behalf under the Bombay Money-Lenders Act.2. The complaint against him was that between 24th June 1974 and 4th November, 1975, he was found carrying on business of money lending without licence at village Ambet and had thereby committed offence under S. 5 read with S. 34 of the Money-Lenders Act. Both the Courts have found him guilty of the offence alleged against him and hence the present revision application was filed by the original accused.2A. Very briefly stated the prosecution case was as follows :-P.W. 1, Abdul Shakur Hussein Miya Dhoken, made a complaint at the Police Station that the accused used to go to the village Ambet for business of money lending. His grievance was that during the period from 1964 to 1974 his wife had pledged her ornaments with the accused and had...
Tag this Judgment!Jugal Kishore Vishindas Vazirani Vs. K.G. Bhaskaran
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1981
Reported in: 1989(25)LC498(Bombay); 1990(45)ELT367(Bom)
1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the action of the respondents in confiscating the Video Cassette Recorder with 13 tapes of the petitioner, which the petitioner imported from London on June 27, 1979. The petitioner had gone to the United Kingdom on a business promotion tour and was presented with a Video Cassette Recorder and 13 Video Cassette Tapes by his sister. The petitioner landed at Santacruz Air Port on June 27, 1979 and declared for the purpose of levy of custom duty the goods imported by him the Adjudicating Officer confiscated the Video Cassette Recorder on the ground that the import was not permitted. The petitioner requested for permission to re-export, but that request was turned down. The petitioner carried an appeal before the Appellate Collector of Customs, but the appeal ended in dismissal by an order dated October 17, 1979.2. Shri Rajhwani, the learned Counsel appearing in support of the petition, ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. Burroughs Wellcome and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1981
Reported in: (1981)23CTR(Bom)102; [1982]133ITR37(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The question referred in this reference under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 11,518 spent by the assessee-company by way of brokerage or commission in obtaining the two premises on lease was an expenditure of revenue nature and is an admissible deduction ?'2. The amount of Rs. 11,518 spent by the assessee by way of brokerage or commission in obtaining the two premises on lease, one of which was for the purpose of locating its factory and the other was for the residence of its sales manager was claimed as expenditure of a revenue nature, but the ITO disallowed the same on the ground that the lease of the premises in question had resulted in an enduring benefit to the assessee-company. This view was, however, reversed by the AAC, whose order was confirmed by the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal took the view that the execution of lease deed secured the period for wh...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »