Mumbai Court April 1987 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.
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Bomansha Framji Cama and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1987
Reported in: (1987)63CTR(Bom)97; [1988]170ITR600(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. The provisions of section 14 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, have to be interpreted in this reference made at the instance of the Revenue under that Act.2. The deceased, Pestonji E. Polson, died on November 6, 1962. By an indenture of settlement dated January 27, 1942, the deceased had settled on trust five policies of insurance on his life. We are concerned here with two of those policies, one issued by the Norwich Life Insurance Society and the other by the Security Life Assurance Co. Ltd. The sum assured under each policy was Rs. 50,000. The premiums on the said two policies, even after their assignment under the settlement, were paid by the deceased. The first of the two policies became fully paid-up on September 22, 1959, and the second on June 1, 1957. On the death of the deceased, a sum of Rs. 97,396 became receivable in respect of the first policy and a sum of Rs. 77,370 in respect of the second policy.3. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty invoked the provisio...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Vasantrao S. Dempo
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1987
Reported in: [1988]170ITR608(Bom)
Sugla, J.1. The deceased had been a member of the society known as Dempo Family Society which was constituted by his forefathers under the Portuguese Law under a decree dated December 16, 1880. The society was reconstituted as per the deed dated February 20, 1930, between Srinivas and his wife, Satiabamabai, on the one hand, and Vitola and his wife, Rocumbai, on the other, each group having 50% share. As per a subsequent deed dated April 22, 1950, the deceased and his wife had jointly gifted half of their shares to their sons, Ventexa and Voicunta who, thereafter, became members of the society along with their parents, all of them having 12-1/2% share each. The deceased, his wife and their two sons continued as members of the society till its dissolution on May 6, 1967, when all the immovable properties of the society were distributed amongst its members. Soon thereafter, i.e., on May 26, 1967, the deceased passed away.2. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty held that the gift joint...
Deokisan B. Sarda Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1987
Reported in: [1988]170ITR644(Bom)
Sugla, J.1. This reference involves two questions of law. They are :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sums of Rs. 50,000 and Rs. 1,25,000 or any portion thereof, gifted by the deceased to his wife, Smt. Rampyaribai, and his minor son, Kisanlal, were includible in the estate of the deceased as property deemed to pass on his death under section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the deceased's share in the goodwill of the firm, M/s. Bastiram N. Maheshri, passing on his death and includible in the estate is 1/2 and not 1/8th of the said goodwill ?'2. The questions are referred at the instance of the accountable person. The first question involves two gifts of Rs. 50,000 and 1,25,000 by the deceased to his wife, Smt. Rampyaribai, and minor son, Kisanlal, made in the year 1954. The deceased was a partner with eight annas share in the firm of M/s. Bastiram Naraya...
Mohan MeakIn Limited Vs. Pravara Sahkari Sakhar Karkhana Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1987
Reported in: (1987)89BOMLR356; 1987MhLJ503
S.P. Kurdukar, J.1. This Letters Patent appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated October 13, 1986 passed by the learned Single Judge (Shah, J.) in suit No. 1844 of 1984 filed on the Original Side of this Court. The learned Single Judge after recording his findings on all the three preliminary issues held that the suit is liable to be dismissed for want of statutory under notice Section 164 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Co-operative Societies Act'). But, however in regard to his finding relating to the jurisdiction (issue No. 3) the learned single Judge felt that his view in that behalf is in conflict with view taken by another single Judge in Pravin R. Gaglani v. Beharilal Beniprasad : AIR1978Bom255 . He therefore referred the said issue for decision to a larger Bench and directed the office to place and papers of this suit before the learned Chief Justice for appropriate orders under Rule 28 of the High Court Origin...
Keshaorao Narayanrao Patil Vs. District Deputy Registrar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR225; 1987MhLJ709
V.A. Mohta, J.1. Maharashtra Act No. 20 of 1986 (brought into force with effect from 12-5-1986), the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (the Act) has been amended and section 73-FF has been added. It deals with the subject of disqualification for membership of the Committee. Sub-section (2) of section 73-FF mentions that A member who has incurred any disqualification under sub-section (1), shall cease to be a member of the Committee and his seat shall thereupon be deemed to be vacant.' The principal point raised in this petition is whether such cessation takes place automatically or has to be preceded by a hearing and thereafter an order as required under section 78 of the Act dealing with the power of Registrar to remove a member, on the ground of incurring a disqualification.2. The point arises against the following backdrop. Petitioner Keshaorao Patil, while he was holding the office of the President-Director of Vikas Khand Sahakari Shetki Kharedi Vikri Samiti Limited, Bar...
Purshottam Gangadas Belani Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)(15)LC275Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The revision applications filed before the Central Government against the Order bearing in 252 to 2255 of 1980, dated 31st December, 1980, passed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as appeals.1. The facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals may be stated as under: On secret Information the officers of the Customs Preventive Collectorate, Bombay, seized 9 packages of textiles of foreign origin valued at Rs. 1,67,425/- from the uninhabitated dilapidated premises at Ulhasnagar Camp No. II. They also recovered 29 similar packages of textiles of foreign origin concealed under dry grass and thorny shrub from a ditch near the residential premises of one Shri Ramesh alias Hansraj at Ulhasnagar Camp No.lll. Besides the above packages the officers seized two Ambassador cars bearing Nos. MMD 4897 and MMB 7540 found abandoned near the ditch. On inspection of the seized cars some dry grass similar to the dry grass us...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jayanand Khira and Company (P.) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1987
Reported in: [1988]170ITR31(Bom)
Sugla, J.1. The assessee is a company. Its main business is that of bus-body building over chassis supplied by owners. The assessee's claim that its business was that of manufacture, construction or production of motor buses and it was, therefore, entitled to higher development rebate for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 and to deduction under section 80E/80-I for the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69 was rejected both by the Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. However, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the claim.2. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred to this court the following questions of law :3. Assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee carried on the business of manufacture or production of 'motor trucks and buses' as specified in the list in the Fifth Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, and s...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Seth Yogindraprasad N. Mafatlal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)67CTR(Bom)197; [1988]170ITR648(Bom)
Bharucha, J.1. This reference relates to the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66. The assessee had, by three indentures of trust dated March 26, 1959, settled certain shares of Mafatlal Gagalbhai & Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. upon trust and transferred them in favour of the trustees there-under appointed. The trusts were created for the benefit of the assessee's minor daughters, Kunti, Aparna and Gayatri. By the two indentures of trust dated March 29, 1961, the assessee transferred certain other shares of the same company in favour of the trustees thereunder appointed for the benefit of his minor daughters, Aparna and Gayatri. In computing the net wealth of the assessee as on March 31, 1964, and March 31, 1965, relevant to the assessment years 1964 and 1965-66, the Wealth-tax Officer included the market value of the aforementioned shares in the net wealth of the assessee, invoking the provisions of section 4(1)(a)(iii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on appeal, ...
Mrs. Pushpa Kalyanmal Singhvi Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1987
Reported in: [1988]171ITR334(Bom)
Desai, J.1. This appeal can be disposed of even at the stage of admission, since we are inclined to confirm a part of the order of the single judge but are of opinion that a part of the order cannot be sustained. If that be, immediate action on the latter part appears desirable as will be made clear subsequently.2. Accordingly, the appeal is admitted. Counsel for the respective respondents waive service. By consent, the appeal is taken up for hearing and advocates are fully heard.3. This appeal is preferred against the decision given by the single judge on March 20, 1987 summarily rejecting Writ. Petition No. 458 of 1987 in limine, though with a detailed speaking order. A few facts may be stated.4. This writ petition has been filed by an advocate practicing in this court and is described as public interest litigation. The writ petition has a dual or a treble thrust. In the first instance, the writ petitioner alleges that the scheme of amnesty propounded under certain circulars and clar...
Third Income-tax Officer Vs. Pitumal J. Pohani
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-14-1987
Reported in: (1987)21ITD648(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the department relates to the assessment year 1981-82.2. The assessee was working as agent for procuring insurance business on behalf of Life Insurance Corporation of India. The terms and conditions of his employment as agent were governed by Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Regulations, 1972. The assessee received Rs. 30,000 as gratuity from the LIC in the relevant previous year. The assessee claimed that this amount was not includible in the total income because provisions of Section 10(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, applied in respect of the said amount. The ITO rejected the claim on the ground that Section 10(10) applied to gratuity received by employee from employer and the assessee was not the employee of LIC but was an agent and as such, said provisions did not apply. The assessee filed appeal and the AAC held that the agent appointed by LIC under the said regulations would come within the ambit of the term "employee" in Section 10(10) and as suc...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »