Mumbai Court April 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.
Smt. Radhaben P. Zaveri Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1988
Reported in: (1988)27ITD594(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal relating to the assessment year 1976-77 filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT (Appeals), Central II, Bombay. Although several grounds are raised in this appeal, the main effective ground pressed by Shri R.G. Desai, learned counsel for the assessee, was that the CIT (Appeals) erred in holding that the appellant's case was not covered by section 54(1) of the IT Act, 1961, and that the appellant was liable to be assessed on the capital gains amounting to Rs. 1,31,258. The facts may first be stated briefly.2. The assessee is an individual. She is assessed to tax in respect of income from business, property, interest, etc. The relevant accounting year is S.Y. 2031. It would appear that the original assessment in this case was passed on 30-3-1979 on a total income of Rs. 17,966. This order was set aside by CIT, Central-II, by his order under Section 263 dated 6-3-1981 with a direction to bring all relevant facts on record and ascertain whether provisions of...
Dattya Vs. Vithal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1988
Reported in: 1990(1)BomCR304; 1989MhLJ741
K.N. Patil, J.1. Petitioner is the original judgment debtor. Respondent is the legal representative of original Decree-holder Dattya Gangya. In this civil revision petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 16-1-1988 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, directing execution of the decree passed in Special Civil Suit No. 15 of 1968 holding that the compromise for adjustment dated 3-1-1978 filed in Special Darkhast No. 31 of 1977 is null and void and does not prevent the decree-holder from executing the decree.2. The facts in brief are :Special Civil Suit No. 15 of 1968 was filed by Dattya Gangya against Gangya Dhondya Mahar (defendant No. 1), Dhondabai w/o Gangya Mahar (defendant No. 2) and Dattya s/o Dhondya Mahar (defendant No. 3), claiming to be the adopted son of defendant Nos. 1 and 2 and praying for recovery of Khas possession of the agricultural lands, survey Nos. 115-A, 123 and 127 situate at village Pangri Taluka and District Nanded and for cancellation o...
Sharda (Sou.) Vs. Ganpatrao
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1988
Reported in: 1988(4)BomCR550
V.A. Mohta, J.1. Shrimati Sharda wife of Ganpantrao Kadu the applicant in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was awarded maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 200/- from the date of application under section 125 Criminal Procedure Code by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Wardha. The learned Sessions Judge in revisional jurisdiction maintained the said order against her husband Ganpantrao Kadu-the non-applicant, so far the liability and quantum is concerned but modified the order by directing payment only from the date of the order, on the grounds that (i) normal rule under sub-section (2) of section 125 Criminal Procedure Code is to order payment from the date of order; (ii) no reasons are recorded for deviating from the normal rule (iii) direction to pay arrears would amount to punishment to the husband and such a course should be avoided.2. Application under section 125 Criminal Procedure Code was filed on 25th May, 1984 and was decided on 6t...
Chemical Corporation of India Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: 1991LC380(Bombay); 1988(36)ELT289(Bom)
1. The petitioner is a sole proprietary firm and had contracted to import with a company in South Korea 100 metric tonnes of PVC Resin which fell under the heading 39.01/06. The petitioner opened a letter of credit and 10 bills of lading were received. On or about 11th October 1982 the vessel known as M.V. 'Styrax' entered the territorial waters of India. On the same day the petitioner filed 10 bills of entry for home consumption. It has been also mentioned in paragraph 4A, which was inserted by way of amendment after obtaining the leave of the Court, that the said vessel was granted entry inwards on 18th October 1982. Before the discharge of the goods could take place, the import duty on PVC Resin was raised from 100% to 150% on 5th of November 1982. However for import from South Korea the duty was raised from 50% to 75%. The petitioner was called upon to pay the duty at the said increased rate. This has been challenged by the petitioner in this petition under Article 226 of the Const...
Chandrakant Yeshwant Sawant and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)BomCR617
S.W. Puranik, J.1. Initially, 9 persons were chargesheeted for an offence of riot and causing grievous injuries and an attempt to commit murder with a common object of wrongful assembly under Crime No. 556/78 registered at Mulund Police Station on the night intervening 29th and 30th December, 1978. At the stage of framing charge, the learned Sessions Judge discharged two out of them and framed charge only against seven accused. After the trial in Sessions Case No. 345 of 1979 was over, the learned Sessions Judge by his order dated 28-1-1981 acquitted accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 of all the charges. He also acquitted accused Nos. 1, 6 and 7 of the charges under section 307 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. However, he convicted accused Nos. 1, 6 and 7 for the offences under section 324 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for 18 months. He also convicted them for the offence under section 143 and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for t...
Goa Bottiing Co. Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: 1989(1)BomCR68
G.F. Couto, J.1 The constitutional validity of the Central Excise Notification No. 203/87 dated September 9, 1987, is being challenged in this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by the petitioners, who therefore, seek a Certiorari quashing it and a Mandamus directing the respondents to continue the benefit of MODVAT Rules to Areated waters manufactured by the first petitioners, and in any event; to permit them to take the credit in respect of inputs lying in stock with them which were purchased on or before October 1, 1987.2. The first petitioners, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, are engaged in the manufacture of Aerated waters and soft drinks under various trade names, in their factory situated at Arlem, Goa and use therefore, several items as raw material, as well as bottles and metal crowns, purchased in the open market.3. The excise duty payable under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (for Short, ' the Act'). prior to its amendment made o...
Durgaprasad ParmatamadIn Shukla and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Min ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)BomCR585
M.L Pendse, J.1. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the legality of judgment dated February 2, 1988 passed by the Member of Central Administrative Tribunal, New Bombay, Bench, New Bombay. By the impugned order, the Member declined to entertain the Review Petition filed by the petitioner for reconsideration of the judgment delivered on November 3, 1987 in Transfer Application Nos. 161 of 1986 and 163 of 1986.2. Initially, the petitioner had filed Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the Original Side of this Court and after the enactment of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 in accordance with the provisions of section 25 of the Act, the petition was transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Central Administrative Tribunal numbered the proceedings as Transfer Application and disposed of the same on merits. The order of the Tribunal is questioned in the present petition.3. We are unable to entert...
Sonia Wife of Yashpal Khanna Vs. Yashpal Kishorilal Khanna
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)BomCR601
A.D. Tated, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 1st September, 1986 passed by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay on Notice of Motion No. 2689 of 1986 arising out of M.J. Petition No. 1078 of 1985 whereby applicant-wife's application for interim maintenance and expenses of the proceedings under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been dismissed by the learned judge.2. The applicant Mrs. Sonia and the opponent Yashpal Khanna were married according to Hindu Vedic rites on 1-8-1984 at Bombay. Soon after the marriage the parties fell out and the opponent-husband Yashpal Khanna on 18th November, 1985 filed a petition for divorce. In those proceedings the applicant-wife took out Notice of Motion No. 2689 of 1986 for interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 4000/- p.m. and costs of the proceedings amounting to Rs 6000/-. Her case was that she had no independent source of income for her maintenance and for meeting the expenses of the proceedings. According t...
Shrawan Sakharam Ubhale Vs. Sau. Durga Shrawan Ubhale and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-22-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR343; 1990(1)MhLj418
ORDER1. Applicant Shravan Ubhale married non-applicant No. 1 Sau. Durga on 2nd May, 1982. Very soon misunderstanding developed between the two and relations got strained. There was exchange of correspondence. All attempts at reconciliation failed. On 13-6-1983 there was a divorce between the two by mutual consent. Two documents - Divorce deed (Ex. 15) and Consent Deed (Ex. 10) were executed by both. Thereafter both started residing separately. Sau. Durga was pregnant at the time of divorce. She delivered a male child Kailash (non-applicant No. 2) after a month or two. When Kailash attained the age of about 1 1/2 years Sau. Durga field an application for maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for herself as well as Kailash. Shravan resisted the application inter alia on the ground that Sau. Durga had specifically relinquished her right to claim past and future maintenance.2. The learned Judicial Magistrate repelling the defence, granted maintenance to Durga at t...
Det Norske Vs. Reserve Bank of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-22-1988
Reported in: [1991]72CompCas470(Bom); 1988(18)ECC276
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J. 1. The petitioners are an international ship classification society and verification/certification authority founded in Norway in 1864. The petitioners have over 120 year's expertise in the field of classification of ships, safely of men and machinery and onshore. 2. They are a non - profit foundation and their entire income is used for research relating to shipping as well as industries both marine and land based. The petitioners have 236 sub - stations. They have two sub - stations in India, one at Bombay and one at Calcutta. The benefit and development from Norway is made available to their centres in India by the petitioners. The petitioners employ in India only one foreign national as against 18 Indians. 3. In 1972, the petitioners established a separate branch in Bombay for classification and certification of ships. The branch was established pursuant to an authorisation issued by the Director - General Of Shipping Bombay. By a letter dated 26th July 1972,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »