Mumbai Court December 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.
Phoenix Chemical Works (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1983
Reported in: (1984)7ITD553(Mum.)
1. These three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 24-3-1983 of the Commissioner (Appeals) relating to the assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75. They raise a common issue for decision. Hence, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee is a limited company deriving income from business in the manufacture and sale of chemicals. In the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81, the ITO found that the assessee had sold certain parts of its machinery at prices considerably below their written down value. The actual figures are that the sale proceeds fell short of the written down value by Rs. 29,990 in the assessment year 1979-80 and Rs. 38,915 in the assessment year 1980-81. The assessee explained that the parts of the machinery were no longer usable and so they were scrapped and sold as such resulting in the aforesaid losses. The wr...
Maharashtra State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd. and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1983
Reported in: 1984(1)BomCR257; 1984MhLJ364
B.A. Masodkar, J.1. The neat question of law that is posed and has arisen in this petition is with regard to the interpretation of section 43 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Tenancy Act).2. That question has the context of the following facts and circumstances:Petitioner No.1 is a Co-operative Society and a Bank. It is so registered and governed by the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter called the Act). By a registered deed of mortgage, of May 12, 1964, respondents Nos. 1 to 3 mortgaged their property, being Survey No. 59/2, Gat No. 219, admeasuring 5 acres and 7 gunthas, situate at village Belval, Taluka Bhusawal, district Jalgaon, with the petitioner Bank against a loan advance of Rs. 3,500/-. The said property was in the tenancy of one Ramchandra Nehete. He died in the year 1963, and respondents Nos. 1 to 3 are his heirs inheriting his interest in the said property upon his death. Ramchandra got that p...
Fifth Income-tax Officer Vs. Master Bankimchandra Sumanlal.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1983
Reported in: [1986]17ITD931(Mum)
ORDERPer Shri I. S. Nigam, Accountant Member - This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the AAC.2. The assessee is a minor represented by his father and natural guardian Shri Sumanlal Goverdhandas. Return was filed showing income from interest amounting to Rs. 13,379. which included interest of Rs. 10,531 received from the firm Bankimchandra & Co. in which the assessee had invested Rs. 20,000 by way of capital and in which he was admitted to the benefits of partnership. For default of statutory notices under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). the assessment was made by the ITO ex parte under section 144 of the Act. In this ex parte assessment, the ITO held that the nature and source of investment of Rs. 20,000 in the firm Bankimchandra & Co. in which the assessee was admitted to the benefits of the partnership was not satisfactorily explained and similarly the nature and source of investments by way of interest bearing advances to various parties, ...
Mahesh C. Mathur Vs. Second Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1983
Reported in: (1984)7ITD727(Mum.)
1. The assessee, an individual, is a chartered accountant by profession. Apart from his individual proprietary concern, the assessee is also a partner in a chartered accountants' firm. The accounting year followed by the assessee for his own profession is the year ending 31-8-1976. The firm in which he is a partner, on the other hand, follows the financial year as the accounting year. We are concerned in this appeal with the assessment year 1977-78. For this year, the profit of the firm allocable to the assessee was Rs. 1,114.2. In the return filed by him, he did not show this amount as taxable in his hands. On the other hand, he showed his share of profit at Rs. 900. The reasons he gave were that the income from the partnership firm is also professional income and he has the right to record that income according to the method of accounting he chooses. It was the assessee's case that as far as the income from the firm is concerned, he has chosen the cash basis. Since he has drawn only...
Fakirchand M. Shah Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1983
Reported in: 1985(20)ELT38(Bom)
1. The petitioner is carrying business as a wholesaler and retailer in engines and parts thereof in the firm name and style of M/s. Honesty Trading Corporation as the sole proprietor. The petitioner is an 'established importer', within the meaning of Imports and Exports Control Act, 1947 and Imports (Control) Order, 1955. The petitioner, as an established importer, was granted quota certificated by the Government of India and on the strength of the same, the petitioner secured from time to time import licences and quota certificates enabling him to import into Indian various goods in accordance with the policy laid down by the Government. The petitioner was holding eleven quota certificates of the aggregate value of Rs. 8,38,451/- in the year 1977. The quota certificates were for import of items covered under Serial Nos. 293, 295 and 297 of Part IV, Section IV of Import Trade Control Policy for the year April 1976 - March, 1977. The subject under these three items was 'Motor Vehicle Pa...
JaIn Exports Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1983
Reported in: 1985(20)ELT35(Bom)
1. The short question which falls for determination in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is about the validity of an exemption notification dated September 20, 1979 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department to Revenue, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 25 of the Customs Act. The Order recites that in the light of shortage of caustic soda within the country, it has been decided to import 10,000 tonnes of caustic soda to make good the shortage in the local production. It further recites that since the landed cost of the imported product, after payment of full customs duty, would make the imported goods costlier than the price at which the indigenously produced caustic soda is being sold, it was felt necessary to extend exemption from customs duty on the imported caustic soda. Accordingly, the Central Government exempted import of 10,000 tonnes of caustic soda, to be imported through the State Chemicals ...
N.N. Khubchandani Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1983
Reported in: 1988(4)BomCR139
S.K. Desai, J.1. The petitioner before us is one Notandas K. Khubchandani, a resident and businessman of Ulhasnagar. He is an elected Municipal Councillor of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Council. In paragraph 1 of the petition he has stated that he pays large income tax, that he has never been charge sheeted for committing any crime and has served as Chairman of Public Works Committee for three successive terms.2. Section 51 of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 provides for the election of a President and co-option of Councillors. Section 51(A) which was subsequently introduced makes provision for appointment of a Vice-President and it is provided that every Municipal Council governed by the Act shall have a Vice-President who is to be appointed by the President from amongst the elected or deemed to be elected Councillors. The appointment is to be made before the first meeting convened by the President of the Council is held or within seven days from the date on which the vacancy in...
Gangabisan Panalal Joshi and ors. Vs. Dattatraa Chandrasa Bilade and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Bom332; 1984(2)BomCR1; (1983)86BOMLR97; 1985MhLJ305
1. (After stating the facts and finding of the lower Court in paras1 to 6, His Lordship proceeded).2. Mr. Abhale has assailed the finding of the learned Assistant Judge and has contended that there was no warrant for interfering with the finding of fact recorded by the Court of first instance. In support of his contention he relied upon a judgment of Mysore High Court, as it then was, in Fitter Peera Saheb v. K. Balchandra Rao Air 1972 Mys 14. It has been mentioned in this judgment that in ordinary circumstances when the owner says that he requires his premises for his own use and occupation, the Court must start with a presumption that the land lord's claim is true. It has lord is false is not sufficient to rebut that presumplion. I am unable to accept the proposition contained in this judgment. This is contrary to what has been said by the Supreme Court in M. M. Quasim v. Manohar Lal Sharma, : [1981]3SCR367 , about the approach to be adopted by the courts under the Rent Acts. The Sup...