Mumbai Court April 1981 Judgments
Minocher Behramji Damanial Vs. Hema N. Dadachanji and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-08-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Bom151; 1983(2)BomCR218; 1981MhLJ783
ORDER1. This revision application arises out of a judgment in the City Civil Court Suit No. 583 of 1975 dt 16-3-1979 staying the said suit under the provisions of S. 10 of the Civil P. C. This stay was granted not on any notice of motion taken out as is usually done but was granted after framing a preliminary issue at the hearing of the suit as to whether the suit should be stayed under the provisions of S. 10 of the Civil P. C. As I am deciding the application on merits I do not propose to go into the question whether such a stay can be granted without a separate application. I must also point out that there is no pleading and so no issue framed as no pleading and so no issue framed as to whether the stay should be granted in exercise of the inherent powers under S. 151 of the Civil P. C. However, as this point has been argued in detail by both sides and without any objection on behalf of the plaintiff as to want of pleadings or issue I will deal with this point also.2. Sometime in th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Hindustan Lever Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Bom)137; [1982]133ITR614(Bom); [1981]7TAXMAN112(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The assessee-company claimed certain items as being includible in the computation of its capital for the purpose of Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, for the assessment year 1963-64. These three items were as follows : Rs.99,723 Doubtful debts reserve.44,12,832 Retirement gratuity reserve.17,00,000 Contingency reserve.2. In addition to these three items the assessee-company also claimed that an amount of Rs. 1,61,88,099 being the proportionate increase in the capital with effect from May 25, 1962, should also be included in the computation of its capital for the purpose of the S. P. T. Act.3. In respect of the first three items, i.e., doubtful debts reserve, retirement gratuity reserve and contingency reserve, the ITO held that they represented 'provisions against liabilities' and not reserves. The last item of Rs. 1,61,88,099 which represented the proportionate increase in the capital (220/365) as a result of the issue of bonus shares of the face value of Rs. 2,67,36,000 o...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. Abdullabhai M. Moonim
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Bom)250; [1981]132ITR642(Bom)
Sawant, J.1. The assessee along with five others started construction of a property for which purpose of assessee and his two brothers had to borrow money as loan. However, in spite of these borrowings which were spent for the construction of the property, the property could not be completed for shortage of funds. Hence, further funds were obtained by all the six from the Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd., by mortgaging the property under construction and the construction of the property was completed. The shares of all the six co-owners of the property were known and certain. The assessee claimed deduction of the interest paid by him on the loan raised by him personally for contributing his share of the cost of construction contributed by him originally before it was pledged to the said bank. This deduction was claimed by him under cl. (iv) of s. 24(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), from out of his share of the income from the said property, ...
Tag this Judgment!Jamnadas Motimal Vanwari Vs. Ishwaribai Tejandas Alwani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Bom314; (1981)83BOMLR274; 1981MhLJ701
Deshpande, C.J.1. In a landlord's suit for possession simpliciter against the tenant on the ground of default in payment of rent in breach of Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), without any claim of recovery of rent, the tenant amongst other defences raised the plea of the rent of Rs. 90/- p.m. being in excess of the standard rent of Rs. 25/- or Rs. 30/- p.m. During the pendency of the trial the learned Judge of the Small Cause Court of Bombay directed the tenant on 4th February, 1975, to deposit in Court a sum of Rs. 8,460/- towards the arrears of rent and compensation due up to February, 1975, and thereafter to deposit every month a sum of Rs. 90/- p. m. from 15th April 1975, onwards.2. The tenant challenged the legality of this order in Revision. The Appellate Bench dismissed the revision with costs on 6th January, 1977 and upheld the (impugned order relying on a Division Bench judgment of this...
Tag this Judgment!Gajanan Damodar Deokar Vs. Rashtriya Girni Kamgar Sangh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1981
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR259
R.A. Jahagirdar, J.1. The petitioner is a tenant of four rooms on the ground floor of a building bearing House No. 302 in Baliram Peth in Jalgaon City. These four rooms along with two other rooms had taken by the petitioner as a tenant sometime in the year 1957 and the agreed rent of the premises at that time was Rs. 67 per month. The petitioner has contended, and not without justification, that apart from these six rooms the open space surrounding the building was also a part of the demised premises. Detailed reference will be made to that contention later in this judgement. On 15th December, 1960, under a sale deed at Exhibit 80 respondent No. 1 in this petition, hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent' purchased the said building. For sometime thereafter the relations between the respondent and the petitioner seem to have been sufficiently cordial so much so that the petitioner was persuaded to surrender possession of two rooms to the respondent. After such surrender the rent of ...
Tag this Judgment!H.H. Goswami Shri Gokulnathji Vs. Thirteenth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-1981
Reported in: (1982)1ITD780(Mum.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 16-11-1979 of the AAC. The asses-see is an HUF. The assessment year involved in this appeal is 1975-76 and the relevant previous year was the period from 27-10-1973 to 13-11-1974. The assessee derived income from property and other sources. The TRO attached the property at Bombay by an order dated 23-10-1974 issued under Rule 4(b) of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), for recovery of arrears of income-tax as certified by the ITO and interest payable thereon for the period commencing after the date of the certificate.The case of the assessee before the ITO was that the order of attachment issued by the TRO created an annual charge, not being a capital charge, in respect of the interest payable by the assessee referred to above and so the said interest should be allowed as a deduction under Section 24(1)(iv) of the Act while computing the income of the said property. The ITO rejected the cont...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-iii Vs. H.D. Dennis and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Bom)107; [1982]135ITR1(Bom); [1981]7TAXMAN231(Bom)
Sawant, J.1. The 11 assessees concerned in the present reference were, at the material time, employees of the Caltex (India) Ltd. The facts in regard to 10 of the assessees are identical except the figures involved therein. Except in the case of Shri Ziegler in Reference Application No. 48 of 1970-71, there is a dispute in regard to the validity of the assessment proceedings reopened under s. 147(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Hence, both the questions which have been referred by the Tribunal under s. 256(1) of the Act will have to be answered except in the case of the said Shri Ziegler.2. The assessment year involved in all 11 cases is 1963-64, the corresponding accounting period being the financial year April 1, 1962, to March 31, 1963.3. For the sake of convenience, we will narrate here the facts relating to the case of Shri H. D. Dennis, one of the said assessees, since the question of law relating to the valuation of the rent perquisite in terms o...
Tag this Judgment!Vasant Ambadas Pandit Vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Bom394; (1981)83BOMLR248; 1981MhLJ706
Deshpande, C.J.1. This reference to the Full Bench arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff on 1st July, 1970 in the Bombay City Civil Court. The plaintiff instituted Suit (No. 4816 of 1970) against the Bombay Municipal Corporation. The suit is for a declaration that the notice of the Corporation, defendant No. 1, under Section 351 of the Act dated 29th March, 19(59 was illegal, void, bad in law and unenforceable. The suit is also for an injunction restraining respondent No. 1 from enforcing the said notice dated 29th March, 1969. At a later stage, the landlords of the suit premises also were impleaded as defendants at their request. Defendant No. 1 filed its written statement on 14th August, 1970. In paragraph 1 of the written statement, defendant No. 1 raised a plea that the suit is bad for want of statutory notice under Section 527 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In spite this plea being raised in paragraph 1, defendant ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1981
Reported in: (1982)27CTR(Bom)183; [1982]136ITR186(Bom); [1982]9TAXMAN203(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The assessee, M/s. Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd., Bombay caries on the business of manufacture of sugar, oil, ice and power alcohol. In the assessment year 1964-65, the assessee had exported de-oiled cake which is a by-product of the solvent extraction plant of the assessee. Before the ITO, the assessee claimed the benefit of cl. (5)(a)(ii) of s. 2 of the Finance Act, 1964, claiming an additional rebate as provided by that clause. This was, however, rejected by the ITO as well as by the AAC.2. In the appeal before the Tribunal, the view taken was that the assessee being engaged in an industry specified in the First Schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Industries Act, 1951'), the claim of the assessee was not affected by the provisions of cl. (5)(c) of s. 2 of the Finance Act, 1964, which provided that the benefit of cl. (5)(a)(ii) would not be available in the case of the items specified in cl. (c). The Tribunal too...
Tag this Judgment!Shripati Madhav Dure Vs. Fulabai Balaji Dure
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Bom224
1. The only substantial question of law involved in this second appeal relates to the interpretation of the provisions of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937. According to the plaintiff she is a member of coparcenary of her deceased husband and the defendant, brother of her husband, Her husband possessed certain land in village Irale, which was then situated within tha territory of the State of Hyderabad. The joint family also owned and possessed some landed property at village Undegaon in taluka Barsi, which was then situated in the territory of British India. Fulabai's husband died in the year 1945, i. e., after coming into operation of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, According to her, on the death of her husband, she was entitled to a share in the coparcenary property. After hearing both sides, the learned Judge of the trial Court found that she was entitled to a maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month. However, her suit for partition and p...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »