Mumbai Court January 1983 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Madhukar Vithoba Thakare Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-1983
Reported in: 1983(1)BomCR595
V.S. Kotwal, J.1. On May 7, 1981 when the darkness was set in the evening at about 7 p.m. the complainant Head Constable Patil, who attached to Task Force went to village Nagaon in Raigad District. They went near the temple and parked the jeep and walked down some distance when they noticed one person sitting under a Banyan tree with a glass and can. That person was apprehended on the spot and it was disclosed that can contained illicit liqour. The sample was taken in a bottle and it was sealed and it is after few days that it was sent to the Chemical Analyser, who certified it to contain 27% V.V. ethyl alcohol which was not tolerable or medical preparation. The person found is the accused, who was ultimately charge sheeted for an offence under section 66(1)(b) of the Prohibition Act.2. The learned trial Magistrate convicted him on that charge and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default R.I. for one month.3. Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 1...
In Re: Swastik Textile Mills Ltd. and in Re: Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: (1983)85BOMLR244; [1985]57CompCas766(Bom)
Kania, J.1. These are two petitions under ss. 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, whereby the petitioners in Company Petition No. 684 of 1981 have prayed for being amalgamated with the petitioners in Company Petition No. 685 of 1981. The petitioners in Company petition No. 684 of 1981 are the Swastik Textile Mills Ltd. I propose to refer to them as 'the transferor company'. The petitioners in Company petition No. 685 of 1981 are Apte Amalgamations Ltd. (formerly called 'Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd.') which I propose to refer to as 'the transferee company'.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of these petitions can be stated shortly. The authorised capital of the transferee company is Rs. 2,00,00,000 (rupees to Crores only). The paid-up capital of the transferee company is Rs. 82,50,000 (rupees eighty-two lakhs fifty thousand only). The transferee company was incorporated on March 8, 1933, and its main business was to manufacture sugar. At one time, the transferee company had vast ag...
H.N. Lakhani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: [1983]147ITR552(Bom); [1983]14TAXMAN455a(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. This is a reference made under s. 66(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, at the instance of the assessee, who is now no more. An application is being made for bringing on record the legal representatives of the assessee, who will be substituted in place of the assessee in the reference.2. In the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1955-56 relevant to the accounting period ending on March 31, 1955, the assessee had sold gold ornaments of the value of Rs. 35,653. When called upon to explain the source and the time of acquisition of the said ornaments, the assessee claimed that these ornaments belonged to his wife and that she had received them at the time of her marriage and on some ceremonial occasions. Some ornaments were claimed to have been given to the wife by the mother of the assessee. This explanation was rejected by the ITO and he held that having regard to the status of the assessee who belonged to a rich Marwari family, the sudden sale of his...
Harinarayan Jamnadas Lakhani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: [1984]147ITR576(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The wife of the assessee in this reference was a partner in a partnership firm carrying on business of mining and contraction under the name and style of M/s. Maheshwar Mining & Contracting Company. Her share of capital was Rs. 6,875. Out of the other four partners, three partners were the daughters of the assessee and the fifth one was a stranger.2. The ITO, however declined to grant registration to the firm for the assessment year 1956-57 on the ground that it was the assessee, was had contributed capital on behalf of his wife and daughters and it was he who was in control and management of the business and had enjoyed the profits arising out of the partnership. In respect of the same assessment year in question, originally the assessee had filed a return on January 13, 1959, declaring the entitle share income of his wife and daughters from the said partnership firm but in the revised return filed by him, he omitted the said income. The ITO, however, while making the...
Smt. Zubedabai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha and Marathwada
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: (1984)39CTR(Bom)124; [1984]148ITR104(Bom); [1984]17TAXMAN124(Bom)
Mohta, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for opinion of this court :'Where, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the following amounts of interest paid by the assessee are deductible in determining the income of the assessee which is taxable under the heading 'Other sources' for the respective years : Assessment year Amount of interestRs.1964-65 1,7241965-66 3,4211966-67 4,190 ?'2. Smt. Zubedabai, wife of Haji Umer Gani, the assessee, was a partner in the firm of Haji Umer Gani and Co. up to the end of March 1962. After she ceased to be a partner, she withdrew various sums from her accounts in the books of the firm, for which the firm charged interest from her at the rate of 9 per cent. per annum. She made deposit with one P. S. S. Chettiar out of the moneys withdrawn by her, from which she received interest at 12 per cent. per annum. Her income from such interest in the accounting years ending wit...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Express Printing Press
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom190; [1983]52STC290(Bom); 1983TAXLR2871
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. All these references pertain to two daily publications called 'Joker' and 'Jabara' printed by the respondents. Reference No. 8 of 1979 pertains to the assessment period 1st January, 1972, to 31st December, 1972, Reference No. 9 of 1979 pertains to the assessment period 1st January, 1971, to 31st December, 1971, Reference No. 10 of 1979 pertain to the assessment period 1st January, 1970, to 31st December, 1970, and Reference No. 11 of 1979 pertains to the assessment period 1st April, 1964, to 31st December, 1964.2. It appears that in view of a certain intimation received by the Sales Tax Officer, Enforcement Branch, the place of business of the assessee was visited by the Sales Tax Officer, Enforcement Branch, on 11th August, 1972, and 14th August, 1972. On taking search of the business premises of the assessee, the Sales Tax Officer found that the assessee was printing two pamphlets, viz., 'Joker' and 'Jabara'. The assessee informed the Sales Tax Officer that th...
Jayaprakash Shamsundar Mandare Vs. Laxminarayan Mulidhar Mundade and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom364; 1983(1)BomCR552A; (1983)85BOMLR96; 1983MhLJ362
Jahagirdar, J.1. This petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution arises out of proceedings initiated by respondent Nos. 1 to 7 in this petition under the provisions of the Bombay Rent, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Rents, Hotel and Loading Houses Rates Control Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Rent Act,'. They has filed a suit, being Regular Civil Suit No. 557 of 1973, in the Court of the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Jalgaon against the petitioner, who was defendants No. 2 in the suit, and one Madanlal Fakirchand Tiwari, who was defendants No. 1 in the suit. Madanlal Fakirchand Tiwari died after the decree of the trial Court and his heirs and legal representative are respondent Nos. 8 (a) to 8 (1) in this petition. for the sake of convenience, the said Madanlal Fakirchand Tiwari will be referred to as 'defendants No. 1'.2. The suit had been filed for possession of a shop bearing No. 4 and situated in House No. 159 of Navipeth at Jlgano. The said shop, hereinafter r...
Sonubai Yeshwant Jadhay Vs. Bala Govinda Yadav and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom156; 1983(1)BomCR632; (1983)85BOMLR398
1. This is original defendants No. 1's second appeal that question the concurrent judgment and the decree made and affirmed holding that to the property left by the deceased Tanubai w/o Vithoba Giriappa, who died on Nov. 17, 1966 plaintiff Bala Govinda Yadav, being the nearest heir, was entitled to succeed and the will set up by the appellant-original defendants No. 1 was a got up one and did not confer any entitlement on the appellant to succeed to the property to Tanubai.2. The undisputed facts as are found are that plaintiff Bala is the son of Govinda, s/o Nana, who was the son of Patu. Patu had four sons, being Aba, Nana, Sakhoba and Girjappa. Vithoba, the husband to Tanubai was the son of Girjappa. The plaintiff thus is shown to be Tanbuai's husband cousin brothers sons As far as the other branches are concerned. there does not appear to be any other male heir having priority in the branch and in the family of the husband to Tanubai.3 . The suit property was the property was the p...
Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Bombay Vs. Ambaji Traders Pvt. L ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-13-1983
Reported in: (1984)40CTR(Bom)193; [1984]148ITR401(Bom); [1984]16TAXMAN398(Bom)
Chadurkar, J.1. In the account books of the assessee-company for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1959-60 there were cash credits totaling Rs. 3,36,000. This amount was added as income of the assessee in the said assessment year.In appeal, the AAC found that cash credits amounting to Rs. 2,50,000, out of the total cash credits of Rs. 3,36,000 fell within that part of the financial year which was relevant to the assessment year 1958-59 and since the financial year was to be considered as the previous year for the assessee's income from undisclosed sources, the AAC deleted the sum of Rs. 2,50,000 from the assessment year 1959-60. In view of the deletion made by the AAC, the ITO issued a notice under s. 147(a) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1958-59. Finding that there was no satisfactory explanation of the source of the cash credits to the extent of Rs. 2,25,000, that amount was included in the assessment for the assessment year 1958-59.2. When the matter ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha and Marathwada Vs. United Transpo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-13-1983
Reported in: [1984]148ITR57(Bom)
Chandurkar, J.1. The assessee is a company in which the public are not substantially interested. The business of the assessee company is of passenger transport. For the assessment year 1958-59 for which the relevant accounting year was from August 1, 1956 to July 31, 1957, the company disclosed an income of Rs. 30,889 according to its profit and loss accounts. In the return the company had shown a loss of Rs. 1,086. The ITO, however, estimated the passenger receipts at Rs. 4,50,000 as against Rs. 3,36,935. Thus, an addition of Rs. 1,13,065 was made and on computation the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 99,860.2. In appeal the total income was reduced by Rs. 9,860 by the AAC. There were cross-appeals for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59. The assessee's appeals came to be dismissed. The references for the assessment year 1957-58 and 1958-59 made under s. 66(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, arising out of the orders of the Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 1957...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »