Mumbai Court April 1988 Judgments
income-tax Officer Vs. Gokul Gas (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1988
Reported in: (1989)28ITD60(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the department and the cross-objection by the assessee relate to the assessment year 1980-81.2. The assessee is a Private. Limited Company. The assessment year is 1980-81. The accounting year ended on 31-3-1980.3. During the year under appeal the assessee carried on the business of bottling and marketing of L.P. Gas. The assessee had other business activities also.4. The said business of bottling and marketing of L.P. Gas was originally carried on by a firm in the name of Kosangas Company. The firm was dissolved and the assessee-company took over the said business as proprietor.5. With effect from 26-5-3979, the said business of bottling and marketing of L.P. Gas was nationalised by the Act of Parliament. That Act is known as Kosangas Company (Acquisition of Undertaking) Act, 1979 (Act No. 28 of 1979).6. Section 3(1) of the said Act laid down that on the appointed day, the right, title and interest of Gokul Gas Pvt. Ltd. (assessee-company) in relation to the undertak...
Tag this Judgment!Hariprasad Sanat Trivedi and Etc. Vs. the Dean, Topiwala National Medi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Bom281; 1988(3)BomCR215; 1988MhLJ475
Sawant, J.1. The petitioners in these two petitions have challanged R.4(a) of the Rules of the Greater Bombay Municipal Corporation for admission to Post-Graduate Degrees and Diploma Courses at the Municipal Medical colleges affiliated to the University of Bombay, and the consequent preference given to the respondent students for seats in Super-Specialities in the Municipal Medical Colleges.2. The petitioner Dr. Trivedi in Writ Petition No. 1165 of 1988 passed his qualifying M. B. B. S Examiantion in Oct., 1983 from the Grant Medical College, Bombay, which is a State Government College. He completed Internship in the year 1984 and passed his M. D. Examination in Medicine in the year 1988 from the same College. Pursuant to advertisement given by the Dean of the Topiwala National Medical College belonging to the 2nd respondent Bombay Municipal Corporation inviting applications for seats in different Super-Speciality Courses like Cardiology, Gastroenteriology, Neurology, Thorapic Surgery,...
Tag this Judgment!Mahaboobkhan @ Babu S/O Faizullakhan Vs. Parveenbanu D/O Mohammed Abdu ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR379; 1988MhLJ781
V.A. Mohta, J.1. Is the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (the Act) retrospective in operation is the point that arises in this application. Following is the factual back-ground :2. The applicant Mahaboobkhan married the non-applicant Parveenbanu on 25th April, 1984. Both are Muslims and were married according to Muslim law. There was a divorce between the two on 8th January, 1985. Parveenbanu applied for maintenance under section 125, Cri.P.C. on 25th January, 1985 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Luxettipet (A.P.), where the marriage was solemnised. By order dated 31st January, 1985 she was granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 250/- p.m. from the date of the application till the circumstances vary. She filed an application in the Court of judicial Magistrate, First Class, Wani (M.S) (where Mahaboob Khan resides) under sub-section (3) of section 125 read with section 120. Cri.P.C. for issuance of a distress warrant for recovery of maintenance ...
Tag this Judgment!Gurukripa Shaskiya Karmachari Sahakari Nirmam Sanstha Vs. Ratanlal S/O ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR474
M.M. Qazi, J.1. The appellant is a Co-operative Society and the respondents are the owners of survey No. 3/1-A. 5 acres 23 gunthas situated at Malkapur, district Akola. The respondents wanted to sell the said field and the appellant wanted to purchase the same for constructing houses; consequently the agreement came to be recorded on 7-3-1979. The agreement shows that the property was not under any encumbrances and that the respondents had absolute right to sell the same. Under the agreement the permission under section 89 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (for short 'Act') was required to be obtained by the appellant and the respondents were to co-operate in getting the said permission. The deed was to be executed in two parts on two occasions and the possession of the land was to be delivered on or before 10-6-1980. The sale consideration was fixed at the rate of Rs. 26,500/- per acre and an amount of Rs. 10,000/- was paid by the appellant as ea...
Tag this Judgment!ibm World Trade Corpn. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-28-1988
Reported in: (1989)28ITD153(Mum.)
1. These six appeals relating to assessment years 1967-68 to 1972-73 filed by the asses-see-company against the consolidated order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) VI, Bombay deal with the same issue and are, therefore, for the sake of convenience, disposed of by a common order.2. The assessee is a non-resident company. We were given to understand at the time of hearing of the appeals that both in the Returns filed under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for these assessment years and in the course of the assessment proceedings no claim was made by the assessee-company for exclusion of interest income from the chargeable profits under the First Schedule to the Act. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment) (hereinafter referred to as the 'IAC'), therefore, in the assessment orders, all of which were dated 30-7-1974, had no occasion to consider the claim of exclusion of interest from the chargeable profit ...
Tag this Judgment!Miltons (India) Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-28-1988
Reported in: 1990(27)ECC96; 1988(36)ELT549(Bom)
1. The petitioners were registered exporters under the Import Export policy for the year 1978-79 pursuant to a Registration Certificate dated 11.10.1976 which was granted to them under the relevant import export policy. The scheme of benefits to registered exporters was continued under the import export policy for the year 1978-79. It is an accepted position that once an exporter has been registered, the registered shall remain valid for four years unless the exporter registered ceases to exist or his is deregistered for any reason or he becomes ineligible to hold the certificate. The registration certificate of the petitioners, therefore, would have ordinarily been valid up to 10th October 1980.2. During June-October 1977 the petitioners agreed to export diverse quantities of cast iron pipes to Egypt on behalf of an Indian exporter who had entered into a contract for this purpose with the Egyptian buyer. Specifications for these cast iron pipes to be exported were also agreed upon. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Parvati K. Moorjani Vs. A. Fonseca
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-28-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Bom366; 1988(2)BomCR464; (1988)90BOMLR249
Sawant, J.1. These are two writ petitions which raise some common points, while other points are exclusive to writ petit ion No. 1081 of 1984. We will, therefore, take the facts from Writ Petition No. 1081 of 1984.2. In Writ Petition No. 1081 of 1984 the1st petitioner is the mother, the 2nd petitioneris her sort, and the 3rd petitioner is her marrieddaughter. The late Sherier Irani, the husbandof petitioner 1 and the father of petitioners 2and 3 possessed three pieces of property,namely: .(1) a building with the land under it and also the vacant land around, situated at GLR Survey No. 709 (Bungalow No. 8, Prince of Wales Drive), Admeasuring 9,145.88 square metres as a lessee under a regular lease; (2) a building with the land under it andalso the vacant land around it, situated atGLR survey No. 158 (Bungalow No. 8, Princeof Wales Road admeasuring 8,175 squaremetres as a grantee under the Old Granttenure; and (3) a building with the land under it as well as the vacant land around it, s...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhdeo S/O Sopan Mundhe and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-28-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)BomCR507
S.G. Deo, J.1. The short question involved in these two criminal appeals, one by the eight appellants-accused in Sessions Case No. 62 of 1982 decided by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani, convicting them of the offence under sections 147, 452, 323 and 302 all read with section 149, I.P. Code and sentencing them to life imprisonment and other terms, the sentences running concurrently, and the twelves respondents accused in Criminal Appeal No. 177 of 1983 filed by the State against their acquittal in the aforesaid sessions trial is : whether all or any of the aforesaid twenty original accused were members of an unlawful assembly and had taken an active part in the riot that took place on the fateful day i.e. Friday, the 4th June, 1982, by fatally assaulting the four deceased namely Hari, Govinda, Limba and Narayan and voluntarily causing injuries to the six P.Ws., namely, P.W. 2 Sopan, P.W.6. Kondabai, P.W. 7 Bapu, P.W., Phulchand, P.W. 21 Kundlik and P.W. 22 Vithal.2. An o...
Tag this Judgment!Mahesh Bhajanlal Bajaj Vs. Shri K.L. Verma, Joint Secretary
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: 1988(37)ELT169(Bom)
Agarwal, J.1. The detention order dated 15th December, 1987 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 is impugned in this petition. The said order was a sequel to an incident that had taken place on the 13th September, 1987 when the detenu was apprehended with Saudi Riyals 8,500 on his person. The said order of detention was served on the detenu on the 5th of January, 1988.2. Shri Karmali, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the detenu firstly submitted that certain documents that were served upon the detenu along with the grounds of detention were hopelessly illegible. This had deprived the detenu of his right of making an effective representation. The detenu was thus deprived of his valuable right guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.3. Shri Karmali pointed out that copies of the several endorsements on the passport of the detenu tha...
Tag this Judgment!industrial Linings, Bombay and Another Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: 1989(20)LC490(Bombay); 1988(36)ELT28(Bom)
1. The petitioners are engaged in the business of rubber-lining/re-rubber-lining of tanks, vessels, rollers, etc, at their factory at Bombay. They claimed exemption under Notification No. 176/77, dated 18th of June, 1977, but the same was rejected by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, Division 'L', on the ground that the value of the goods, including the value of the tanks, vessels, etc. supplied by the customers for rubber-lining had exceeded the limit of Rs. 30,00,000/-2. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners preferred an appeal to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) who, by his order dated 29th of August, 1981 partly allowed the appeal. While disposing of the appeal, the Appellate Collector distinguished three categories among the activities of the petitioners. the first category was naked tanks and vessels received from the petitioners' manufacturers for the purpose of rubber-linings. The second and third categories were naked tanks and vessels or old t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »