Mumbai Court October 1989 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. Smita Dilip Rane Vs. Dilip Dattaram Rane
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-09-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Bom84; (1989)91BOMLR564; II(1990)DMC95; 1990Mh.L.J.69
ORDERC. S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. TheRespondent-husband Dilip Rane filed a Petition against Appellant-wife under the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce on the ground of cruelty, Shri V.K. Kulkarni, Judge, Bombay City Civil Court at Bombay, allowed the said Petition and declared that the marriage solemnised between Dilip Rane and Smt. Smita Rane stands dissolved by a decree of divorce.2. Being aggrieved by this judgment and decree, Smt. Smita Rane (wife) filed an Appeal before this Court. Sharad Manohar J., before whom the Appeal was placed for hearing, fully heard the Appeal. On going through the evidence on record, he came to the conclusion that there is hardly any acceptable evidence about the alleged acts of cruelty. He further found that assuming that there were any acts of cruelty, the said acts stand condoned, and therefore, the decree of divorce as passed by the City Civil Court cannot be sustained. However, in view of the subsequent complication, and relying upon the observations of t...
Tarabai W/O Krushnadas Mathankar (Sau.) Vs. State of Maharashtra and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-09-1989
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR159
D.J. Moharir, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 28-4-1989 of the Election Officer disqualifying the petitioner from contesting the election for the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat of village Chikni, Tahsil Warora, District Chandrapur. The elections were scheduled to be held on the 13th May 1989.2. The nomination paper for contesting the election from Gandhi Ward No. 1 of the said village Chikni was filed in by the petitioner and the same came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner had incurred a disqualification under section 14(1)(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, in that she was a member of the joint Hindu family consisting of hereself and her husband Krushnadas Mathankar and house property standing in the name of the said Krushnadas at Village Khapri, within the jurisdiction of the Gram Panchayat, Khapri, was in arrears of Gram Panchayat taxes amounting to Rs. 126/- for a period of...
Chowgule and Co (Hind) Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: (1990)81CTR(Bom)1; [1990]182ITR189(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. Two questions of law are raised in this reference at the instance of the assessee. The questions read thus :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Income-tax Officer has a choice to initiate penal proceedings for concealment in respect of the same item of income or particulars of income within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) on the basis of either the original return or the return under section 148 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the penal provisions for default under section 271(1)(c) as amended on April 1, 1968, are applicable in the case of the applicant '2. The assessee is a company. The proceedings relate to its assessment for the assessment years 1959-60 to 1962-63 (both inclusive). Returns were originally filed and the assessments were completed long before the penal provisions under section 271(1)(c) were amende...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: [1990]182ITR130(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. Two questions have been raised in this reference made at the instance of the Revenue in relation to the assessment year 1972-73 for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1972. the questions read thus :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that roads within the factory premises constituted 'plant' to be entitled to depreciation allowance ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions made for the purchase of deferred annuity policies on the lives of the directors for meeting the assessee's obligations for payment to them at the time of their retirement would not fall within the mischief of section 40(a)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 '2. Counsel are agreed that the first question is covered by this court's judgment in CIT v. Colour-Chem Ltd. : [1977]106ITR323(Bom) . Following that judgment, the first question is answered thus : The ...
K.D. Kapadia Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: [1990]182ITR490(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The assessee was doing business in copper bars. He imported two consignments of copper bars from the United States of America. The value thereof was U. S. dollars 35,411. They were shipped by the vessel 'Steel Vendor'. It sailed via Karachi and the copper bars were, in September, 1965, seized by the Pakistani authorities due to the hostilities then current between Pakistan and India as being articles destined for an enemy port.2. The assessee had paid sums of Rs. 1,59,449 in September and November, 1965, and a further sum of Rs. 25,000 in April, 1966, towards the price of the copper bars. The amounts which had originally been debited to a bank deposit account were, upon the seizure as aforesaid, transferred to an insurance claim account and the assessee lodged a claim with the insurers of the copper bars. After negotiations, the assessee received from the insurers, in full satisfaction of the claim, an amount of Rs. 2,92,433. The amount was received after June 6, 19...
Telco Kamgar Sanghatana and ors. Vs. Avinash Pandurang Toro and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: [1989(59)FLR819]; (1993)IIILLJ637Bom
Desai, J.1. This matter can be disposed of at the stage of admission. Accordingly Rule will issue. Smt. Menon for Respondents 1 to 5 waives service. Respondent No. 6 being the Tribunal is a formal party and need not be served. Advocates are heard.2. By this Writ Petition the Petitioners have impugned an interim order passed by the Industrial Court, Pune on 5th September 1989. A substantive dispute was referred to the Industrial Court on 20th October, 1988 after obtaining the permission of the Registrar. This was numbered as Application ICTU No. 4 of 1988 and was one under the procedure contemplated by Section 28(1-A). As usual the proceedings considered in a very leisurely manner and till April of next year only the pleadings had been completed. It would appear that thereafter an interim order was sought for and passed by the Tribunal in September 1989, that is, nearly 11 months after the proceedings were concerned.3. For passing an interim order and granting interim reliefs in this ab...
Suresh Madhaorao Bhange and ors. Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR199
M.S. Ratnaparkhi, J.1. The order passed by the Collector, Wardha on 9-5-1988 (Annexure-M) disqualifying the six petitioners from being Councillors of the Zilla Parishad, Wardha and the consequential order issued by the State Government on 17-5-1988 appointing the Chief Executive Officers Zilla Parishad, Wardha as Authorised Officer under section 91B (b) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act have been challenged in this writ petition.2. There were elections to the Zilla Parishad at Wardha in 1979 of so and the petitioners Nos. 1 and 3 to 6 contested those elections on the official symbol of Congress-(I) and they were elected on that symbol. Other persons have also contested the elections and they were also elected. One Mr. Raut was elected as President of the Zilla Parishad. One Mr. Ingole (present respondent No. 4) was elected as a Vice President. One Mr. Gopal Tukaramji Zate (respondent No. 5) was elected a Chairman of the Works and Health Committee of the Zilla...
Makarand Krishnaji Joshi Vs. Sadashiv Vithal Joshi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Bom159; 1990(1)BomCR215; (1990)92BOMLR61; 1990(2)MhLj324
ORDER1. The petitioner filed a Civil Suit in he Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sangli on 2nd Nov. 1981 for recovery from the respondent of a sum of Rs. 17,516.49 p. together with interest. The petitioner made an application being Miscellaneous Application No. 179 of 1981 for being permitted to file the suit in forma pauperis. It seems that this application took a very long time for disposal. The application was fixed for hearing on 5-9-1985. On that day the petitioner was absent. It is his case that he had applied for an adjournment on the ground that he was required to be elsewhere for his business, but he learnt on that day that one of his relatives was seriously ill and was admitted to hospital. Hence he was required to attend on him at the hospital.2. In his absence the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Sangli dismissed his application for default.3. The petitioner applied for setting aside the order of dismissal for default, under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Ci...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Silk and Art Silk Mills Association Ltd ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: (1989)80CTR(Bom)163; [1990]182ITR38(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. This reference, made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, raises, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question :'Assuming that the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the entire expenditure and investments in Government securities during the years under reference should first be considered as having been made out of the assessable income of the assessee and only the balance should be treated as having been made out of the income from sub-scriptions '2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1967-68 to 1970-71. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and it is now established by a judgment of this court that it is a charitable institution entitled to exemption under section 11 of the Act. This judgment was delivered a reference relating to the assessment year 1967-68 for which year the Tribunal had so held...
Pharmed Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: [1990]182ITR75(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The assessee is a limited company. It was carrying on a business in manufacture during a part of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1972-73, which ended on June 30, 1971. Towards the end of that previous year, the assessee sold its factory along with machinery, plant and fittings. The price realized was allocated by it to the various assets according to what had been stated in the sale deed. In connection with the sale, the assessee had incurred expenditure in an aggregate sum of Rs. 1,60,661, the predominant part whereof was for registration and stamp fees in the sum of Rs. 1,29,425 and solicitors' fees in the sum of Rs. 28,926. The expenditure was proportionately allocated by the assessee to the various assets. In doing so, a sum of Rs. 1,15,267 was allocated to the factory building and Rs. 474 to the lift. The sale price in respect of the factory building and the lift was less than the cost thereof so that there was no capital gain. However, having...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »