Mumbai Court February 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.
Atic Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise,
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-11-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC389DTri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an application for stay filed by M/s Atic Industries Ltd., Atul in connection with the appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda vide Order No. 2 of 1982. It is a transferred matter from the Board. The appellant had filed stay petition before the Board on the 10th day of July, 1982. The Learned Counsel for the appellant has filed a photostat copy of the letter dated the 31st January, 1983 issued by the Supdt. of Central Excise, Atul-Range II directing them to make the payment by the 5th day of February, 1983.This stay petition is in respect of excise duty of Rs. 33,25,832.35 refunded to the appellants in error. The appellants had been agitating their claim before various Courts and excise duty was refunded to the appellants in view of the Honourable Supreme Court Judgment. Thereafter a Notice under Section 35-A (2) of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 was issued and in the review proceedings, an order was passed by the Collector of Central E...
Ramanlal I. Joshi Vs. Ninth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-11-1983
Reported in: (1983)4ITD364(Mum.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 9-4-1981 of the AAC, by which he confirmed the order dated 19-2-1980 passed by the ITO under Section 185 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), rejecting the claim of the assessee for the benefits of registration under the Act.2. The assessee-firm was constituted by a partnership deed dated 14-6-1976. with effect from 1-4-1976. Shri V.R. Joshi was carrying on the business or profession of income-tax practitioner individually and by the aforesaid deed of partnership dated 14-6-1976, he took his daughter, a graduate of the Bombay University, as a partner in his professional firm giving her a ten per cent share in the profits of the firm. The asssesee firm applied for registration under Section 185, The ITO refused to grant registration to the assessee-firm on the ground that the daughter of Shri V.R. Joshi, namely, Miss B.V. Joshi, was not competent to practise as an income-tax practitioner under Section 288 of the ...
Mrs. Mary Kutty Thomas Vs. Mr. Pawar, D.C.P. Zone-iv and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1654
ORDERKotwal, J.1. The protector of law is sought to be placed in the dock by a private citizen while one judicial forum practically removed him from that situation. The petitioner herein is the wife of one Thomas Kurian alias Khaja, residing in Sion area of this metropolitan city along with her husband and the children. Her husband runs a restaurant as also a wine shop located at Antop Hill Road for quite some time under the name and. style as 'Janith Restaurant and Janith Wine Shop.' The wife claims that one Edward Albert Mathias and two of his associates were arrested by the Police attached to Matunga Police Station on July 28, 1982, for an offence under Sections 307, 353 of the Penal Code and Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. When they were produced before the 30th Court Kurla for remand, two of them ventilated a grievance that they have been ill-treated by Shri Pawar, Deputy Commissioner of Police Zone-V, whose office is located in the precincts of Matunga Police Stat...
Commandant Embarkation Hqrs. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC414DTri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant (Embarkation Headquarters) filed Revision Petition (referred hereafter as R.A) before the Government on 30th April, 1981 against the order No. S/49-143/80GS dated 18th of November, 1980 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay which was in relation to the order No. S/3-83/80GS dated 1st of July, 1980 passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Government Stores Section relating to Bill of Entry No. 975/ dated 12th of November, 1979. The R.A. was transferred to the Tribunal by virtue of Section 131B of the Customs Act as an appeal and accordingly is being disposed of as such.2. The petitioner claimed refund under Notification No. 211/212/77-Cus.on the ground that the imported goods were fabrics used in the manufacture of MIG Air-Craft. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim firstly on the ground that no invoice, contract etc. for the verification were produced and secondly that the continuity Bond register maintained by the Customs Department did not ...
Agfa Gevaert India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC270DTri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeal No. CD (Bom) of 8/82, dated 3-11-82 of M/s. Agfa Gevaert India Ltd. against order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) No.S/49-17/82 PA dated 30-4-82 came up for admission before me today in terms of proviso to Section 129-A(1) of the Customs Act. In view of the appellant's plea that the identical books had been released by the Customs House in the past, the appeal was admitted for hearing and decision, which was also done on the same day. During the course of the hearing the appellant's representative emphasised that an identical consignment of the same book had been released by the Customs House and in support of his statement he pointed the photo-copy of the invoice with the annexed appeal dated 3-11-82. The appellant's representative reiterated that the books contained photographs taken by famous photographers and were meant for professional photographers. Even in the past, the import of the same book had not been treated as prohibited on the grounds of obscenity un...
Bharti Surendra Shah Vs. Surendra Ramanlal Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Bom258; (1983)85BOMLR129
1. This appeal against an order made by the City Civil Court at Bombay is filed by the original plaintiff who has been refused an injunction which she sought against her husband, the respondent herein, trying to restrain him to enter the home, being Flat NO. B-3 situate in 'Sagar' building, Shree Sarvottam Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., 73/74 Juhal Road, Daulatrai Desai Marg, Santa Cruz (West) Bombay. By the impugned order, the trial Court dissolved the ex parte injuction holding that the conduct of the plaintiff indicated that taking advantage of the absence of the husband she entered upon the property and was now trying to secure the same to herself by excluding her husband. Further is was found that the home with regard to which the injuction was sought is an matrimonial home of both the spouses whose marriage subsists and such an injuction would not be available to one of the spouses against another.2-3. The parties are husband and wife. Plaintiff-wife seeks a declaration again...
Viren Natwarlal Shah Vs. Khursid Ahmed Jalil Ahmed and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1983
Reported in: 1985(2)BomCR693
V.S. Kotwal, J.1. A complaint under sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code came to be filed respondent herein the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Kurla, Bombay being the subject matter of Case No. 1168-N of 1980 which have been now renumbered as 163/S/81. A challenge to the maintainability of the said complaint is made in this proceeding filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code on behalf of the petitioner accused. 2. The gravamen of the allegations as levelled in the complaint are to the effect that some time in January 1979 the accused contacted the complainant and made a representation that he is prepared to extend the benefit of his experience in the marketing and such as he would like to work with him as partner in the Screen printing business. He also assured that he would act to the minimum benefit of the partnership. It is on the basis of placing reliance on this representation that according to the complainant, the partnership agreement ca...
Neena Sudarshan Wadia (Smt.) Vs. Venus Enterprises
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1983
Reported in: 1984(2)BomCR505
R.A. Aggarwal, J.1. Both these appeals involve chiefly the interpretation of the provisions of section 7(1)(i) and (ii) of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') and the relevant rules made thereunder in 1964, and therefore, they have been heard together and can be disposed of by a common judgment along with the subsidiary points.2. In Appeal No. 575 of 1982 from Order a learned Judge of the Bombay City Civil Court has construed the provisions of section 7(i) and (ii) of the said Act against the flat-owner i.e. the plaintiff and in favour of the promoter i.e. the defendants, while in Appeal No. 875 of 1982 from Order another Judge of the Bombay City Civil Court has held in favour of the flat owner and against the promoter.3. Facts in Appeal No. 575 of 1982 from order.Briefly stated, the plaintiff purchased from the defendants Flat No. 503 in 'Jaldarshan' situated ...
The Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. R.R. Gundu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-09-1983
Reported in: (1983)85BOMLR356; 1983MhLJ761
Masodkar, J.1. This second appeal filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation arises out of a suit filed by the respondents, which appears to be a firm manufacturing chaddars on power looms in Municipal House No. 466, situate at Sakhar Peth, Sholapur.2. The facts leading to the present appeal and the adjudications by the Courts below reveal a very curious state of affairs and entirely unsatisfactory results.3. The plaintiffs sought the relief of injunction by filing the present suit for the purpose of restraining the present appellant Corporation, which is duly constituted under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), from enforcing the provisions thereof against the plaintiffs' units and from recovering amounts of contribution and special contribution. This relief was claimed on the basis of the allegations that plaintiff No. 1 was a partnership firm having four power looms, one winding machine, one warping machine and one can...
Narhar Shamrao Deshpande Vs. Lakhu Raghu Dalvi (Since Decd.) Through H ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-08-1983
Reported in: 1984(1)BomCR14
R.D. Tulpule, J.1. This petition challenges the order passed by the Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No. SS-403/1976, confirming the order passed by the Collector, Sangli, in Tenancy Appeal No. 23 of 1975.2. Survey No. 119 of Village Padali in Khanpur Tahsil, District Sangli, according to the petitioner, was in his possession, the land belonged to the Datta Devasthan, Vita, a public trust. According to the petitioner, this land was originally leased by a registered lease deed on the 28th of September, 1903 by the predecessor of the respondent-tenant. The respondent was inducted in the land in the year, 1947. Thereafter it is his contention that as the petitioner landlord was a minor, upon his majority, he served a notice upon the tenant on 7th October, 1960 seeking to terminate his tenancy and restoration of possession of land for personal cultivation. He filed that suit on the 17th of November, 1960 before the Tenancy Aval Karkun.3. During the pendency of that proceeding it ap...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »