Mumbai Court December 1988 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.
Datta Damodar Kakule of Calangute Vs. Krishna Sridor Pai @ Subhash Shr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1988
Reported in: 1988(4)BomCR270
M.L. Pandse, J.1. This appeal is preferred by original plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No. 380/87/A to challenge order dated September 22, 1988 passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division at Mapusa rejecting the application filed by the plaintiff for grant of temporary injunction pending the suit. The plaintiff prays that the defendants should be restrained from disturbing the plaintiff's possession of the suit property. 2.The properties in dispute are two in number and are described as Property 'A' and Property 'B'. Property 'A' known as 'Esmolachem' is situated in the village of Calangute and described in the register under No. 1717. The property consists of a house and coconut garden. Property described as suit property 'B' consists of a house and a coconut tree. The area covered by the coconut tree has been acquired in Land Acquisition proceedings. Both these properties originally belong to one Shrinivasa Duclo. Shrinivasa died in the year 1925 and property 'A' was allotted to his son M...
Bank of Baroda Vs. Har Kishore Jain
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1988
Reported in: (1988)90BOMLR675
Sharad Manohar, J.1. This order relates to an application made by the plaintiffs for amendment of the plaint. The draft amendment is submitted to the Court and the plaintiffs desire the plaint to be amended in accordance with the draft amendment.For stating the genesis of the Chamber summons, a few facts, more or less admitted facts, need to be stated.2. The Bank of Baroda are the plaintiffs.3. On October 30, 1982 two Bills of Exchange, the first for Rs. 1,95,744.61 and the other for Rs. 2,08,293.66, were drawn by M/s. D. Shanalal upon the drawee, Har Kishore Jain & Sons Pvt. Ltd., the present defendants. The Bills of Exchange were presented to the drawee and they were accepted by them.4. They were discounted with the plaintiff/Bank (hereafter, referred to as the Bank). Both the Bills of Exchange were for a period of 60 days, that is to say payable on the due date of payment, being December 29, 1982. On July 18, 1983 the Bank wrote a letter to the defendants sending therewith a stateme...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Carter-wallace Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1988
Reported in: [1989]177ITR349(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The question for consideration at the instance of the Revenue reads thus:'Whether, on the interpretation of the provisions of section 80J of the Income-tax, 1961, the assessee is entitled to relief under the said section at 6 per cent. of the capital employed in the new industrial undertaking even though the factory had worked for only the last 175 days of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1969-70 ?'2. Counsel are agreed that the question must be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee in view of this court's decision in CIT v. Godrej Soaps Pvt. Ltd. : [1988]169ITR537(Bom) .3. The question is so answered.4. No order as to costs....
Zenith Steel Pipes Ltd. (No. 2) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1988
Reported in: [1990]185ITR281(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in this reference at the instance of the assessee reads thus :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, of Rs. 43,000 in its assessment for the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1970-71 ?'2. The statement of case states that the admitted facts are 'that the assessee was allocated an amount of Rs. 43,000 by the Engineering Export Promotion Council, Calcutta, under its general foreign publicity scheme. Out of the aforesaid amount, the assessee was to contribute 2/3rds, i.e., Rs. 26,668, and the balance 1/3rd amounting to Rs. 14,332 was to be subsidised by the Engineering Export Promotion Council. Admittedly, the said amount was spent by the assessee during the year under consideration in a foreign publicity scheme. The stand of the assessee before the Income-tax Officer for the allowance of we...
Zenith Steel Pipes Ltd. (No. 1) (Now Zenith Ltd.) Vs. Commissioner of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1988
Reported in: [1990]186ITR500(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The first question that arises in this reference at the instance of the assessee reads thus :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, of Rs. 12,500 in its assessment for the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1972-73 ?'2. A similar question at the instance of the assessee arose in Income-tax Reference No. 219 of 1976, Zenith Steel Pipes Ltd. (No. 2) v. CIT : [1990]185ITR281(Bom) , which we have just disposed of. The statement of facts here being as inadequate as the one in that reference, this question is returned unanswered.3. The second question reads thus :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the assessee is entitled to development rebate in respect of the air-conditioners installed in the conference hall in its factory at Khopoli and/or electrical lighting installations in the dispensary building and factor...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. BasseIn Electric Supply Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1988
Reported in: [1989]177ITR482(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. This reference at the instance of the Revenue raises only one question. The question reads thus:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it was rightly held that the 'written down value' of the assessee's assets acquired prior to April 1, 1961, and the 'actual cost' thereof should be taken as per the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and not as per the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 ?'2. Counsel are agreed that the issue herein is covered by the decision of the assessee's own case in CIT v. Bassein Electric Supply Co. Ltd. : [1979]118ITR884(Bom) , and in view thereof, the question is to be answered in the negative and in favour of the Revenue.3. The question is so answered.4. No order as to costs....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gynamij India Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1988
Reported in: [1990]181ITR265(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. Two questions arise for consideration in this reference at the instance of the Revenue. They read thus :'(i) Whether any liabilities should be deducted in the computation of the capital employed in the new industrial undertaking for the purpose of relief under section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(ii) If the answer to question No. (i) above is in the affirmative, whether only those liabilities which are due and payable on the relevant date should be deducted or all the liabilities which are owed but which are not due and payable on the relevant date should be deducted ?'2. Counsel are agreed that the first question must be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lohia Machines Ltd. v. Union of India : [1985]152ITR308(SC) .3. The first question is so answered.4. The answer to the first question being in the affirmative, the second question has to be considered. And it is agreed that the issue is conc...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mafatlal Gagalbhai and Co. P. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1988
Reported in: [1989]177ITR488(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. The questions of law raised in this reference at the instance of the Department are:'R.A. No. 1707 (Bom) of 1973-74: (i) whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the scheme of amalgamation between New Shorrock Spinning and ., and the assessee, any sum could be assessed in the hands of the assessee as capital gains having accrued to it by exchange or relinquishment as provided in section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax Bombay City-I. Bombay, dated May 12, 1964 ?R.A. No. 1708 (Bom) of 1973-74:Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, B-Range, Bombay, dated November 13, 1968, and restoring the appeal to his file for deciding it afresh in accordance with law ?'2. Co...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1988
Reported in: [1989]177ITR500(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. This reference raises only one question of law. The question reads as under:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amounts of the dividend reserve pertaining to the preference shares for each of the years under consideration are includible in the capital computation base of the years concerned ?'2. Counsel are agreed that the issue herein is covered by the Supreme Court decision in the case of Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT : [1981]132ITR559(SC) and that following the said judgment, the question must be answered in the negative and in favour of the Revenue.3. The question is so answered.4. No order as to costs....
Z.M. Merchant Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1988
Reported in: [1989]177ITR512(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. This reference raises at the behest of the Revenue the following question:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the land bearing Survey Nos. 1393 and 1395 and portions 'A' and 'C' of Survey No. 1394 in Surat (Gujrat) is agricultural land for the purposes of section 2(14)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee sold land bearing Survey Nos. 1393, 1394, and 1395 in Surat by asale deed dated February 24, 1967, at the rate of Rs. 20 per sq. yd. The said land measured 32,4000 sq. yds. In his return, the assessee showed a capital gain arising from the sale of the land bearing Survey No. 1394 (measuring 16,219 sq. yds) on the basis that this was non-agricultural land. He thereafter filed revised return where in the computation of the capital gain was altered. The revised return proceeded on the basis that out of three portions of the land bearing Survey No. 1394, i.e., A, B and C, only the portion marked 'B' whereon there was structure whi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »