Mumbai Court April 1981 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-iii Vs. Service Station Equipm ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-1981
Reported in: [1981]6TAXMAN349(Bom)
Sawant, J.1. By this reference made under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, in computing the income of the assessee a moiety of the sum of RS. 35,984 was rightly held to be deductible ?'2. The question relates to the assessment year 1966-67, the previous year of which ended on the June 30, 1965. The assessee is a company established in 1963, and in the beginning it carried on merchanting business in automotive lubrication equipment and supplies. On the July 1, 1964, the assessee entered in to a collaboration agreement with a U.S.A. company called Stewart Warner Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'Stewart') which is well established in the business of designing, manufacturing and selling automotive lubrication equipment and supplies. The object of the agreement was to enable the assessee to manufacture the s...
Tag this Judgment!Hariram Hemraj Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-iii
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-1981
Reported in: (1982)27CTR(Bom)254; [1982]136ITR168(Bom); [1981]7TAXMAN301(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The two questions which have been referred at the instance of the assessee under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, have to be clearly answered against the assessee in view of the material which has been considered by the Tribunal to come to the finding that the sum of Rs. 29,000 in question was the income of the assessee. The two questions referred are as follow :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any material to justify the assessment of the sum of Rs. 29,000 as the income of the assessee ? (2) If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether the interest income of Rs. 4,275, Rs. 4,670 and Rs. 3,713 was rightly assessed in the hands of the assessee for the assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66, respectively ?'2. The assessee, who is an individual, derived share income from two registered firms and had also interest income. The relevant assessment years are from 1963-64 to 1965-66.3. The assessee was married ...
Tag this Judgment!Devichand Balkrishna Sonavane and ors. Vs. Kisan Shripati Dhumal and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Bom226; 1981MhLJ744
1. This is a second appeal filed by the original plaintiffs against the judgment and decree passed by the District Court at Satara dismissing his appeal and thereby confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Satara dismissing the plaintiffs' suit for possession of the suit premises.2. The plaintiff filed a suit for possession of the suit premises together with the arrears of rent and costs of the suit. According to the plaintiffs the suit property was proposed by Deu Krishna Sonavane, who was then a minor by his guardian mother Rahi vice the registered sale deed dated 11th June 1921 and all the plaintiffs had joint interest in the suit property. The plaintiffs then stated that the suit plot is being used for manufacturing oven bricks since the last several years and was leased out to different tenants on a monthly basis. The plaintiffs also stated that the bricks are manufactured into ovens installed over the suit property since the beg...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Narottamdas Kapadia Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-1981
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR148; (1981)83BOMLR362
B.J. Rele, J.1. This is an application for anticipatory bail made by the petitioner on an apprehension that he would be arrested on an accusation for having committed offences under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and under section 5(2) of the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and in respect of which offences the Delhi Police Establishment, C.B.I., Delhi, have filed and F.I.R. on 6th March 1981 under their C.R. No. 2/81-SIU-I/SIC/CBI/SPE/New Delhi.2. The petitioner is the Chairman of Industrial Consulting Bureau Limited, (hereinafter referred to as 'I.C.B. Ltd.'), having its registered office at Bombay and branch at Delhi. He is also the Advisor of a company by name Harshadray Pvt. Ltd. This company also has its registered office at Bombay and has its office at New Delhi. These two companies are specifically mentioned in this order, although the petitioner has set out in his petition the company in which he is the Managing Director and a number of companies in which he is the Director...
Tag this Judgment!Bapatla Vyankateshwar Rao Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-1981
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR301
N.K. Parekh, J.1. The appellant before this Court is the original accused in Sessions Case No. 38 of 1977 on the file of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik.2. Being aggrieved by an order and judgment dated 17th July, 1978, convicting him and sentencing him for a period of four years rigorous imprisonment, the accused has preferred the present appeal.3. The case of the prosecution is that one Shantaram Jagtap resides at in Station-Wadi at Deolali Camp with his wife and daughters. The name of one of the daughter is Suman and at or about the time of offence, she was about 18 years of age. That his son Jaydeo serves at Satpur.4. That the accused was a Naik and was posted at the military supply depot near the railway lines of Deolali Camp.5. It is the case of the prosecution that the said Suman and other girls from station-Wadi used to go to the railway tracks to collect pieces of coal. That coal was also being stored in this military depot. That these girls also used to coll...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›