Mumbai Court November 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.
Collector of Customs and Central Vs. Narendra P. Unrao and ors.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1983
Reported in: (1984)(15)ELT275Tri(Mum.)bai
1. All these appeals arise out of the orders passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs. The appellants are the Collectors of Customs, Ahmedabad and Bombay.2. As these appeals involve important questions of law as to the maintainability and competence of the Collectors to prefer appeals against the orders passed by the Board and having regard to the number of appeals filed by the Collectors in the West Regional Bench and similar appeals which would have been filed in other Benches of the Tribunal, the President considered it necessary to constitute a larger Bench to resolve the issue once for all. Accordingly, a larger Bench was constituted.3 As these appeals are heard only on the question of maintainability and the locus standi of the Collectors to prefer the appeals, suffice if we set out the facts of one of the appeals and accordingly we set out the facts of the appeal in appeal No. 336/83.4. The Assessee, M/s. Perfect Power Systems, New Delhi, had imported 8 consignments ...
Garware Shipping Corporation Ltd. and Others Vs. J.H.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1983
Reported in: 1989(23)LC296(Bombay); 1984(15)ELT375(Bom)
1. Both these petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment as the order under challenge in the two petitions is one passed by the Additional Collector of Customs (Preventive), New Custom House, Bombay, on August 31, 1979.2. The facts leading to the filing of these petitions are as follows : On January 23, 1979, the Officers of the Rummaging Division boarded the vessel m.v. 'RISHI VISHWAMITRA' which had arrived at the Port of Bombay from Gulf Port. During the course of search, nine gunny packages were found tied to the ceiling brackets at the fresh water tank situated in the steering gear from room at the after of the vessel. The goods of foreign origin totally valued at Rs. 63,445/- J 180 were recovered. On January 24, 1979, during the further search, goods of foreign origin valued at Rs. 80,563/- were found. Again on January 27, 1979, the vessel was searched and the goods of foreign origin of the value of Rs. 53,410/- were recovered. The goods were seized as unclaime...
Smt. Ashibai C. Oswal Vs. Gold Control Administrator
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1983
Reported in: (1984)(16)ELT382Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal, purported to be under Section 81 of the Gold Control Act 1968 will hereinafter be referred to as the Act, arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-Original bearing No F. XVII (GC) 7-108/Adj/82 Pune dated 16th September 1982 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Pune by which he refused to renew the gold dealers licence. The appellant Smt. Ashibai C. Oswal is the Proprietress of M/s. Bhagji Devaji & Co. Till the year 1963, her husband was the Proprietor and he held a gold dealers licence. Subsequent to the death of her husband, the appellant held the gold dealers licence. On 18th February, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Pune called upon the appellant to show cause why her gold dealers licence application for the year 1982 should not be rejected. The appellant sent a reply dated 27-2-82. She contended inter alia that the Assistant Collector has no competence to consider the renewal application. Thereafter the Assistan...
income-tax Officer Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1983
Reported in: (1984)8ITD296(Mum.)
1. The appeal is filed by the department. The several grounds contested in the departmental appeal are dealt with seriatim below.2 to 4. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.] 5. Deferred payment of Annuity Policy: In connection with the application of Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') the ITO included a sum of Rs, 42,000, premium paid by the company towards a deferred annuity policy, in favour of the managing director.The facts of the case are that the managing director, Shri Rahul Kumar Bajaj, was entitled to commission at a particular rate in addition to his fixed salary and other items of remuneration and perquisites. By a resolution of the Board, the company resolved that the commission payable to Shri Rahul Kumar be spent by the company every year towards the purchase of a deferred annuity policy from the LIC on the life of the managing director to provide for payment of annuity to him for life and upon his death to dependents. A...
Chamanlal Lala Maghiram Bansal Vs. Trustees of the Port of Bombay and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1983
Reported in: 1987(30)ELT700(Bom)
1. The petitioner carries on business in the State of Haryana and imported 141 times of lead-ore from Casablanca in the month of May 1976. The goods arrived in Bombay Port by ship 'm.v. Chicago' but could not be cleared by the petitioner within three months on account of Customs and ITC formalities. A sample from the consignment was forwarded for analytical test and before the report could be received from the customs House Laboratory, the imported goods were auctioned by the Assistant Docks Manager, Sales Branch Office of the Trustees of Port of Bombay. The auction was held on November 24th, 1976 and respondent No. 1 realised a sum of Rs. 55,000/- as sale proceeds. The auction was held under the provisions of Section 64A and 65 of the Bombay Port Trust Act, 1879.2. The State Bank of India, Overseas Branch, Bombay, addressed a letter dated February 16, 1977 to the Assistant Docks Manager of respondent No. 1 requesting to pass the claim in respect of surplus, if available, after deducti...
Hingoli Municipal Council Vs. Ramkumar Ramchandra Chaudhari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1983
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR78
D.B. Deshpande, J.1. This is defendants appeal against the judgement and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Parbhani, against the defendant in Special Civil Suit No. 27/1974 and it arises out of the following facts:---Defendant is Hingoli Municipal Council. By a Municipal Resolution No. 328, dated 5-4-1970 the Municipal Council fixed the tax on performances and shows at the rate of Rs. 4.50 paise per show. This was in pursuance of the Government Resolution, dated 26-11-1969 fixing the minimum of such tax at Rs. 4/- and fixing the maximum of such tax at Rs. 5/- per show and this was to be in force from 1st April, 1970. So by virtue of the Resolution, dated 26-11-1969 only the minimum and maximum rates were fixed and the tax was not fixed and this tax was fixed by the Municipal Resolution dated 5-4-1970.2. Plaintiff-respondent challenged this resolution in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hingoli in Regular Civil Suit No. 107/70. It was the contention ...
Karamchand Mulchand Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1983
Reported in: 1984(2)BomCR502
S.K. Desai, J.1. Both the Special Civil Applications can be disposed of by a common judgment as in our opinion, detailed statement of facts is unnecessary. The petitioners in both the matters are displaced persons having migrated to India as a result of the partition of the country. They had abandoned moveable and immoveable properties including agricultural land at West Pakisthan. They filed a claim application and after due formalities were observed their entitlements were determined by the duly constituted authorities and it is in respect of the land awarded to them that the petitioners have filed the respective petitions claiming reliefs.The difficulty faced by the two petitioners has not occurred for the first time, but has been the subject matter of two decisions, one at Bombay and the other one at Nagpur. The difficulties arose by reason of the fact that there were erstwhile tenants, in our case Adivasis, on these lands. The short question that arises for consideration was wheth...
Cibatul Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-24-1983
Reported in: (1985)LC95Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal to the Tribunal under Section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 against order-in-appeal Nos. A-248 to 252/BD-99 to 103/83 dated 11.2.1983.2. The impugned order covers five appeals against five orders dated 30.4.1982, 30.4.1982, 29.4.1981, 4.6.1982 and 29.7.1982 passed by the Asstt. Collr., Valsad Division. The appellants manufacture Epoxy Synthetic Resins and Hardeners which have been classified under Tariff Item No. 15A. For manufacture of Hardeners, Synpol was imported and charged to additional duty of customs equivalent to that under Item 15A CET. They were permitted to avail of proforma credit under Rule 56A in respect of the duty paid on Synpol and used the same when they cleared Synthetic Epoxy Resins. The Assistant Collector considered that such utilisation was not in accord' ance with the provisions of Rule 56A(3)(vi)(a) and issued show cause notices why the credit so utilised during January '76 to December '79 should not be recovered. By the l...
Kishco Cutlery Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-23-1983
Reported in: 1984(15)ELT367(Bom)
1. A Company known as Kumar Brothers (India) Private Limited was incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 and was carrying on business as manufacturers and dealers in cutlery. The said Kumar Bros. (India) Pvt. Ltd. carried on business in the name and style of Kishco Cutlery . was changed to Kishco Cutlery Pvt. Ltd. On October 30, 1975, Shri K. G. Nariman and Ravi Nariman being the only shareholders of the Company transferred all their shares to one Shriyans Prasad Jain and others and thereafter the petitioner No. 1 Company became a deemed public company under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.2. The petitioners, to carry on the business as manufacturers and dealers in cutlery, are regularly importing the necessary raw materials required for the manufacture of cutlery. By a contract dated July 21, 1969 entered into between the petitioner No. 1 and one Mitsui & Company Limited, Japan, an order for import of 115 Metric tonnes of prime quality stainless s...
Rukminidevi Jalan Vs. Wealth-tax Officer, Circle-ix (Central), Bombay ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-23-1983
Reported in: (1984)39CTR(Bom)141; [1985]153ITR223(Bom); [1984]17TAXMAN62(Bom)
1. By this petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the legality of the order dated February 28, 1979, passed by the Commissioner of Wealth- tax, Central-I, Bombay, in exercise of the powers under s. 25(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957.2. The facts leading to the passing of the impugned order are as follows : The petitioner is assessed as an individual, both under the I.T. Act, 1961, as well as W.T. Act, 1957, for the last number of years. The petitioner became a partner in M/s. Ramkumar Jalan after the death of her husband, the Late Gajanand Jalan, in September, 1953. The petitioner filed returns under the W.T. Act for the assessment years 1957-58 to 1962-63 and in the said wealth-tax returns, the petitioner showed her interest in M/s. Ramkumar Jalan, as a partner. The WTO, while assessing the petitioner under W.T. Act, included a sum of Rs. 26,39,427 in the assets of M/s. Ramkumar Jalan, being the amount of disclosed income of the partners ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »