Mumbai Court November 1984 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.
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Khimji Velji and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: [1985]58STC95(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference on a case stated by the Sales Tax Tribunal under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act').2. The facts giving rise to this reference are as follows :The respondent-firm is a registered dealer under the said Act. In respect of the assessment of the respondent for the periods 1st April, 1961, to 31st March, 1962, and 1st April, 1962, to 31st March, 1963, it was found by the Sales Tax Officer concerned that the respondent had collected amounts of Rs. 1,115.67 and Rs. 993.66 respectively in excess of the tax payable by the respondent under the said Act. The Sales Tax Officer ordered the forfeiture of these amounts on the ground that they represented the excess collection of tax by the respondent. The respondent preferred first appeals before the Assistant Commissioner against the orders of the Sales Tax Officer in respect of the aforesaid two assessment periods but these appeals were dismissed. The responden...
Dharamdas B. Katira and anr. Vs. O.P. Bhardwaj and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR522
A.D. Tated, J.1. The petitioners, who are accused in Criminal Case No. 1474/S of 1981 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 23rd Court, Esplanade, Bombay, filed this petition under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code and Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the proceedings against them.2. The respondent No. 1 filed a complaint against the petitioners alleging that on or about 6th July, 1978 both the accused, who are husband and wife, approached him at his office and represented to him that they had contracted to purchase the import licence in the name of their firm M/s. L.D. Traders. They further represented to him that they had already paid Rs. 2,00,000/- for the purchase of a licence for importing 500 Metric Tons of Industrial Crude Palm Oil from Singapore under the said licence. They also represented to him that they had contracted with Hindustan Lever Ltd., Bombay, to sell the said stock of 500 Metric Tons of Industrial Crude Palm Oil at the rate of Rs. 6,700...
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Manohar Mahadeo Vaira ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC377
V.V. Vaze, J.1. Kallappa Mallappa Vairage an agriculturist of village Alas, Taluka Shirol in Kohlapur district came to Sangli for cure of his daughter Janabai but by a quirk of fate the visit entailed not only in further damage to the health and well being of his daughter Janabai but also a permanent disability to his grand son Manohar aged nine years. All the three of them stayed in the house of Kallappa's sister situated on the southern side of Sangli-Miraj road and in the evening crossed the road when they were knocked down by S.T. bus coming from Miraj side.2. As a result of the accident the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sangli awarded damages for injuries to Kallappa and Janabai as well as Manohar who had received grievous form of the injuries.3. The Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation did not challenge the award as respects the other members of Kallappa's family but have filed the present appeal challenging the grant of compensation of Rs. 40,000/- awarded to Manohar ...
Krishan Avatar Bahadur Vs. Col. IrwIn Extross and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR443; (1984)86BOMLR596; [1986]59CompCas417(Bom)
1. The petitioner in this petition, who is the accused in Criminal Case No.63/8 of 1981 pending in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Girgaum, Bombay, was prosecuted for an offence under section 630 of the companies Act, 1956, filed this petition under section 482, Cr PC, for quashing the criminal proceedings and in the alternative for staying the criminal proceeding pending the decision in Suit No.276 of 1972 filed by the petitioner on the original side of this court and also in the alternative for staying further proceeding of the criminal court pending the hearing and final disposal of Suit No,3315 of 1981 filed by the petitioner in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay for a declaration that he is a tenant of the premises occupied by him.2. The petitioner-accused was in the employment of respondent No.1 company (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') from June, 1962, to June 30, 1981, when his services were terminated. While the petitioner was in the employment ...
Aditya V. Birla Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: (1985)46CTR(Bom)169; [1986]157ITR470(Bom); 1985MhLJ688; [1985]20TAXMAN391(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The petition involves the interpretation of section 80RRA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It reads thus :'80RRA. (1) Where the gross total income of an individual who is a citizen of India includes any remuneration received by him in foreign currency from any employer (being a foreign employer or an Indian concern) for any service rendered by him outside India, there shall, accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the total income of the individual, a deduction from such remuneration of an amount equal to fifty per cent. thereof : Provided that where the individual renders continuous service outside India under or for such employer for a period exceeding thirty-six months, no deduction under this section shall be allowed in respect of the remuneration for such service relating to any period after the expiry of the thirty-six months aforesaid. (2) The deduction under this section shall be allowed - (i) in the Case of an individu...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Premier Automobiles Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: [1985]59STC147(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 read with section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Act'). The question referred to us for our determination is as follows :'Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that 'service pool charges' recovered by the respondent-dealer from their distributors does not form a part and parcel of the sale price as defined under section 2(h) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?'The facts giving rise to the reference are as follows : The respondent-company is a registered dealer under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 and under the said Act. The respondent was assessed by the Sales Tax Officer concerned for the period from 1st July, 1964 to 30th June, 1965 under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as well as under the said Act, on May 7, 1969. On examination of the books of account of the respondent the Sales Tax Officer found that the respondent had collected 'servic...
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay Vs. Toshniwal Bro ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: [1985]58STC161(Bom)
Smt. Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. M/s. Toshniwal Brothers Private Limited, who are the assessees are holders of a registration certificate under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. For the calendar year 1963, they were assessed to Central sales tax. As per the assessment order they were required to pay an additional amount of Rs. 30,637.88. In respect of this additional amount of sales tax a demand notice was served on the assessees under section 9, sub-section (2), of the Central Sales Tax Act read with section 38(4) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act. The petitioners preferred an appeal from this order. The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax by his order dated 24th December, 1983 admitted the appeal on part payment of Rs. 6,700 instead of payment of the full amount of additional tax. He also granted stay of recovery proceedings in respect of the said sales tax dues. The said order was to be operative till the date of the decision of the appeal petition ...
Kamgar Utkarsha Sabha Vs. Benett Coleman and Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ798Bom
Sawant, J.1. The grievance of the petitioner - Union is that the Industrial Court aid not grant the request made by it to hear its application dated 3.8.1984 filed under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for its recognition along with the application of the 2nd respondent Union filed by it in 1980 for the very same purpose. The order refusing to hear the two applications together is impugned in this petition.2. We do not find any substance in this petition for the following reasons:A plain reading of the scheme for recognition of Unions given in Chapter II! of the Act shows that its object is to avoid mushroom growth of unions and to secure industrial peace. Towards this object, a provision has been made that in one Undertaking there shall not be more than one recognised Union and once a Union is recognised it alone will have the right to represent the workers in their dispu...
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Babalal Daud Mulani a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: I(1985)ACC362; 1985(1)BomCR701
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation against the Award made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sangli, in Motor Accidents Claim No. 33 of 1980, awarding an amount of Rs. 36,000/- with future interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum from the date of application till realisation of the amount, vide order dated 20th September, 1982.2. It is an admitted position that an accident took place on 5th April, 1980 at about 5-30 p.m. on the Sangli-Indapur road. It was the case of the claimants that on the evening of 5th April, 1980 one Moula Babalal Mulani and Rambhau Dhondiram Shinde were returning to their village Mangrul from Tasgaon on a motor-cycle. Deceased Moula was driving motor-cycle and Shinde was sitting on the pillion seat. At about 5-15 p.m. when they were negotiating a sharp curve, they were dashed by a S.T. bus coming from the opposite side. The head of Moula was smashed and he died on the spot. For the death o...
Tulsidas Kesharlal Blyani Vs. Kasabai (Smt.) W/O Bhajanlal and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR583; 1984MhLJ1007
B.A. Masodkar, J.1. This is the original defendant's civil revision application that questions the order made below Exhibit 23 in Special Civil Suit No. 76 of 1981. By that order, the Court below ordered that the petitioner-defendant was to furnish a solvent security to the extent of Rs. 45,000/- on or before February 21, 1984 in order to secure the respondents-plaintiffs' claim in the suit, and that in case of default, his defence would stand struck off.2. That order came to be made upon an application that was purported to have been filed under Order 38, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').3. The respondent-Plaintiffs filed the suit on August 11, 1981 on the basis of the claim that the petitioner-defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 33,903.25p. because of non-payment of five deposit receipts. That claim included the claim for interest and notice charges. Along with the plaint, an application was filed under Order 38, Rule 5 of the Co...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »