Mumbai Court December 1982 Judgments
international Computers Indian Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-28-1982
Reported in: (1983)5ITD60(Mum.)
Commissioner has jurisdiction to revise the order giving effect to appellate order and doctrine of merger would be applicable only in respect of original order and not on the subsequent order passed by the assessing officer.It is the original assessment order that gets merged in the appellate order but the order giving effect to the appellate order remains an independent order unaffected by any merger. The Commissioner could, therefore, exercise his jurisdiction under section 263 in respect of such order.1. These two appeals filed by the same assessee are heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee is a company deriving income from business in selling and/or leasing out computers. The assessment years involved in these appeals are 1973-74 and 1974-75. The assessee follows the year ended 30th September as its previous year.3. The present appeals are directed against the order dated 25-11-1980 of the Commissioner passed under Section 2...
Tag this Judgment!Pentagon Engineering (P.) Ltd. Vs. First Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-28-1982
Reported in: (1983)5ITD87(Mum.)
1. The assessee has filed these appeals against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the levy of interest by the ITO under Section 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for the delayed payment of tax into the Government treasury.2. The assessee is a private limited company. During the years under consideration, the ITO was of the opinion that the assessee had delayed the payment of tax into the Government treasury which the assessee had deducted from the salaries paid to its employees. He, therefore, proceeded to calculate interest under Section 201(1A) from the date on which the salaries were payable to the employees to the date on which the tax was actually paid by the assessee into the Government treasury, on each occasion and demanded the same from the assessee.3. The assessee appealed before the Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of the interest levied by the ITO for the years under consideration.The main ground on which the assessee objected to the levy w...
Tag this Judgment!Export Credit and Guarantee Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-1982
Reported in: (1983)5ITD612(Mum.)
1. The assessee is a Government undertaking. The common grounds of appeal for all these years relate to disallowance of surtax liabilities claimed as the revenue expenditure for the purpose of the assessee's business and the non-grant of relief under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The point relating to the allowance of surtax liability is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Amar Dye-Chem. Ltd. v.ITO [1983] 3 SOT 384 (Bom.) (SB) against the assessee.3. The assessee claimed weighted deduction under Section 35B of Rs. 29,09,639 being 50 per cent of the overall expenses incurred by the assessee under various heads for the assessment year 1975-76. Likewise for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78, Section 35B relief of Rs. 31,53,035 and Rs. 34,51,047 were claimed. The ITO disallowed the claim.According to the ITO, the assessee neither performed any services outside India nor executed any contract for the supply outside India of any goods, serv...
Tag this Judgment!indulal Hiralal Shah and ors. Vs. S.S. Salgaonkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Bom192
1. An interesting question to whether the Educational Institution run by the petitioner is an Institution run by minority community and, if so, whether the provisions of Rule 77.3 (3) (vii) of the Secondary School Code violate fundamental right guaranteed under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, falls for determination in this petitioner.2. The petitioner No. 5 Prabhubhai Bhogilal Upadhyaya conducted an educational institution at Khar in Bombay Known as 'Adarsh Bal Mandir'. The institution was set up in the year 1938 by opinion a primary school and in June, 1963, High School was stated. The institution was conducted on the Gandhian principles of truth and non-violence and with a view to inculcate in the students Gandhian ideals and Gandhian view of life. The petitioner No. 5 executed a Deed of Declaration of Trust dated July 12, 1962 and created a Trust in respect of the educational institution and appointed and petitioner as the trustees. The Trust was registered under the Bo...
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Municipal Corporation for Greater Bombay and anr. Vs. Ramesh G. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-1982
Reported in: 1983(1)BomCR262
V.S. Kotwal, J.1. Raising of colourful flower beds and maintenance of a garden and a lawn would no doubt enhance the beauty of the building and the healthy environment of living which may not necessarily be a luxury but a requirements in a place like the Metropolitan City where values of a normal life have deteriorated. However, this has landed the owner of the building in difficulties to some extent, costing him the amounts which are thoroughly disproportionate. This grievance is made against the Bombay Municipal Corporation as he received bills for water supply at enhanced rate.2. The appellants are the owner of the property located at Ridge Road and known as Malbar Court and it falls in 'B' Ward of the Bombay Municipal Corporation. The water supplied to the said buildings is by meter measurement. The building consists of the basement, ground and four upper floors where several residential flats are located while 3rd and 4th floor are a single unit. This property was constructed abou...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkrishna Narayan Patekar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-23-1982
Reported in: 1983(1)BomCR280
M.P. Kanade, J.1. The petitioner was prosecuted for offence under section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act in a Summary Case No. 180/1981. It is alleged by the prosecution that the petitioner was found dealing in liquor behind the temple of Kholaba at village Anjangaon, Taluka Madha, District Solapur in the evening on January 14, 1980. The police party was on patrolling duty and they received an information about the said dealing in illicit liquor. A raid was conducted and the petitioner was found with a liquor can and a glass and it is, thereafter, that the sample was taken and was sent to the Chemical Analyser and after the receipt of the report from the Chemical Analyser, the prosecution was launched against the accused.2. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge framed by the learned Magistrate. On consideration of the evidence on record, the learned Magistrate, by his order dated August 6, 1981, was pleased to convict the petitioner under section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay P...
Tag this Judgment!Sakeena and ors. Vs. Kusumbi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-22-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Bom384; 1983(2)BomCR9
ORDER1. In this writ petition the legal representatives of the original tenant have challenged the order passed by the appeal bench of the Small Cause Court at Bombay dated 26th of November 1981 in appeal No. 99 of 1973.2. It appears from the record that the original plaintiff Abdullakhan filed a suit against the original defendant-Ali Mohamed for recovery of possession of the land bearing Nos. 85, 85A and 241 (2) (part) situated appurtenant 49--C Pali Naka, Bandra, Bombay together with the structures. It was the case of the plaintiff that he was the owner the property whereas the defendant was the tenant in respect of the structures and the plots. The structure on the plot No.85 was the main building of permanent nature and there was also a coal shed bearing Nos. 49-C, 49-D respectively.3. Short history of the litigation shows that originally Dr. J. F. Henriques and in the year 1934 he let out these two plots to the original defendant. The 3rd plot viz. hissa No. 2 of S. No. 241 was g...
Tag this Judgment!Billion Plastics P. Ltd. Vs. Dyes and Chemical Workers Union and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-1982
Reported in: 1983(2)BomCR25; 1983MhLJ572
C.S. Dharmadhidari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner Company has challenged the order passed by the industrial Court dated 21st of July, 1982 rejecting the prayer in terms or Clause 4(ii) of the application. The petitioner Company filed an application for interim relief under section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Apart from the reliefs an interim relief was also asked for preventing workman from resorting to or continuing strike in Pursuance to the latter dated 3rd July, 1982. It is not necessary to make a detailed reference to other averments made in the application or the reply filed by the Union. It is that part of the interim relief which was denied to the petitioner Company by the Industrial Court by the impugned order. In para 7 of the order the Industrial Court has given its reasons for refusing to grant the interim relief, which reads as under :'So far as the...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. First Income-tax Officer Vs. J.M. Shah
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-18-1982
Reported in: (1983)4ITD303(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the revenue objects to the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) directing the ITO to assess the commission received by the assessee from its employer not as salary but as income from business and in further allowing deduction of expenses of Rs. 4,500 on account of travelling and Rs. 5,894 on account of car expenses out of the commission income received from the employer. The assessee has also filed a cross objection objecting to the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that he had omitted to consider and dispose of certain other grounds relating to deduction of other expenditure claimed by him and on other points decided against him.2. Shri J. M. Shah, the assessee herein, is a salesman in the service of Voltas Ltd. This appeal relates to his assessment year 1977-78 for the previous year ended 31-3-1977. The assessee declared a total income of Rs. 73,300. He also filed a salary certificate from his employer Voltas Ltd., regarding the salary paid to him wh...
Tag this Judgment!Shamji Mithubhai Vora Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Bom219; 1983(1)BomCR411
1. The petitioner has filled this petition in a representative capacity and I must confess that it is difficult to appreciated how the petitioner can be permitted to sue in a representation capacity on the facts and circumstance of the case. The facts set out hereinafter would make it clear that the relief sought by the petitioner was totally misconceived.2. The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was passed by the Central Government for the control of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce in, certain commodities. S. 2(a) enables the Central Government to notify by order any commodity as an essential commodity. Cement has been declared to be an essential commodity by the Central Government. S. 3 of the Act enables the Central Government by order to provided for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply and distribution thereof. Sub-section (2) (d) of S. 3 confers power upon the Central Government to provided for regulating by licences, permits or otherwi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »