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.
Rajaram Dwarkadas Chhabria Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1988
Reported in: 1988(36)ELT293(Bom)
1. The petitioner has been carrying on business in the name and style of Messrs Raja Radio Company. The business is the manufacture, as the name of the establishment itself shows, of radios in which tape deck mechanisms are used. The petitioner is challenging by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India a notice dated 25th of March, 1982 issued by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay demanding from the petitioner a sum of Rs. 76,684.84P. This amount represents the amount for which the petitioner took credit, according to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, illegally during the months of May, 1981. The notice purports to be under the proviso to sub-rule (2A) of Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. The petitioner's contention is that this notice of demand and the consequent detention of goods effected by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent' he being the 2nd respondent in this petition, are w...
Amrut Rayoo Anvekar Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1988
Reported in: 1988(17)LC257(Bombay); 1988(36)ELT87(Bom)
1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging certain orders which have been passed against the petitioner by the appropriate authorities under the Gold (Control) Act as well as under the Customs Act. The facts leading to proceedings which resulted in a penal action being taken against the petitioner must be stated in order to understand what I would regard as the untenable nature of the orders passed against the petitioner.2. The petitioner is carrying on the business of a goldsmith under the name and style of M/s. Anvekar Brothers at a place in Bombay. On receiving information that his mother is sick he proceeded to his native place in the then Union Territory of Goa on or about 6th November, 1973. He had a brother by name Gurudas who was left behind to look after the shop. On 12th of November 1973 the petitioner returned to Bombay, his mother having recovered sufficiently enabling him to do so. On return the petitioner found that on 8th of November...
B.R. Sound-n-music Vs. O.P. Bhardwaj and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1988
Reported in: (1988)70CTR(Bom)43; [1988]173ITR433(Bom); 1988MhLJ496
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The petitioners are a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. The petitioner firm was regularly assessed under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, since the assessment year 1976-77. In respect of the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83, the petitioner-firm filed its returns late. These returns, however, were filed voluntarily. No notices under section 139(2) or section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were issued to the petitioner. For these assessment years, the Income-tax Officer had levied interest under section 139(8), penal interest under section 215/217 and penalties under sections 271(1)(a), 273(b) and section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioner made an application dated July 12, 1985, addressed to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-III, Bombay, under section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, requesting him to waive the interest and penalties so levied under the pro...
Trading Engineers (international) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direc ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1988
Reported in: (1988)70CTR(Bom)60; [1989]176ITR317(Bom)
Sujatha Manohar, J.1. The petitioner carries on business of rendering technical and engineering services for installation of pumping plants, etc., together with preparation of designs and furnishing of technical know-how connected with it. The petitioner renders technical and engineering services have, in the past, been approved by respondent No. 1, that is to say, the Central Board of Direct Taxes under section 80-O of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This fact is not denied by the respondents who have not filed any affidavit in reply.2. One such contract for technical and engineering services was entered into by the petitioner with P. T. Sarang Tehnik, Indonesia. The contract is dated May 14, 1981. It is for installation/erection of pumping plant and other equipment in Indonesia as set out in the agreement. The agreement is at exhibit-A.3. In respect of this agreement of May 14, 1981, the petitioner applied for approval under section 80-O of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year...
Harshadbhai Shah and anr. Vs. Rani Kamla Raje Wd/O Kunwar Jaisinghrao ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1988
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR166; 1988MhLJ874
M.M. Qazi, J.1. The impugned Order has been passed by the Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nagpur, on the basis of the compromise petition on 11-3-1983. There is no dispute that the compromise petition was not signed by all the parties. As many as five parties did not sign the compromise petition and as many as seven parties did not verify the same. Inspite of this, the learned trial Court accepted the compromise and directed that the decree be drawn in terms thereof. The learned trial Court further directed that the 2/9th share of Shalinidevi shall continue to remain with the Court of Wards till the rights of the parties entitled to her share were decided. It may be mentioned here that Shalinidevi is alleged to have executed two Wills-(1) dated 16-1-1982, under which the appellants claim to have been appointed as executors, and (2) dated 4-8-1982, under which Mrs. Ahirrao and Rajendrasingh Jadhao claim to be the legatees of Shalinidevi. They have initiated probate proceedings whic...
Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Senior Medical Teachers' A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1988
Reported in: (1988)90BOMLR639
Lentin, J.1. Medical teachers in the municipal medical colleges in Greater Bombay, being as much municipal employees as any other, are likewise entitled to leave travel assistance (L.T.A.). Such is the ratio of this judgment.2. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay runs three medical colleges and one dental college in Greater Bombay. Medical teachers are employed in those colleges. They are full-time employees of the Corporation. They are but a handful compared to the Corporation's remaining employees.3. In 1976 the Corporation revised the pay scales of all its employees including medical teachers. On April 29, 1977 the Medical Council of India passed a Resolution that all medical teachers in all the affiliated medical colleges should be given the University Grants Commission (UGC) scales of pay, plus clearness allowance (D.A.), house rent allowance (H.R.A.), city living allowance (C.L.A.) and non practicing allowance (N.P.A.). The Resolution was accepted by the State Government ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›