Mumbai Court September 1981 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Merck Sharp and Dohme of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1981
Reported in: [1983]140ITR332(Bom); [1982]9TAXMAN78(Bom)
S.K. Desai, J.1. In the reference the following questions stand referred to us at the instance of the Commissioner by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'C'. For the assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to relief under the section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. For the assessment year 1963-64 :'(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the following sums are allowable as revenue expenditure:(a) The sum of Rs. 19,096 representing the expenditure incurred in connection with the foundation laying ceremony.(b) The sum of Rs. 2,476 representing the expenditure on printing additional articles of association of the assessee-company.(c) The sum of Rs. 1,535 representing the legal expends in connection with the alternation of the articles of association of the assessee-company ?'3. It would appear that items (b) and (c) of question No. (2) are concluded as far as thi...
Tag this Judgment!K.M. Mody Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1981
Reported in: [1983]141ITR914(Bom)
Desai, J.1. This reference was on board earlier on 10th of this month, when at the request of Mr. Khanna it was kept back till 16th. Mr. Khanna pointed out on the first date that he had no instructions from the assessee or his heirs. On 16th at Mr. Khanna's further request, it was kept back till 21st. From 21st it has been appearing on board till today.2. Another Income-tax Reference involving this very assessee was also on board, being Income-tax Reference No. 104 of 1972 (see p. 903 supra). In the said reference, which was at the instance of the Commissioner, we found that the original assessee, K. M. Mody, had died and his heirs and legal representatives were one Roosi K. Mody and Mrs. Manek Burjor Cooper, being his son and daughter respectively.3. On the earlier occasions we had indicated to Mr. Khanna that it would be appropriate if he communicated with the said heirs, who in the other Income-tax Reference No. 104 of 1972, were represented by Mr. S. E. Dastur instructed by M/s. Sm...
Tag this Judgment!Padmakar Balkrishna Samant and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Bom422
ORDER1. Questions of considerable public importance are raised in this public interest action initiated under Article 226 of the Constitution by three citizens, one of whom is a former member of the country's sovereign legislative body, tbe Parliament, the other two being former members of the Maharashtra State Legislature.2. These questions have vital significance to the rule of law and the rights and obligations of the Executive enjoined to administer and govern according to the laws of the land and the Constitution of the country.3. Though there are three respondents to this petition viz., (1) the State of Maharashtra, (2) the Chief Minister of Maharashtra and (3) the Union of India, this petition is directed mainly against the first two respondents, there being no dispute that respondent No. 3, Union of India, is a formal party.4. Case is that the petitioner received numerous complaints from various citizens that cement -- an essential commodity --was not at all available from rati...
Tag this Judgment!Mehtabbi W/O Khajamiya Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1981
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR32
M.P. Kanade, J.1. This criminal appeal by appellant-original accused is directed against an order of conviction dated June 27, 1978, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, sentencing her under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the accused Mehtabbi wife of Khajamiya has living with her son and daughter-in-law, Aziza, in the village Padegaon in the district of Aurangabad. The deceased Aziza was married with the son of the accused, Mansur Khan, hardly one and a half month before the date of the incident. On May 13, 1977 at about 11-30 or so in the morning, Aziza was burnt in the house belonging to the accused. It is the prosecution case that the accused Mehtabbi poured kerosene oil on the person of Aziza and set fire the deceased by lighting a matchstick and left the said house immediately. The place where the deceased Aziza and the accused were living at the material time was ...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Shekhar Ojha Vs. A.K. Karnik and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1642; 1982MhLJ43
Dharmadhikari, J.1. The detenu Gopaldas H. Pandit @ Gopal Sharma is detained under the COFEPOSA Act vide order Dt. 13th April 1981. On the same day grounds of detention were also served on the detenu. The detenu made a representation against this order of detention on 1st of July, 1981, which was addressed to the Minister of State for Home Affairs, State of Maharashtra. It appears that this representation was presented by the counsel for the detenu personally. The said representation came to be rejected on 18th July, 1981. In due course the detenu appeared before the Advisory Board and in pursuance of the opinion expressed by the Advisory Board his detention was also confirmed. In the present petition the detention order issued on 13th April 1981 as well as the continued detention of the detenu is challenged by the petitioner on various grounds.2. Mr. Canteenwala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended before us that the continued detention of the detenu is illegal, as ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. Govindram Brothers Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: [1983]141ITR777(Bom); [1982]9TAXMAN177(Bom)
Desai, J.1. In this reference the following three questions are referred to us at the instance of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'A' :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to deduction of entertainment allowance of Rs. 20,000 paid to Kudilal, a director of the assessee-company ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases the assessee was entitled to the bad debt of Rs. 1,78,255 due from Famous Pictures Ltd. ?(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in relying on the earlier order of the Commissioner of Income-tax for the earlier year 1956-57, and of the Income-tax Officer for the earlier year in allowing the salary of Rs. 41,928 to Shams-under ?'2. As far as question No. 1 is concerned, we have dealt with a similar item in Income-tax Reference No. 115 of 1972 CIT v. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd. - see p. 626 supra. Which was for an earlier assessment year, and w...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Bom)262; [1983]141ITR626(Bom)
Desai, J.1. In this reference, which is at the instance of the Commissioner, the following two questions stand referred to us :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee to raise an additional ground that the capital loss should be allowed to be carried forward ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to deduction of the entertainment allowance of Rs. 60,000 paid to Kudilal, a director of the company ?'2. The assessee concerned is Govindram Bros. Private Ltd., and we are concerned in this reference with the assessment year 1957-58. At the relevant time the assessee-company carried on the business of managing agents of Seksaria Sugar Mills Ltd. It was also a partner of M/s. Agarwal and Co., which firm was the managing agent of United Mills Ltd., and supplied stores to all the Seksaria group of industries.3. In the course of assessment one of the items for considera...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. Kanchanlal L. Talsania
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: (1982)27CTR(Bom)215; [1983]141ITR284(Bom)
Rege, J.1. This reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'A', at the instance of the Commissioner, referring to us the following question for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that the sum of Rs. 21,439 paid by M/s. Bhaishanker Kanga and Girdharlal as a share of the earnings of the assessee for the period he was a partner in the firm is to be excluded from the total income of the assessee is in law justified ?'2. The assessee, who is an attorney and an advocate of this court, was a partner in the firm of M/s. Bhaishanker Kanga and Girdharlal, attorneys-at-law, from March 1, 1961, till May 31, 1968, under a deed of partnership dated April 25, 1961, varied from time to time, the last of such variation being made of March 16, 1968. He retired from the firm on March 31, 1968. The accounts of the firm were maintained on cash or receipt basis, its accounting year bei...
Tag this Judgment!Kosan Metal Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT725(Bom)
1. The petitioners are manufactures of diverse metal products at their factory situated at Chembur in Greater Bombay. The petitioners are manufacturing since the year 1960 LP Gas Cylinders used for storage of liquid petroleum gas. The manufacture was done under an Industrial Licence bearing No. MEI(10)/59-EI(M) and the gas cylinders were manufactured from mild steel sheets.2. In the year 1963, the petitioners obtained an Industrial Licence to manufacture valves. The valves are manufactured from brass by hot forging of brass rods. In the year 1964, the petitioners obtained from the Government of India, a licence to manufacture regulators and the regulators are manufactured from corrosion resistant materials such as zinc alloy die casting, brass and stainless steel. The regulators are used to regulate pressure of gas and are not required in every type of utilisation of gas. The petitioners have been selling gas cylinder without fitting the valves and regulators. Though in some cases, the...
Tag this Judgment!Two Star and Another Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs, Central Excis ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT865(Bom)
1. The petitioner No. 1 is a firm of small manufacturers of domestic electrical appliances such as round ovens, geysers, pressure release valves, etc. and petitioner No. 2 is a partner of the firm.2. The petitioners sell their goods, amongst several other purchasers, to M/s. Bajaj Electricals Limited. The Bajaj Electricals Limited purchases the goods from various manufacturers and sells the goods under their brand name. On April 25, 1975, an agreement was arrived at between petitioner No. 1 on one hand, and Bajaj Electricals Limited on the other, whereby the petitioners agreed to supply the goods manufactured by them which the purchaser desired to sell under their brand name. In pursuance of the agreement, the petitioners have sold the goods to the Bajaj Electricals Limited from time to time.3. The Government of India had granted relief from the payment of excise duty by way of exemption to small manufacturers. The Government of India published Notification No. 176/77 on June 18, 1977 ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »