Mumbai Court November 1985 Judgments
J.N. Baxi and Co. Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-1985
Reported in: 1991(33)LC701(Bombay)
Kurdukar, J.1. It is not at all necessary to set out in detail the various challenges made by the petitioner against the impugned order dated June 25, 1984 passed by the Deputy Collector of Customs, New Custom House, Bombay.2. This petition must succeed only on the short ground that the impugned order does not contain the reasons for arriving at the findings recorded therein. Shri Gomes learned Counsel appearing in support of this petition urged that the purported outturn report on the basis of which the show cause notice was issued and thereafter the order was made, do not indicate any basis. The outturn report was disputed by the petitioner. The petitioner made a written request to the authority while showing cause that witness summons be issued to the Bombay Port Trust Docks Manager or Deputy Docks Manager or the Officer concerned from the Bombay Port Trust who has issued the outturn report. Since this request was turned down it amounts to denial of opportunity and therefore the imp...
Tag this Judgment!Babasaheb Krishna Karande and Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-19-1985
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR716
V.S. Kotwal, J.1. On the basis of credible report that stolen articles are stored in the house of original accused No. 1 at village Hupari in Kolhapur District. Police Head Constable Kurhade raided the house in the presence of panchas when accused Nos. 1 to 3 who are near relations were present. In search 61 sugar bags were found with a particular sea [marks in ink indicating that those were filled in at Bhogavati Sugar factory while some marks were indicated that those were loaded in the railway wagon. Those came to be attached under panchanama. Investigation started and it was revealed that these sugar bags were clandestinely removed by breaking open railway wagon at Kolhapur on the night intervening 13th and 14th of March, 1976. It also transpired that some other accused were involved who included original accused Nos. 4, 5 and 7. It is alleged by the prosecution that these three persons hired a truck and went to railway yard at Kolhapur on the night of 13th March, broke open the wa...
Tag this Judgment!Janata Trust Vs. Fifth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-18-1985
Reported in: (1986)16ITD147a(Mum.)
1. These two appeals the first by the assessee and the other by the department -pertain to the assessment year 1980-81 and arise out of the common order of the AAC. They are disposed of by this common order.2. The assessee is a trust. A copy of the trust deed has been filed before us and it shows that the trust was created on 17-10-1977 by well known socialists of this country, like Shri N.G. Goray, Shri Rohit Dave, Shri Prem Bhasin, Shri Surendra Mohan and others. The trust deed recites in the preamble as follows : (1) The Janata, an English Socialist Weekly, was founded in January, 1946, by a group of socialist intellectuals, political workers and trade unionists with the purpose of disseminating democratic socialist thought, stimulating discussion of" national and international problems from a democratic socialist perspective, and promoting struggles of the down-trodden for radical social transformation. (2) Under the able stewardship of such national leaders and dedicated socialis...
Tag this Judgment!Ramakant Shivgopal Shukla Vs. Krishna Kumar Shivgopal Shukla
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-18-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)BomCR599
M.L. Pendse, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated January 31, 1985 delivered by Mr. Justice Bharucha granting the petition for probate filed by the respondent and dismissing the Caveat lodged by the appellant. Few facts which gave rise to the filing of the appeal are as follows :2. One Shivgopal Bandedin Shukla died on October 20, 1978 leaving behind a Will executed on January 4, 1977. Shivgopal had four sons: Krishnakumar the respondent, Girjashankar, Devendrakumar, and Ramakant the appellant. The wife of Shivgopal had died on February 13, 1970. Shivgopal, along with his wife and the respondent had purchased an immoveable property bearing Survey No. 3, Hissa No. 1/1 (Part) admeasuring about 7968 square meters situated at Bandivli, Jogeshwari, Bombay. Each of the three joint owners had equal share in the suit property. The wife of Shivgopal had executed a Will bequeathing her 1/3rd share in the property in favour of Shivgopal, and after her death 2/3rd share in the propert...
Tag this Judgment!H. M. Mehta and Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-18-1985
Reported in: [1986]17ITD1007(Mum)
ORDERPer R. L. Sangani, Judicial Member - In the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1981-82 the assessee-company derived income as under :Rs.(i) Dividend of Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. 15,039 (ii) Interest on loan from Gaekwar Mills Ltd. 54,000 (iii) Interest on debenture 1,875The assessee-company incurred total expenditure of Rs. 1,918 on printing and stationery, postage, audit fees, professional tax and general charges. An amount of Rs. 15 was allowed as depreciation on the written down value of furniture. Thus, the total debit was Rs. 1,933 which was deducted from the gross income in order to arrive at net income. The assessee claimed deduction under section 80M of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the gross dividends of Rs. 15,039. The contention of the assessee before the ITO was that the assessee had not incurred any expenditure in earning dividend income and as such, gross dividends of Rs. 15,039 were also net dividends with the result deduction on that amount ...
Tag this Judgment!Sarbhansingh Nukumsingh Keer and ors. Vs. HusseIn Khan Kadarnawaz Khan ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)BomCR459; 1986MhLJ386
B.G. Kolse-Patil, J.1. The petitioners on the one hand and respondents No. 2 and 3 on the other, both claim to be the purchasers of the disputed premises in the building known as 'Khan House' on plot No. 106 T.P.S. III, 24th Road, Bandra, from respondent No. 1 who was doing the business of building-construction under the name and style of Khan Builders. The building in dispute consists of a basement and a ground floor plus five upper storeys.2. Respondent No. 1 had executed an agreement of sale in favour of petitioner No. 1 in respect of the basement and the ground floor, on 31-3-1982. The said agreement was registered on 9-8-1984. An agreement in respect of the first floor was executed by him in favour of petitioner No. 2 on 31-3-1982 and was registered on 24-9-1984. The agreements respect of the second floor were executed by him in favour of petitioners 3 and 4 on 18-12-1981. Both the agreements were registered on 20-9-1984. Although the four agreements referred to above were registe...
Tag this Judgment!H.A. Abdul Mustafa and Co. Vs. Additional Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1985
Reported in: (1986)(25)ELT718Tri(Mum.)bai
1. M/s H.A. Abdul Mustafa & Co. have filed a Revision Petition to the Government of India dated 12-3-1980 under old Section 131. of the Customs Act and this has been transferred to the Tribunal under Section 131 B ibid and this is to be treated as an appeal before us.2. The appeal was posted for hearing and argued by the Advocate Shri J.R. Gagrat. He explained that the appellants owned a vessel named "M.S.V. Faizi Husaini" registered in January, 1975 under No. BDI 542.The appellants were a partnership concern having the business of plying mechanised sailing vessels. The Hussaini arrived in Bomaby Port on 13-4-78 with a cargo of 4400 gunny bags containing wet dates belonging to M/s National Co-operative Consumers' Federation Ltd. The appellants "had entrusted the vessel to the Tindel Shri Dawood Ismail and they had taken an undertaking to ensure that he will take all precautions in compliance with law. This was a safeguard for the appellants. The Tindel was authorised to appoint th...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Sadashiv Rasal and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1985
Reported in: 1987(2)BomCR287
S.M. Daud, J.1. This is an application for bail under sections 439 and 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.2. The applicants are in custody pending the investigation of a crime allegedly committed by them on October 9, 1985. It is alleged that relations between them on the one hand and Manohar Vir on the other, are strained. Manohar was charge-sheeted for the alleged killing of the brother of applicant No. 1. He was convicted on a lesser count and sentenced to an unbelievably low term of imprisonment. This angered applicant No. 1 who took a vow on the bier of this deceased brother that he would take revenge. Manohar was released after serving the sentence, and it is after that the incident figuring in the present case took place. On 9-10-1985, the applicants surrounded Manohar somewhere in the vicinity of the residence of the Police Inspector at Barshi and gave him a thrashing with deadly weapons. It was a miracle that Manohar survived. Even since the occurrence, Barshi town is ri...
Tag this Judgment!Soma Son of Deu Daradmare and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1985
Reported in: 1986(2)BomCR109
B.A. Masodkar, J.1. This petition questions the order of restoration of land by the authorities under the Maharashtra Restoration of Land to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Restoration Act').2. Few facts need be stated to appreciate the singular submission made by the learned Counsel in support of the petition. The present petitioner Soma was admittedly the tenant of 7.05 acres of land which comprised of Survey Nos. 128, 130 and 135 of village Jambhali. Being a tenant governed by the provisions of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (hereinafter called 'Tenancy Law') an order was made in his favour on June 30, 1965, in Revenue Case No. 541/59(13) of 1965-66 of village Jambhali that he has become the statutory purchaser and the said land stood transferred to him. It is not in dispute that pursuant to that order, Soma became the statutory purchaser of that property.3. Under the provisions of the Restoration Act, proceedings were initiated and by applying...
Tag this Judgment!Roshan Porus Mistry Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-1985
Reported in: 1986(1)BomCR385; 1986MhLJ602
B.G. Kolse-Patil, J.1. This is an application challenging the order dated April 3, 1984 of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Borivli passed under section 146 of the Criminal Procedure Code in respect of Flat No. 20 in Siddhi Vinayak Co- operative Housing Society at Malad. Respondent No. 2 claimed that he was in possession of the said flat from January 5, 1984 till March 25, 1984 when he was dispossessed by the petitioner and respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The petitioner is the divorced wife of respondent No. 5. Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 are the parents of respondent No. 5. The flat in dispute is owned by respondent No. 5. According to respondent No. 2, he was put in the possession of the flat on 5-1-1984 by respondent No. 5 in pursuance of an agreement dated 15-10-1983. However, the petitioner, respondent No. 3 and respondent No. 4 dispossessed him on 25-3-1984. He, therefore, preferred applications under sections 145(1) and 146(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Metropolitan Magistrate,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »