Mumbai Court October 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.
Nafees Begum and ors. Vs. Hikmatullah Mohamed Safi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Bom62
ORDER1. This is a petition under S. 14 of the Arbitration Act under which the petitioners have prayed that the arbitrators be directed to file the award dated 4th October, 1976 in court. The petitioners and the respondents 2 and 3 are heirs of one MOhamed Jan Chowdhari Abdul Kayum who died on 7th May, 1976. Mohamed Jan Chowdhari was carrying on business in partnership with the 1st respondent. After the death of Mohamed Jan the 1st petitioner who was the window of Mohamed Jan on behalf of herself and the heirs of Mohamed Jan who wer then minors. Preferred the disputes between them and the 1st respondent to arbitration. The arbitrators made their award on 4th October, 1976 which is Exhibit 'A' to the petition. It seems that at the time when the award was made thumb impression of the 1st petitioner (who had referred the dispute to arbitration on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of Mohamed Jan) as well as the 1st respondent were taken on the award. What requires to be determin...
Power Cable Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1983
Reported in: (1984)(16)ELT285Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal under Sec. 35-B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 which will be hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' arises out of and is directed against that part of the Order-in-Appeal No.A-1832/BI-346/82. dt. 17-11-82 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, and by which he confirmed the following order passed by the Deputy Collector, Central Excise, Bombay. (i) 166 coils of PVC electric wires seized on 5-1-76 and 40 coils of PVC electric wires seized on 3-1-76 from the premises of M/s. P.D. Jain & Bros., Bombay-2 are liable to confiscation but they are provisionally released and despite direction they are not produced in terms of the bond. Hence I appropriate a sum of Rs. 500 (Rs. five hundred only) towards the value of the goods. (ii) 54 coils of PVC insulated wires seized from the premises of M/s. Selmor Agencies, Bombay-2 are liable for confiscation but they are provisionally released and despite direction they are not produced in terms of the bo...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pfizer Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1983
Reported in: (1984)41CTR(Bom)182
Desai, J.1. The question referred to us by the Tribunal reads as under :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the balance-sheet of the assessee-company in the amount of Rs. 8,67,380 as on 1-12-1962, Rs. 10,92,617 as on 1-12-1965 and Rs. 14,91,611 as on 1-12-1964 constituted 'reserves' as contemplated in r. 1 (iii) of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964?'2. Our attention was drawn to out earlier judgment in It Reference No. 63 of 1974, where we have considered a similar question (question No. 1 in the said Reference) and given certain directions following the decision of the Supreme Court in Vazir Sultan Tabacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT : [1981]132ITR559(SC) . In the said decision we had also referred to an earlier decision of this High Court in CIT v. Gokak Mills Ltd. : [1983]142ITR525(Bom) . In Gokak mills case, the Division Bench had followed the guidelines indicated by the Supreme Court and gave certain direction to the Tribunal. In the insta...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. Bharat Auto and Metal Works
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1983
Reported in: (1984)38CTR(Bom)210; [1985]151ITR461(Bom); [1983]15TAXMAN491(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The question to be answered in this reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, reads thus :'Whether the assessee-firm was entitled to relief under s. 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in its assessment, though similar relief was allowed by the Income-tax Officer in the assessments of the partners ?'2. The assessee is a partnership firm consisting of three partners. It set up a new industrial undertaking in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1967-68. The ITO allowed partial exemption from tax under s. 84, relating to the income of newly established industrial undertakings, in the assessments of the assessee's partners, but did not allow it in the case of the assessment of the assessee. He gave no reasons for such disallowance. The assessee preferred an appeal. The AAC allowed the appeal and granted to the assessee the relief under s. 84. He based his conclusion upon the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Arun Industries : [1966]61ITR241(Guj)...
Dhulia Taluka Sahakari Kharadi Vikri and Prakriya Society and Another ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1983
Reported in: [1981]132ITR637a(Bom); (1985)ILLJ99Bom
1. Appeal No. 327 of 1978 is filed by the original opponent No. 1, Dhulia Taluka Sahakari Kharedi Vikri and Prakriya Society (hereinafter referred to as 'opponent No. 1') and Appeal No. 208 of 1979 filed by the original opponent No. 2, Chandrakant Anandrao Shinde (hereinafter referred to as 'opponent No. 2'). The facts are that opponent No. 1, Society carries on the business of storing and selling of the agricultural produce on behalf of its agriculturist members. For this purpose, it hires space on rental basis in a warehouse which belongs to opponent No. 3, the State Warehousing Corporation. The produce brought by the member-agriculturists is stored by opponent No. 1, Society in the warehouse till it is sold. Against the produce handed over to it, the Society pays to its members advances which are recovered from them with interest as well as rent of the warehouse when the produce is sold. The Society stores the produce in the warehouse with the help of the coolies or labourers hired ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ratilal Popatlal Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: (1984)43CTR(Bom)4
Desai, J.1. It would appear in this matter that the assessee had addressed a latter to the Prothonotary & Senior Master on 1-10-1983, that the assessee is unable to appear in the matter. Original letter sent to the Prothonotary does not appear to have been received by him but we have been shown a copy of the same received by the department from the concerned Income Tax Officer. Under the circumstances we may proceed in the absence of the assessee as it would appear that the question referred to us will have to be answered in the assessee's favour.2. The question referred to us by the Tribunal, Poona Bench, Poona is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,806 being the collections made by the assessee on account of 'charity' through sale bills was liable to be assessed as income of the assessee liable to tax ?'3. The ITO in his assessment order for the asst. yr. 1970-71 added an amount of Rs. 2,806 which was described as 'charity account' ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. P. Rajesh and Company
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: (1984)41CTR(Bom)183; [1985]151ITR453(Bom); [1984]17TAXMAN280(Bom)
Desai, J.1. In this matter, the assessee who is represented by advocate Mr. Chimanlal T. Mody has chosen to remain absent. However, it is clear that the matter is concluded by the decision of the Full Bench of this High Court in CIT v. Daimler Benz : [1977]108ITR961(Bom) .2. A few facts may be stated as under : The assessee is M/s. P. Rajesh and Company, a registered firm which carries on business in art silk cloth on commission basis. As stated in paragraph 2 of the statement of the case, returns of income from the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69, which were due on or before June 30, 1967, and June 30, 1968, were filed late, namely on January 8, 1969, and June 30, 1969, respectively. There was a change in the constitution of the assessee-firm in the first period, but that is not very relevant for our purpose. For the late submission of returns, the ITO charged interest as provided under s. 139 of the I.T. Act. 1961.3. Being aggrieved by his order, namely, the one for charging int...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii, Bombay Vs. Lalchand Bhabut ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: (1984)38CTR(Bom)183; [1985]151ITR360(Bom); [1983]15TAXMAN489(Bom)
Desai, J.1. The question referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is as under :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,55,500 being the value of the gold in question, was liable to be taxed in the hands of the assessee under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. We would like to reframe the question although we are conscious that the question as reframed takes within its compass the further question which was proposed by the Revenue which was specifically disallowed. The question as reframed by us will read as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,55,500 being the value of the gold in question, was liable to be taxed in the hands of the assessee ?'3. Both in the statement of the case as well as in its appellate order, the Tribunal has very lucidly set out the facts as well as the respective arguments of the Department and those urged on behalf of the assessee. However, after conside...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. Chandan and Bharat Enterprises
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: (1984)38CTR(Bom)197; [1985]151ITR441(Bom); [1983]15TAXMAN435(Bom)
Desai, J.1. The following two questions have been referred to us at the instance of the Commissioner by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Poona Bench :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, where the assessee-firm sold its real estate business as a going concern having a net value of Rs. 27,238 to the company, M/s. Chandan and Bharat Pvt. Ltd., of which the partners of the assessee-firm were the sold shareholders, for a consideration of Rs. 1 lakh in the form of shares of said company, the excess value of Rs. 72,760 which accrued to or was received by the assessee-firm under the said transaction was capital gains and taxable as such ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the said excess value of Rs. 72,760 which accrued to, or was received by, the assessee-firm under the said transaction was only fictional income or fictional gain and, therefore, was not chargeable to tax ?'2. As we shall pr...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Poona Vs. Jawanmal Gemaji Gandhi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: (1984)39CTR(Bom)127; [1985]151ITR353(Bom); [1983]15TAXMAN487(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The assessee-firm carried on the business of purchasing and selling gold and silver ornaments. For the assessment year in question, that is, 1962-63, the accounting period being S.Y. 2017, the assessee showed a gross profit of Rs. 42,428 on sales of Rs. 3,78,064, which worked out to 11.2%. The ITO had in the previous year increased the gross profit to about 14.2%, which the AAC reduced to 13.8%. For the year in question, therefore, the ITO estimated the sales at Rs. 3,85,000 and gross profit thereon at 13.8%. It appeared that during the course of S. Y. 2017, that is, on September 1, 1961, the Central Excise authorities had seizes gold weighing something more than 76 tolas sent to the assessee at Kolhapur. The consignor had admitted in excise proceedings that he was an employee of the assessee. An explanation had been sought to be tendered by the assessee regarding this gold, but the excise authorities did not accept the explanation and confiscated the gold, which order o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »