Mumbai Court March 1984 Judgments
Babubhai Patel and Co. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1984
Reported in: (1985)(5)LC1709Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The application for stay arises out of Order No. S/10-122/83C dt.12-9-83 passed by the Addl. Collector of Customs, Bombay, under which consignment, described as Diethylene Diamine Hydrate of CIF value of Rs. 1,93,448 covered by Bill of Entry No. 2206/89 was ordered to be confiscated and a fine of Rs. 2,00,000 only in lieu of confiscation was imposed. The applicants have filed an appeal against this order which has been registered under No. 1296 of 1983. They had not yet paid the fine and cleared the goods, but request that pending disposal of the appeal they may be allowed to clear the imported goods on payment of duty but without payment of fine on the following amongst other grounds: (a) The imported goods are not a drug canalised under Appendix 9 of the Import Policy. (b) What is canalised by Appendix 9 are the Active Ingredients of drugs named in Appendix 9, as Active Ingredients and not in any other form. (c) The Asstt. Drug Controller of the Customs House as well as the other...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Paramount Premises (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1984
Reported in: (1984)9ITD263(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the department is directed against the order dated 12-10-1981 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The assessee is a private limited company. The assessment year is 1978-79. The previous year ended on 31-3-1978.3. At the relevant time the assessee was engaged in the construction of three buildings. Under the method of accounting followed by the assessee and accepted by the department, the profits were offered for assessment when the construction of buildings and sale of flats comprised therein were completed. In the relevant accounting year, the construction of the buildings and sale of the flats had not been completed. Consequently, all the expenses incurred during the year were carried forward to the next year.4. On the scrutiny of the profit and loss account, the ITO found that the assessee had credited, inter alia, following five amounts in the relevant accounting year:(i) Interest on sale deposits 20,000(ii) Interest on temporary loans from the surplus funds ...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ratnabai Balu Kadam a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1984
Reported in: II(1985)ACC422; [1986]60CompCas677(Bom); [1985]151ITR496a(Bom)
Sawant, J.1. These two appeals have been heard and are disposed of together by a common judgment as they arise out of the same accident and the same judgment and order dated February 7, 1980, of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sangli. The short facts of the case are as follows :On June 8, 1978, a motor truck bearing No. MHL 4258 was crossing an unmanned gate which was in between Salgare and Belanki railway station. One passenger train was coming from Salgare towards Belanki railway station on its way to Miraj. The truck crossing the unmanned gate and the said passenger train collided on the railway track and considerable damage was caused to the body of the truck. Balu Kadam, who was the cleaner on the said truck, was seriously injured in the said accident and he breathed his last on his way to Miraj where he was taken for treatment. His widow and minor son, therefore, filed the present claim of compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sangli. To the application fo...
Tag this Judgment!inspecting Assistant Commissioner Vs. Chandpur Sugar Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1984
Reported in: [1986]17ITD795(Mum)
ORDERPer Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member - The revenue is aggrieved against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the interest of Rs. 2,64,279 received by the assessee-company was not assessable.2. The assessee-company was setting up a sugar mill during the accounting year under consideration ending 31-3-1978. It had borrowed funds from Industrial Finance Corpn., Indian Overseas Bank, U.P. State Sugar Corpn., etc., on which during the relevant accounting year it paid interest of Rs. 9,13,380. The part of the fund so received was deposited in short-term deposits with the banks on which the assessee earned interest of Rs. 2,64,279. The assessee claimed that the said interest receipts should be set off against the interest payments made by the assessee and, therefore, no interest income was assessable in the hands of the assessee-company. The ITO, however, rejected this contention holding that the interest of Rs. 2,64,279 earned by the assessee was assessable under the hea...
Tag this Judgment!Koel Sales and Service Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1984
Reported in: [1984]56STC151(Bom)
Shah, J.1. This is a reference under section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), made at the instance of the applicant and the short question which arises is whether oil engine is agricultural machinery or constitutes only a component or part of agricultural machinery ?2. The facts leading to this reference are these :The applicant is a manufacturer of diesel oil engines which are used as prime movers of pumping sets. On 26th April, 1974, the applicant filed an application under section 52 of the Act for determining the question as to whether the sale of prime mover oil engine of the description given in Invoice No. E/01/40803 to M/s. Kelkar Bros., Poona, will fall in entry No. 22 of Schedule E, or whether the said prime mover oil engine is covered by entry No. 12 of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. For our purpose it is not necessary to refer to the detailed description of the oil engine in the said invoice. All that is to be borne...
Tag this Judgment!Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay Vs. Suryakant Natvarlal Surati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1984
Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR254; [1986]59CompCas147(Bom)
Bharucha J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of a learned single judge dismissing an applicants' chamber summons in execution proceedings of a decree passed on admission.2. The appreciate the contentions, the facts need to be set out. On January 18, 1966, Kamani Brothers P. Ltd. (now referred to as 'the company') deposited, with intention to create an equitable mortgage, the title deeds of an immovable property called 'Kamani House' with the trustees of the Kamani Engineering Corporation Limited Employees' Gratuity Fund . It is an admitted position that the charge created by the equitable mortgage was not registered under the provisions of the Companies Act.3. The trustees of the gratuity fund filed in this Court a suit ( being Suit No. 308 of 1977 ) against the company on the equitable mortgage and prayed for realisation of the security.4. On December 3, 1977, a decree on admission was obtained in the suit . The decree recorded that the mortgagors (the company)...
Tag this Judgment!Ghatge Patil Transport Pvt. Ltd. Vs. B.K. Etale and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Bom167; [1984(49)FLR86]; (1984)IILLJ121Bom
Dharmadhikari, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed against the finding on he preliminary issue recorded by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kolhapur vide his order dated 24th July, 1979 in I.D.A. Reference No. 79 of 1976. Before the Labour Court the employee had challenged the legality and validity of the Departmental Inquiry held against him on several grounds. The Learned Presiding Officer found that there was no substance in any other contention except the one viz. that he was not permitted to be defended by some well-wisher from outside or some Union representative from outside or through a legal practitioner and, therefore, the inquiry was vitiated, it being violative of the principles of natural justice. It is part of the order which is challenged in his Writ Petition by the petitioners-employers.2. Shri Shetye, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, contended before us that the learned Presiding Officer committed an error, which is apparent on the face of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramnath Jagannath Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1984
Reported in: [1984]57STC46(Bom)
Kania, J.1. These two references arise on a common statement of the case made by the Sales Tax Tribunal under section 34(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said Act'). The facts in both the cases are, for all practical purposes, similar except that the periods under assessment are different. The period under assessment in Sales Tax Reference No. 8 of 1971 is from 1st April, 1955, to 31st March, 1956, and the period under assessment in Sales Tax Reference No. 9 of 1971 is 1st April, 1956, to 31st March, 1957. The question referred to us in both the references is identical. It is, in these circumstances, that both these references are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The question referred to us for determination in these references is as follows :'Whether on a proper interpretation of the letter dated 28th July, 1965, and the arguments made before the Deputy Commissioner, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the dealer had agreed to get ...
Tag this Judgment!Sitaram Laxminarayan Rathi Vs. Sitaram Kashiram Koli and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1984
Reported in: 1984(2)BomCR819; 1985MhLJ430
Sharad Manohar, J.1. The short question that arises in this revision application is whether a post dated cheque is a negotiable instrument within the meaning of the Bombay Money Lenders Act.2. The relevant facts are as follows :---On 19-5-1973, a sum of Rs. 1,500/- was purported to be advanced by the petitioner (hereinafter 'the plaintiff') to respondent No. 1 acting on behalf of the respondents (hereinafter 'the defendants'). Admittedly the amount was paid against three post dated cheques of Rs. 5000/- each but the total amount actually paid was not Rs. 1,500/- but Rs. 1,410/- only. A sum of Rs. 90/- was purported to be deducted as commission payable by the defendants to the plaintiffs. However, it is fairly conceded by Mr. Soni, the learned Advocate appearing before me for the petitioner that this was in fact a deduction of interest in advance. But his explanation is meaningless because if the interest was deducted even before the advance was made it only means that the sum advanced ...
Tag this Judgment!Laxman Vs. Sukhdeo
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom125; 1985(2)BomCR260; (1983)86BOMLR330; 1984MhLJ418
Waikar, J.1. This is a reference made by the learned single judge in Civil Revision Application No. 375 of 1980, as there are conflicting decisions of the learned single Judges of this Court on the question whether the Agricultural Lands Tribunal, (hereinafter called 'ALT'), under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, is competent to make a reference and whether the reference answered by the Officer is valid and legal?2. In the present case, the issue arose this way. Deceased Kasabai was the holder of the land in question and during her lifetime, suo motu proceedings for transfer of ownership of the field were started. Sukhdeo, (the present defendant) contended that he was a tenant, while the contention of the landlady was that he was taken as a partner in cultivation by her. This issue was decided by the ALT holding that he was a tenant. In the appeal that was preferred, the Special Deputy Collector observed that the ALT had no power to decide the status of ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »