Mumbai Court September 1986 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.
Domingos Teles and anr. Vs. Clara Viegas (Smt.)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1986
Reported in: 1986(3)BomCR225
G.H. Couto, J.1. By a judgment dated 13th June, 1986, the learned District Judge, South Goa, dismissed an appeal filed by the present petitioners against the order dated 6th December, 1985, whereby the Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Margao, dismissed their application for temporary injunction. It is against the judgment of the learned District Judge that the present revision application has been filed. 2. The petitioners filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondent on the ground that they are the owners in possession of a property known as 'Polentil Tican' or 'Zolear' or 'Dando' situated at Pollem, Canacona, within the limits of the Village Panchayat of Loalem, Canacona, as they had purchased the said property by a deed dated 22nd October, 1969. The possession of the plaintiffs in respect of the said property has been peaceful, continuous and without obstruction of anybody. There was a structure in the said suit property with an area of 10 x 6.15 mtrs. which was in an ...
First Income-tax Officer Vs. D.K. Marathe
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD187(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the revenue and the first ground taken is that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,98,597 made to the total income. It is necessary to state briefly the facts leading to this appeal.2. The assessee runs a dairy for which purpose he has to maintain fixed number of catties. We are concerned with the assessment year 1980-81 for which the accounting period ended on 31-3-1980. The assessee showed in his return income of Rs. 1,73,220. The business of providing milk is being conducted as a proprietary concern since 1-9-1979. During the period 1-9-1979 to 31-3-1980, i.e., 7 months of the accounting period, the assessee purchased 55 buffaloes for Rs. 1,98,597. The purchase price of the catties so purchased was debited to the trading account.The assessee sold 83 old buffaloes for Rs. 73,695 (in the course of hearing before us the assessee's representative stated that the correct figure was Rs. 73,790). The selling price was reportedly credi...
Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Gulshan Rai Sachdev
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1986
Reported in: (1986)19ITD860(Mum.)
1. As common points are involved in both these appeals by the revenue, they were heard together and are disposed of by a consolidated order.The assessee is the proprietor of Modern Movies which is a film distribution concern. He is also partner with 25 per cent share in Sai Syam Pictures which is also a film distribution concern. The relevant valuation dates are 30-6-1976 for the assessment year 1977-78 and 30-6-1977 for the assessment year 1978-79.2. The controversy in both these years is regarding the valuation of the assessee's rights as distributor of films on the said valuation dates. The WTO had made addition of Rs. 50.86 lakhs in the assessment year 1977-78 and Rs. 56,04,513 in the assessment year 1978-79 on account of variation under Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 ('the Rules') in respect of the said distributorship rights. Under the said rule, the WTO can make addition where the market value or an asset shown in the balance sheet exceeds its written down value or bo...
Vasanta Tulshiram Bhoyar Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)BomCR668; 1987MhLJ111
The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order of the conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Session Judge, Akola dt. 4-12-1984 in Session Case No. 67 of 1984. The appellant has been convicted under S. 306 I.P.C. and has been sentenced to R.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default R.I. for one month. The appellant has also been convicted under S. 498-A, I.P.C. and has been sentenced to R.I. for one year and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default R.I. for 15 days under that section. Both the sentences to run concurrently.2. Shri R. B. Pendharkar, Advocate (Appointed) appeared for the appellant and Shri G. D. Patil, Assistant Public Prosecutor, appeared for the respondent-State.3. The prosecution case in brief is that the appellant was married with Manda on 27-5-1983. It is alleged that some dowry was also paid to the appellant. On the next day of the marriage, a religious function 'Satyanarayan' was arranged at the house of Manda's parents. The said pooja was to ...
N.M. Wadia Charitable Hospitals and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1986
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ536Bom
1. These two writ petitions impugn the same notification issued under the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and can, therefore, be disposed of by a common judgment. The impugned notification is dated 29th Jan., 1985 and revises the minimum rates of wages payable to employees in hospitals which are not run by a local authority.2. Entry 23 of the Schedule to the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (hereinafter called 'the Act') relates to 'employment in any hospital not falling under entry 6 in this schedule'. Entry 6 deals with 'employment under any local authority'. The explanation to Entry 23 reads thus:'Employment in any hospital not falling under entry 6 in this Schedule Explanation:- For the purpose of this entry, hospital means any institution for the reception and treatment of persons suffering from illness or mental defectiveness, any maternity home, and any institution for the reception and treatment of persons during convalescence or persons requiring medical rehabilitation, and...
N.M. Wadia Charitable Hospital and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1986
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ541Bom
Vaze, J. 1. I regret, I am unable to agree with the view expressed by my learned Brother Bharucha J. - who has dictated his judgment just now - on the core issue regarding the application or want thereof of mind by Minister of State for Labour while issuing the notification dated 29th January 1985 relating to the fixation of the rates of minimum wages as respects the employees in hospitals.2. As my learned Brother has given the factual background in great detail, I would not burden this judgment by repeating the same, but would straight-away proceed to state my reasons.3. In administrative law, a writ Court would interfere with the decision of an authority empowered to act under a Statute (the Minister in the present case) if the Minister, while arriving at the decision, has failed to take into consideration matters which he was obligated to take under the statute; or has taken into consideration extraneous or irrelevant matters which he ought not to have so taken; or the decision arri...
Sharan Ganga Sharan Chopra Vs. Shantilal Khushaldas and Bros. Pvt. Ltd ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)BomCR273
G.F. Couto, J.1. In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 29th December, 1978, passed by the third respondent, Deputy Collector, and Rent Controller, Margao, and the judgment dated 16th May, 1986, passed in appeal against the aforesaid Order by the respondent No. 2, the Administrative Tribunal of Goa, Daman and Diu.2. The first respondents have filed eviction proceedings under section 22(2)(c) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control, Act, 1968, against the petitioner herein and one Zacaria Suleman, their case had been that they are owners in possession of a building known as 'Gosalia Building' situated at Vasco da Gama. The petitioner was occupying the godown No. 1 and the said Suleman, the godown No. 8, both situated on the ground floor of the said building, as tenants, on the monthly rent of Rs. 150/- each. It was further the case of the first respondents that Suleman handed...
Eighth Wealth-tax Officer Vs. S.D. Sathe
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD109(Mum.)
1. In both these appeals by the revenue, the controversy raised is identical.2. The assessee has equity shares of Universal Containers (P.) Ltd. In the assessments for 1977-78 and 1978-79, revised returns were filed modifying the value of the shares. According to that, the shares were valued on the basis of break-up method as per Rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 ('the Rules'). While so doing, the assessee had reduced the advance tax paid from the asset side and had also taken into consideration the provision for taxation as a liability. In sum, the revised valuation had been on the basis of the principle explained by the Gujarat High Court in the case of CWT v. Arvindbhai Chinubhai [1982] 133 ITR 800, wherein the earlier decision in the case of CWT v.Ashok K. Parikh [1981] 129 ITR 46 had been followed. The ITO did not accept that method of valuation while allowing the provision for taxation, and deducted the advance tax paid in fixing the liability. On that basis, the value of th...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Pen Workers
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-1986
Reported in: (1987)(30)ELT807Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appeal ED (BOM) 64/83 arises out of and is directed against the order-in-appeal No. A-1360/ BI-268/82, dated 8-9-82 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. The appeal ED(BOM)65/83 arises out of and is directed against the order-in-appeal No.A-1360/BI-269/82, dated 8-9-82 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. Both the appeals were filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-I. As these appeals involve common questions of facts and law, they are clubbed together; heard together and hence this common order.3. The undisputed facts in appeal ED(BOM)64/83 are : The Respondents M/s. Pen Workers were the manufacturers of 'Cinema Chairs'. During the period from 9-12-78 to 18-3-80, the said Chairs were classified under T.I. No. 40 of Central Excise Tariff. On 21-12-79 the Respondents submitted classification list seeking classification of the Cinema Chairs as falling under T.I. 68 of C.E.T. This was provisionally approved by the Assistan...
Indian Card Clothing Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-1986
Reported in: (1987)(10)LC264Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Revision Application filed before the Government of India against the order-in-appeal bearing No. S/49-1/82L dated 3-4-82 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal.2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal may be stated as under : "The appellants M/s. Indian Card Clothing Co. Ltd. imported 'D.C. Drive & Gear Box' as spares for Hydraulic Spooler under OGL Appendix 10(4) during AM 1981 Policy. The Customs, however, objected for the clearance on the ground that the imported goods fell under E/No. 4 of Appendix 30 and therefore non-permissible spare parts. The Dy. Collector of Customs who held the adjudication rejected the appellants' contention that Appendix 30 covers Motor and Gear Box by separate entries and the imported goods an integral unit meant for Hydraulic Spooler. Having regard to his finding, the Dy. Collector ordered confiscation but allowed redemption on payment of fin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »