Mumbai Court September 1984 Judgments
Viswasrao Chudaman Patil Vs. Lok Ayukta, State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom136; 1985(1)BomCR108; (1983)86BOMLR506; 1985MhLJ54
Dharmadhikari J.1. the petitioner had applied for an appointment to the post of Honorary Paediatruician in the District Hospital at Dhule in pursuance of an advertisement issued by the Government of Maharashtra on 27th February 1984. According to him, the State of Maharashtra had constituted a Selection Board as per the rules contained in the Maharashtra Honorary Medical Officers ( Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1976. The Selection Board scrutinised the applications of three candidates viz. the petitioners, respondent No.2 Dr. Mudholkar and one Dr. Vikas Sonawane. They were also called for interview on 30th April 1984. The petitioner was selected by the said Selection Board and was thereafter appointed to the said post, vide appointment letter, sated 12th April 1984. He joined his duties as an Additional Honorary Medical Officer on 13th April 1984. Thereafter he received another letter from the Government of Maharashtra, dated 17th April 1984, informing him that in view o...
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Kumar Tulshan Vs. Fifth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1984
Reported in: (1985)11ITD537(Mum.)
1. This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1978-79 has three grounds. The main ground is in regard to the inclusion of Rs. 1,02,000 as income from undisclosed sources. The facts, as observed by the ITO in his order, are : 2. The assessee's sources of income are from horse racing, share of profit from the firm Tulshan Enterprises. In the year, the assessee had declared high denomination notes of Rs. 1,02,000 on 19-1-1978. A survey was conducted in the assessee's premises on 23-9-1980, at which time the assessee had given a statement regarding the high denomination notes. It was stated that Rs. 1,25,000 was received from the firm in which he is a partner which included 102 high denomination notes of Rs. 1,000 each. It was also explained that the firm Tulshan Enterprises was carrying on the business of advancing loans to parties. The ITO was not satisfied with the reasoning advanced by the assessee and since the addition was over Rs. 1 lakh, he made a draft order under ...
Tag this Judgment!N.K. Kapur, Assistant Collector of Customs and Others Vs. Kirloskar Cu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1984
Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR609; 1985(21)ELT392(Bom)
Kania, J.1. This is an appeal against a Judgment and order of Pendse, J., dated 25th June, 1979 allowing the aforesaid writ petition filed by the respondent herein. By the said judgment certain orders passed by the appellants were quashed and the appellants were directed to refund to the respondent an amount of Rs. 9,91,537.14.2. As we are inclined to accept the view taken by the learned trial Judge and as the facts have already been set out in the impugned judgment, it is not necessary to set out the same in detail here. We do propose, however, to set out such facts as are essential for the appreciation of the controversy arising before us.3. The main question which arises in this appeal is whether the imported component parts utilised for the assembly or manufacture of the type of diesel engines manufactured by the respondent are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 82/60, dated 6th August, 1960 issued under section 23 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 (hereinafter referred to as...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Keshrichand Fuladi and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1984
Reported in: (1985)IILLJ24Bom; 1985MhLJ1
Deshpande, J.1. By these two petitions, the petitioners pray for striking down the amendment to S. 2(4) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 (Bombay Act LXXIX of 1948), effected by S. 2(b) of the Maharashtra Act No. LXIV of 1977.2. The petitioners contend that they do not have any establishment as contemplated by the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 ('the Shops Act' for short). Petitioner No. 1 in Special Civil Application No. 1165 of 1978 has employed only one clerk who does miscellaneous work like keeping briefs and carrying them to the Court, and he never employs any organised labour which is involved in carrying on the legal profession by the petitioner.3. The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 1185 of 1978 is also an Advocate. Besides being an Advocate, he is also duly elected as the Secretary of the Akola Bar Association. The Shop Inspector of the first respondent, Municipal Council, Akola, issued instructions to this petitioner requiring him to regi...
Tag this Judgment!Khadelwal Traders Vs. the Akola Municipal Council
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Bom218
Ginwala, J.1. The petitioner which is a partnership firm and deals in bailing hoops and other commodities, seeks a writ of mandamus against the respondent Municipal Council (hereinafter referred to as 'the Council'), ordering it 'to forbear from claiming octroi on goods which are in transit from one octroi limit to another and which are neither consumed nor used within the municipal area' of the respondent and 'to refund the tax illegally collected' amounting to Rs. 809.59.2. The case of the petitioner is that on 25-3-1975, 1-4-1975 and 2-5-1975 it imported within the octroi limits of the Council three consignments of iron bailing hoops consisting of 500,300 and 550 bundles and were deposited in the bonded warehouse maintained by the Council. It exported 300 bundles out of the first consignment, 100 bundles out of the second and all the bundles of the third consignment on 25-3-1975 respectively after carrying out all the formalities and depositing the amount of octroi as required by th...
Tag this Judgment!Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and anr. Vs. Municipal Council and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1984
Reported in: 1985(1)BomCR472
A.A. Ginwala, J.1. The important question which inter alia is debated in this writ petition is whether under the provisions of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 (the Act for short) octroi is payable and recoverable only at the point of time of the entry of the goods within the octroi limits and not thereafter.2. A few facts which emerge from the material on record and which are relevant for the decision of this question may be stated at the outset. The first petitioner is a registered Society which is running a college within the municipal limits of the first respondent Municipal Council at Katol (Municipal Council for short). This College has been impleaded as the second petitioner. For the sake of convenience the first and second petitioners would hereinafter be referred to as 'the Society' and 'the College' respectively. By its resolutions passed on 5-9-1670 under Rule 4(iii) of the Maharashtra Municipalities (Octroi) Rules, 1968 (the Rules for short), the Municipal Council h...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Industry House Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1984
Reported in: (1985)11ITD502(Mum.)
1. The common ground that has been raised in these three appeals by the department for the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80 is that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in holding that the State education cess is allowable against the annual value under Section 24(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), and not against the gross income.2. The assessee is a company. The assessee owned certain immovable properties, which were in occupation of tenants. The State Government levied State education cess under the provisions of the Maharashtra Education and Employment Guarantee (Cess) Act, 1962 (' the Cess Act').Section 3 of the Cess Act provided for levy and collection in the manner indicated in the Act, education cess for the purpose of providing for the cost of promoting education in the State of Maharashtra. Section 4 of the Cess Act laid down the rates at which the cess was to be collected. Section 8 of the Cess Act laid down that if the actual occupier of ...
Tag this Judgment!Wasudeo Sonone and anr. Vs. Jagannath Ramlalji Jugele
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Bom43; 1985MhLJ565
ORDER1. This is a revision filed by the defendants against the order of the learned trial Court dated 26th July, 1984, by which their application dated 30-6-1984 for permission to cross-examine the plaintiff and his witnesses and to adduce evidence on their behalf was rejected.2. Briefly the facts are that the plaintiff-non-applicant filed a suit on 30-8-1983 for possession and damages aginst the applicants/defendants. The applicants/defendants filed their written statement on 12-1-1984. An application for amendment of the written statement filed by the defendants was allowed on 16-4-1984. The issues in the case were framed on 18-4-1984. The settling date was 20-4-1984 and, thereafter, the case was fixed for evidence on 21-4-1984. However, on the date the additional issues were framed on 19-4-1984, an application was filed on behalf of the applicants/defendants for giving the settling date or for fixing the case in the alternative for evidence after about a month. The case which was fi...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, A Corporation Constituted und ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1984
Reported in: [1984(49)FLR323]; (1985)ILLJ327Bom
1. The only dispute that survives in this petition is about the back wages awarded by the Industrial Court and granting reinstatement to the workmen on whose behalf the 1st Respondent, the Representative Union of the employees of the BEST Undertaking filed an application under Ss. 78 & 79 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act challenging the action of the petitioner is dismissing one Bansi Bhajanram for misconduct under Standing Order 20(1) for rash and negligent driving.2. Bansi Bhajanram was proceeded against by the Management for the aforesaid misconduct for causing an accident by driving Special Bus No. 833 in rash negligent manner and causing in that process injuries to seven members of the staff, who were travelling in the said bus. On the report of the Inquiry Officer Bansi Bhajanram was dismissed on 24th August, 1976. He filed two appeals to the General Manager and after his second appeal was dismissed on 12th November, 1976 the 1st Respondent gave a notice to the management c...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Navbharat Potteries (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1984
Reported in: (1985)11ITD493(Mum.)
1. The revenue is objecting to substitution of 'Rs. 30,183' as capital gains of the assessee in place and stead of 'Rs. 51,357' computed by the ITO in the assessment for 1978-79. The germane facts are in the way following.2. A certain extent of land from various Hissa numbers of Survey No. 29 of Nowpada village, Thane, had been purchased from its earlier owner, J.N. Michael Alwares, by a deed of sale dated 22-5-1948 by one Laxmidas Ramji Thakkar and the document states that he had obtained the conveyance as promoter of a company to be floated in the name Bharat Pottery & Chemical Works Ltd. It would appear that there was a mistake in the description of the Hissa numbers and to correct the same, a deed of rectification was brought forward on 29-10-1948. The consideration for the sale was Rs. 28,000. The company was incorporated on 4-4-1949.By a resolution dated 12-5-1949, the company had accepted the purchase made by the promoter, Laxmidas Ramji Thakkar. For a reason, the company h...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »