Mumbai Court April 1982 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Industrial Perfumes Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(Bom)199; [1982]138ITR644(Bom); [1982]10TAXMAN194(Bom)
Smt. Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The assessee is M/s. Industrial Perfumes Ltd., Bombay. For the assessment year year 1961-62, the ITO computed the capital employed in the new industrial undertaking of the assessee-company for the purpose of granting partial exemption from tax under s. 15C of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, at Rs. 13,33,902. It included a sum of Rs. 1,39,113 being the average profit of the assessee-company for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1961-62. The calculation of the capital employed in the new undertaking was made in accordance with the provisions of r. 3(6) of the Indian Income-tax (Computation of Capital of Industrial Undertakings) Rules, 1949.2. On January 21, 1963, the ITO rectified the computation of the capital employed in the new undertaking of the assessee by holding that profits or losses during a given period would be automatically reflected in the assets of the business. Hence, there was no reason for adding separately the average amount of pr...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, B ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(Bom)254; [1983]143ITR318(Bom); [1982]11TAXMAN79(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Act'). The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1963-64, corresponding in the case of the assessee to the previous year ended December 31, 1962. The business of the assessee consists of purchasing crude oil, processing it into petroleum products and selling the same both in the Indian markets and exporting the same to other countries. During the year under consideration, the assessee had made export sales to the tune of Rs. 1,98,99,745 against its total sales of Rs. 37,20,15,963. Certain rebate was granted in taxation in respect of profits and gains made on exports to which we shall presently refer. For the purposes of determining that rebate, the assessee filed before the ITO calculation of export profits as under :Export profits Rs. 1,98,99,745 x 3,94,91,546- ----------- equal to Rs. 33,08,179.- 23,80,12,8612. The assessee took the dividing factor at Rs. 23,80,12,861 ...
Tag this Judgment!HarikishIn Ajwani Vs. S.G. Rajadhyaksha and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: 1982(2)BomCR502
S.J. Deshpande, J.1. The petitioner is original accused in Criminal Case No. 223/CW/1981, which was pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. On September 18, 1981 the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate ordered to issue process against accused-petitioner in this case after recording a reasoned order. It is this order which is being challenged by the petitioner under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. A few facts necessary to determine the question involved in this application are stated as under :---The petitioner is a non-resident Indian citizen and has been residing in West Germany for the last sixteen years. The petitioner is married to a German girl from whom he has a daughter.3. In the month of November, 1979, as the Customs Officer, Bombay required the petitioner, he came down to Bombay from abroad and contacted the Customs Officer. It is alleged that the petitioner has connection with some offence to have been discovered abroad. On December 5, 1979 petit...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. Jalgaon District Central Co-oper ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1982
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(Bom)206; [1983]143ITR326(Bom); 1984TAXLR212
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Act'). The question referred to us for our determination in this reference is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of section 3 of the Finance Act, 1963, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that additional surcharge was not leviable against the assessee for the assessment year 1963-64 ?'2. The facts giving rise to the reference are as follows :The assessee is a co-operative society carrying on business in banking at Jalgaon. In respect of the assessment year 1963-64, the ITO did not charge additional surcharge as provided under the Finance Act, 1963 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Finance Act'). Thereafter, by an order dated September 27, 1969, passed under s. 154, the ITO held that the additional surcharge of Rs. 31,810 was payable by the assessee and he levied the said additional surcharge by the said...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. Modiram Laxmandas (P.) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1982
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(Bom)209; [1983]142ITR702(Bom); [1982]11TAXMAN26(Bom)
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The assessees are a limited company. They were doing, inter alia, the business of manufacturing art silk. The business of manufacturing art silk was sold by the assessees under a sale deed dated 21st September, 1963, to a firm known as M/s. Asawa Silk Mills. As a result of this transfer, import licenses standing in the name of the assessees were also transferred to the firm of M/s. Asawa Silk Mills along with the goodwill of the company. On the basis of the import licences so transferred, the new firm imported yarn. On account of these imports the firm made a profit of Rs. 86,119. For the assessment year 1964-65, the ITO came to the conclusion that if the import licences had not been transferred to a new firm, the assessees could have made a profit of Rs. 86,119. He brought to tax the sum of Rs. 86,119 in the hands of the assessee-company as short-term capital gains. He also taxed the value of the goodwill, which he fixed at Rs. 20,000, as long-term capital gain...
Tag this Judgment!Madhav Shankar Sonawane Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1982
Reported in: 1982(1)BomCR702; (1982)84BOMLR340; 1982CriLJ1762
Chandurkar, J.1. This criminal appeal by the accused, who has been convicted of the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life for the said offence, has been referred to the Full Bench by Dharmadhikari and Mohta, JJ. because they doubted the correctness of the direction given by another Division Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Manohar Kashinath Ghodake : (1982)84BOMLR29 which required that the accused in that case, who was also convicted of the offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 'will remain in jail at least for a period of 25 years notwithstanding the remissions and concessions, if any, granted to him under the relevant rules'.2. It is clear that on behalf of the State a similar direction was sought in the present appeal, but the Division Bench found that there was no power in the Court to say that the convict shall un...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. Pakco Engg. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1982
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(Bom)232; [1983]143ITR415(Bom); [1982]11TAXMAN62(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Act'). The assessment year with which we are concerned is the assessment year 1960-61. The order of assessment on the assessee in respect of the said assessment year was passed on March 10, 1961, the said order being under s. 23A of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. A notice to show cause against the rectification of mistake was issued to the assessee under s., 154 of the said Act, no objection was taken by the assessee to the proposed application and the ITO proceeded to correct the mistake apparent on the record by raising the additional super-tax liability by his order dated May 20, 1969. On an appeal to the AAC, it was contended by the assessee that as the action for rectification was then under s. 154 of the said Act, it was without jurisdiction and invalid on the ground that the said Act had no the coming into effect of the said Act and that the rectification if at all could have...
Tag this Judgment!Trustees Of Dr. Sheth'S Vs. Seventh Income-Tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1982
Reported in: (1982)2ITD649(Mum.)
1. The assessee is a trust. Its original assessment for the assessment year 1976-77 was completed by the ITO on 12-3-1979. In this assessment was included an item of short-term capital gains of Rs. 1,790 being the surplus on the sale of 1,750 shares in the Great Eastern Shipping Co.Ltd. These shares were sold for Rs. 4,40,420. The capital gains on the sale of these shares amounted to Rs. 3,52,950. On a perusal of the record of the assessee, the Commissioner was of the opinion that deducting from this amount of Rs. 3,52,950 (i) the income deemed to have been applied under Section 11(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), and (ii) the cost of shares, there was still a surplus of Rs. 1,39,325 which should have been taxed as income 'not applied'. The Commissioner furnished the details of this computation to the assessee and called upon the assessee to show cause why this item should not be subjected to tax under Section 263 of the Act. After considering the objections on behalf of t...
Tag this Judgment!Press Metal Corporation Limited Vs. Noshir Sorabji Pochkhanawalla and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Bom144; ILR1983Bom805
ORDER1. The opponents have preferred this appeal against the order and decision dated 5th July, 1980 of the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, dismissing the opposition to the grant of patent and directing the Complete Specification to be amended as indicated in the said order.2. On 28-3-1971 one Noshir Edulji Pochkhanawalla made an application numbered 130620 for registration of a Patent for an invention relating to 'Improvement in or relating to Mufflers or Exhaust Silencers for Internal Combustion Engines' along with provisional specifications. On 14-6-71 the applicant filed complete specifications. The application was accepted by the Controller of Patents and the acceptance was notified in the Gazette of India dated 19-8-1972. The petitioners filed notice of opposition under S. 25 of the Patents Act, 1970. On 10-2-1973 the applicant filed his reply to the Notice of Opposition and on 26-2-1973 the applicant filed his reply -- Statement. On or about 21st June 1973 the said ...
Tag this Judgment!Vasant Laxman Deshmukh Vs. Sakharam Limbaji Jadhav
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1982
Reported in: (1982)84BOMLR369
Kanade, J.1. An interesting question has been raised in this writ petition as to whether a plaint or a decree can be amended when an appeal against the original decree has become final. The said point arises out of the following facts.2. There was an agreement between one Laxman Deshmukh and his sons and Sakharam Limbaji Jadhav in respect of sale of lands Survey Nos. 39, 40 and 41 situated at village Salimba in Manjlegaon Taluka of Beed District. The total area of these three lands is 10 acres 26 gunthas. The price agreed between the parties was at Rs. 8,000. On the date of the agreement of sale, an amount of Rs. 7,900 was paid by way of earnest money and Rs- 100 were to be paid at the time of the sale deed. The owner of the land fell out of the agreement and, therefore, Sakharam Limbaji Jadhav had to file Civil Suit No. 45 of 1968 for specific performance of the said contract against Laxman Deshmukh and his sons. The said suit was decreed on January 30, 1971 in favour of plaintiff. In...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »