Mumbai Court September 1981 Judgments
Hellenic Lines Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT918(Bom)
1. The 1st petitioners are a Foreign Company and owners of a steamship known as 's.s. Helenic Ideal', while the 2nd petitioners are the Bombay Agents of the 1st petitioners.2. The steamer s.s. Helenic Ideal arrived in Port of Bombay in about November 1972 loaded with bales of rags and garments. The imported bales of rags and garments were governed by IGM No. 818 dated November 18, 1972 and they were covered by Item Nos. 50, 89, 91, 27, 28 and 26. The petitioners had landed the entire cargo at the Bombay Port Trust Docks but about 48 bales were in loose condition, while the remaining 572 bales were landed in sound condition. The Port Trust authorities had issued out-turn report which erroneously stated that there were short landing of certain goods by the petitioners. The short landing certificate was issued on November 16, 1972.3. On November 24, 1975, the petitioners were served with the show cause notice by the Assistant Collector of Customs (Manifest Clearance Department) in exercis...
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Printers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-iii
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: [1982]136ITR172(Bom); [1982]8TAXMAN187(Bom)
S.K. Desai, J.1. Three questions are referred to us at the instance of the assessee by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'C'. They are as follow :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-company was one in which the public are not substantially interested within the meaning of Explanation 1 to section 23A(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, as it then stood ? (2) If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and considering the profits available for distribution, the provisions of section 23A(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, were rightly applied in the assessee's case ? (3) Whether the order under section 23A(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act 1922, is vitiated by the fact that it was passed after completing the regular assessment on the assessee-company without issue of notice under section 34 of the said Act ?'2. The point in controversy relates to the applica...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Hingir Rampur Coal Co. L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: [1983]140ITR73(Bom); [1982]9TAXMAN79(Bom)
S.K. Desai, J.1. A very short point arises for determination with regard to the question referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Bombay, Bench 'C'. The question referred to use is as under:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Expenditure of Rs. 59,183 claimed by the assessee as deduction is allowable under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee is the Hingir Rampur Coal Co. Ltd. It has its registered officer in Bombay but owned a colliery in Orissa. In the assessment year 1967-68, it claimed as deduction under s. 37(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, a sum of Rs. 59,183 which is put under the head 'Staff welfare expenses'. This amount was spent by the company by way of expenditure incurred on the construction of 100 tenements for its workers and staff at the colliery. It would appear that an agreement dated November 18, 1966, was excited between the assessee-company and the Coal Mines Labour Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore, Bangalore Vs. Janardhan Zarapkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: (1982)27CTR(Bom)188; [1982]138ITR482(Bom)
Rege, J.1. This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore.2. In this case the assessee is a firm having four partners. The concerned assessment year is 1966-67, with the previous financial year ending on 31st March, 1966. During the accounting year relevant to the assessment year the assessee had purchased certain items of machinery called a 'Michigan Shovel' at cost of Rs. 1,98,230, which was brought into use during that very year. In the return of income initially file by the assessee for the said year it had not claimed development rebate on the said machine, to which it was entitled. So also the statement of account of the assessee on which the said initial return was based had not complied with the statutory conditions under s. 34(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961, namely, 75% of the development rebate actually allowed to the assessee, being shown in the accounts as ...
Tag this Judgment!Dalal Consultants and Engineers P. Ltd. Vs. Miss D.V. Bapat, Income-ta ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Bom)260; [1982]138ITR334(Bom); [1982]9TAXMAN190(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. By this petition, filed under art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging the legality of the notice under s. 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The notice dated May 3, 1978, was served upon the petitioners by respondent No. 1 - the ITO.2. The petitioners are a private limited company carrying on business as engineering the technical consultants offering a wide variety of consultancy services. The petitioners enter into various contracts and claim the benefit under the provisions of s. 80MM of the Act. The benefit of the section is claimed only in respect of the know-how covered by the clauses in the contract. The petitioners have an operation department which prepares, in respect of each consultancy contract, a man-hour budget sheet which allocates man-hours for each activity to be performed under the contract. It is then possible to ascertain the man-hours which will be expended on the specific activities covered ...
Tag this Judgment!Meeraben P. Desai Vs. First Ito and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: (1982)27CTR(Bom)206
M.L. Pendse, J.1. By this petition filed u/Art 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the legality of assessment order in respect of the Asst. yr. 1979-80 along with the demand notice and the notice to show cause as to why the penalty should not be levied.2. The assessment Order was passed ex-parte by the ITO on 6-4-1978. After the petitioner filed this petition in this Court on 5-7-1978 certain facts have transpired which makes the petition redundant. After the assessment order was passed on 6-4-1978, the petitioner filed an application u/s 146 of the IT Act for setting aside the ex-parte order and for a fresh assessment. The ITO rejected the application but in an appeal preferred by the assessee, the relief sought was granted by order the Act came to be granted, the ex-parte assessment order dt. 6-4-1978 passed u/s 144 of the Act was automatically set aside. The petitioner independently of filing the present petition in this Court to challenge the assessment ...
Tag this Judgment!Vasantrao S/O Venkatrao Tirthkar and anr. Vs. Collector of Osmanabad a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR1
M.P. Kanade, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the legality and correctness of the order passed by the learned Collector, Osmanabad, dated June 28, 1979. By the said impugned orders, the learned Collector, Osmanabad, has suspended petitioner No. 1 from the office of the Sarpanch and petitioner No. 2 from the office of Upa-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, village Deolali, District Osmanabad.2. Elections to the panchayat were held in the village on March 22, 1979. The petitioners and their party members got elected defeating the candidates of the other political party. Again elections were held to the posts of Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch on April 9, 1979. In the said elections petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 were elected to the posts of Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch, respectively. It appears that the rival candidates who were defeated in the elections were not pleased and, therefore, they tried to create obstacles in the way of the p...
Tag this Judgment!Central India Spinning Weaving and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (The Empress ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR263
V.A. Mohta, J.1. These three appeals at the instance of the Central India Spinning, Weaving and Manufacturing Company Limited (The Empress Mills), Nagpur are directed against the common judgment dated 13th December, 1974 by which three applications under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('The Act of 1948' for short) have been disposed of. Insurance Case No. 12 of 1966 has been filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation ('The Corporation' for short) claiming a sum of Rs. 21,855.83 as unpaid employees, contribution for the period July 1954 till November 1965. The Empress Mills has filed Insurance Case No. 2 of 1969 and Insurance Case No. 9 of 1970 for a declaration that the amount forcibly recovered from it by the Corporation was in fact not payable. Inasmuch as the controversy about liability---factual as well as legal---was common, by agreement of parties, these three cases were consolidated, common evidence was recorded in Insurance Case No. 12 of 1966 and the three m...
Tag this Judgment!Shantaram S/O Appa Zunjarkar Vs. Rambhau S/O Narhari Udawant and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR29
M.P. Kanade, J.1. This appeal by the original complainant is directed against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, dated November 24, 1978.2. The complainant alleged that one Digambar who was a tenant in the house owned by him in Fakarwadi at Aurangabad. Digambar was in arrears of rent and, therefore, a suit for recovery of arrears of rent was instituted which was subsequently dismissed. An appeal against that decree of dismissal was filed which also came to be dismissed. It is the complainant's case that during the pendency of the said appeal, the said tenant Digambar without any intimation to the complainant left the house and respondents Nos. 1 to 5 in this appeal entered in the house and committed a trespass and caused damage to the property and it is, therefore, a complaint came to be filed on June 10, 1977, being Summary Case No. 4302 of 1977. A charge against the accused was framed under sections 448 and 427 read with section 34 of t...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian United Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1981
Reported in: (1982)27CTR(Bom)207; [1983]141ITR399(Bom); [1982]8TAXMAN182(Bom)
Desai, J.1. In this reference the assessees are the India United Mills Ltd. They were represented by M/s. Mulla and Mulla and Craigie, Blunt and Caroe, advocates, but they have taken a discharge this morning from us, stating that they have no instructions from the assessee.2. We are concerned in this reference with the assessment year 1961-62. In that year the assessee, a mill company, owned various establishments, namely, five textile mill units and a dye works, with a capacity of over 2,00,000 spindles and over 600 looms.3. In the weaving sheds of mills Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and in the folding sizing and drawing Depts. the assessee-company replaced ordinary lighting by fluorescent tubes, incurring an expenditure of over Rs. 2,15,000 for the purpose. According to the ITO, this expenditure brought to the assessee an advantage of enduring nature and it was of a capital nature. The AAC agreed with the view taken by the ITO. The matter was carried to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, and the T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »