Mumbai Court February 1984 Judgments
income-tax Officer Vs. Anwar K. PorbandarwallA.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-1984
Reported in: [1984]8ITD658(Mum)
ORDERPer Shri M. R. Sikka, Judicial Member - This appeal has been filed by the department against the order dated 15-2-1983 of the AAC, whereby, he has held that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act 1961 (the Act).2. The assessee had been in possession of the flat in question situated at Bandra as a tenant under one Smt. Khatijabai since the year 1972. He purchased this flat from smt. Khatijabai on 17-7-1976 for Rs. 15,000. Later on, he sold the same to Smt. Zohrakhanubai Alomohamed on 17-10-1977 for Rs. 46,500 and declared the net capital gains at Rs. 26,451. In the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1978-79, the assessee claimed the benefit of section 54(1). The ITO was of the view that sine the assessee had used the flat for his residence as an owner only for one year and three months and not for two years immediately preceding the date of transfer, i.e., 17-10-1977, he was not entitled to the exemption under sectio...
Tag this Judgment!Government Medical Stores Depot Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1984
Reported in: (1984)(17)ELT425Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. S/49-782/82 M dated 26-6-82 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeal) Bombay, by which he confirmed the Order-in-Original bearing No. S/8-10-3628/80 M dated 8-2-82 passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, M.C.D. by which he rejected the appellants' claim for refund based on shortage.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are not in dispute. The Consignee, M/s. Government Medical Stores Depot, Directorate General of Health Services, Bombay, imported 1 container (15) drums of Abate Technical from USA Ex. S/S. 'EXPORT CHAMPION'.After the first check the goods were cleared on payment of duty. The appellants cleared 14 out of 15 drums on 4-7-80. Since they found one drum damaged a detailed survey was held on 15-7-80 under Customs supervision and the survey disclosed a shortage of 208 Kgs. The appellants, therefore, claimed refund of proportionate duty before the Assistant Collector of Custom...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1984
Reported in: [1986]159ITR667(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference on a case stated under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessment years involved are 1964-65 and 1965-66, for which the respective previous years are the previous years ended October 31, 1963 and October 31, 1964, respectively. The only point for consideration in the appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was as to whether the 'Retirement Gratuity Reserves' of Rs. 20,91,490 (assessment year 1964-65) and Rs. 20,83,233 (assessment year 1965-66) respectively appearing in the books of the assessee as on the opening day of the relevant previous year was entitled to be included in the capital computation for the purposes of the assessment under rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. In the relevant balance-sheets of the assessee, the amounts were shown as provision for service gratuity. The amounts were worked out on a certain basis and were not in the nature of lump sum appropriations. It was not di...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Waman Toke and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Bom345; 1984(2)BomCR268
Jahagirdar, J.1. The petitioners in writ petition No. 38 of 1984 are the owners of what has been described as touring cinemas whereas the petitioner in writ petition No. 240 of 1984 is a person who is carrying on the business of of Hotel kavita in thane. In the said hotel he is exhibiting video cassettes. The petitioners in both the petitions are aggrieved by certain provisions contained in bBombay Entertainment duty [Amendment] ordinance 1983, hereinafter referred to as the ordinance. The petitioners are so aggrieved because,according to them those provisions make them subject to a tax which is illegal and ultra vires the constitution. The challenge is to those provisions of the ordinance which seek to ............. petitioners are engagedin entertainment business. The ordinance itself has come into force with effect from 1 ST. JAN A 1984 and it seeks to amend the provisions contained in the b Bombay entertainment duty act, 1923, hereinafter referred to as 'the principal act.2. The pr...
Tag this Judgment!Mehta Sheth and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1984
Reported in: [1986]17ITD435(Mum)
ORDER1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the AAC.2. The assessee filed the return in the status of a firm. The ITO for default of statutory notices completed the assessment under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), in the status of an unregistered firm. In this ex parte assessment, the assessees business income was estimated at Rs. 10,500 and besides Rs. 19,152, was added as income from undisclosed sources for unexplained cash deposits. Here it will be necessary to point out that against the making of the assessment under section 144, there was an application under section 146 of the Act filed by the assessee on 20-4-1981 praying for the cancellation of the ex parte assessment and making of fresh assessment in accordance with law. No orders on this application under section 146 appear to have been passed by the ITO. The assessee, however, filed an appeal against the assessment order to the AAC. In this appeal, the AAC held, firstly, that the d...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Ahura Shipping and Engg. Co. (P.)
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1984
Reported in: (1984)8ITD435(Mum.)
1. This is a departmental appeal. The asses-see is a company and the proceedings relate to its assessment for the assessment year 1979-80.The assessee is mainly engaged in carrying out large scale repairs to ships and executing allied engineering jobs in respect of ships, barges, off shore oil rigs, tankers, etc. The operations consist of getting various components and equipments manufactured or fabricated in its own workshop as well as by sub-contractors according to the required drawings and designs and then assembling and utilising them for and in the course of carrying out the repair assignments.2. Stating that the execution of such jobs involves the following stages: (ii) Purchase of substantial quantities of engineering materials such as iron and steel sheels, bars, angles, tubes, etc., as well as several other components; (iii) Conversion of these into required forms and shapes by various machining and engineering processes; (iv) Assembling and installing such processed compone...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Ngef Aeg Engg. Co. Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1984
Reported in: (1984)8ITD445(Mum.)
1. In this appeal, the revenue contests the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the case of NGEF AEG Engg. Co. Ltd. for the assessment year 1976-77 on the following ground: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that for the purpose of allow-ability of relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, the initial year should be reckoned as assessment year 1973-74 in which year the assessee came to employ the requisite number of persons although production had started in the assessment year 1971-72 in which year the assessee however had not employed requisite number of persons and erred further in directing the ITO to give deduction under Section 80J in the assessment year 1976-77 which happened to be the sixth year from the initial assessment year in which production was started. The assessee, an electrical engineering company, had, for the assessment year 1976-77, claimed, inter alia, deduction under Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City-i, Bombay Vs. New Swadeshi Sug ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1984
Reported in: (1984)41CTR(Bom)376; [1985]151ITR220(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is a reference in a case stated under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, as applied to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Surtax Act'). The questions referred to us for out determination are as follows :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the entire amount standing to credit of the General Reserves as on the first day of the previous year should be included in the capital computation for the purpose of the Surtax Act, 1964, without reducing therefrom any sum in respect of the amount capitalised subsequently during the succeeding year for issuing bonus shares ? (2) If the answer to question No. 1 above is in the negative, then whether Rs. 27,18,000 being the entire amount capitalised, or Rs. 15,19,101 up capital for bonus share issued, should be reduced from general reserves as on the 1st day of the previous year ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstan...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sudarshan Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1984
Reported in: (1984)42CTR(Bom)1; [1986]159ITR629(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The assessee, Sudarshan Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd., carries on business of manufacture of organic and inorganic pigments. The assessee entered into a collaboration agreement dated February 23, 1965, with M/s. H. Kohnstam and Co. Inc., New York, under which the foreign company agreed to give technical know-how to the assessee-company for a period of five years in the first instance concerning processes for the manufacture of certain intermediates and pigments. Under the agreement, there were certain items which were already being manufactured by the assessee-company. The foreign company agreed to give technical know-how in respect of these items. The foreign company also agreed to give technical know-how in respect of other items which were not manufactured by the assessee-company and which the assessee-company proposed to manufacture with the help of the technical assistance provided under the agreement by the foreign company. The agreement was for a per...
Tag this Judgment!Amartara Limited, Bombay Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1984
Reported in: 1989(39)ELT523(Bom)
1. This petition concerns the classification for Excise purposes of 'rigid grade PVC non-adhesive tape' manufactured by the Petitioners in four colours.2. In May 1971, Item 59 was introduced in the Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. It reads thus :'Tariff Item Description Rate of duty. 59. Electric Insulating tapes, in or 10% ad valorem.' in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power.3. On 19th June, 1971 a trade notice was issued by the Bombay Central Excise Collectorate which stated that electric insulating tape was impregnated or coated with insulating compounds used for covering joints in, and open ends of electric wires and cables. Such tape might have for backing textiles, cellulosic film or paper. It was liable to Excise duty under Item 59.4. On 17th April, 1972 the Petitioners wrote to the Superintendent of Central Excise stating that they had started manufacture of non- adhesive tapes which, they claimed, fe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »