Mumbai Court March 1989 Judgments
Shri K.V. Vijaykumar Vs. Deputy Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1989
Reported in: (1989)(22)LC235Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the Order No. XVH(GC)7-8/87 dated 7.9.1987 passed by the Deputy Collector of Customs (Prev.), Gold Control, Bombay.2. During the course of Personal Hearing Shri D.H. Shah Advocate representing the appellant reiterated all the submission made in the appeal memo.3. I have carefully gone through the records of the case as well as considered all the submissions made in support of the appeal. I have also perused the relevant documents in respect of the subject matter of this appeal.4. The Appellant Mr. K.V. Vijaykumar has preferred this appeal against the order of rejection of his application for the grant of Gold Dealer's Licence. The Appellant is one of the existing partners of the firm M/s. Laxmi Jewellery Mart, holding Gold Dealer's Licence No.574/Gold/63 at Bombay. Since the appellant wants himself to get separated from the said partnershipbusiness in gold and to start his own, independent business as a Licensed Gold Dealer, the request was made by him to ...
Tag this Judgment!Parikh Bros. Vs. Sixth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1989
Reported in: (1990)32ITD222(Mum.)
1. The assessee comes up with the present miscellaneous application and it arises out of the following order of the I.T.A.T., Jaipur Bench camp at Bombay made on 29th September, 1984 in ITA Nos. 3500 to 3506/Bom./1983 involving assessment years 1973-74 to 1979-80: These appeals are by the assessee pertaining to assessment years 1973-74 to 1979-80. 2. The assessee has sought permission to withdraw these appeals under Section 245M of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in order to be entitled to make an application to the Settlement Commission. 3. We are of the view that the request must be granted and the same is hereby done. The appeals are permitted to be withdrawn under Section 245M of the I.T. Act.The order dated 20th April, 1985 made by the Settlement Commission (IT & WT), New Delhi is to the following effect: Sub : Application Under Section 245C(1) of the IT Act, 1961 Assessment years 1973-74 to 1984-85. Please refer to your application dated 22.11.1984 for settlement mentioned above. ...
Tag this Judgment!Satyabhamabai Balaji Kitey (Decd. by Legal Representative, Kamlakar La ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1989
Reported in: 1989MhLJ1068
A.A. Desai, J.1. These appeals raise a question as to what is the extent and nature of the right, interest and title of an ostensible owner vis-a-vis a real owner of benami property?2. Facts involved in these appeals, to some extent, are interlinked. They are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. One Satyabhamabai, widow of Balaji Kitey, the original plaintiff, claimed to be the owner of the suit house. She is stated to have purchased the suit house, vide sale deed, exhibit C-1, dated January 7, 1936, by making payment of a consideration of Rs. 1,600. She had three brothers; (i) Yeshwantrao, (ii) Laxmanrao and (iii) Marotrao. The defendant, Pandurang, is a son of Marotrao. According to her, she intended to execute a will bequeathing the suit house to the sons of her brothers. She instructed the defendant, Pandurang, to prepare a will. She alleged that the defendant presented exhibit 35 dated June 21, 1966, representing it as a will drafted according to her...
Tag this Judgment!Padubidri Pattabhiram Bhat Vs. Shamrao Vithal Coop. Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)BomCR500; (1989)IILLJ377Bom; 1989MhLJ566
1. The Petitioner was the General Manager and Chief Executive of The Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Ltd., the respondent No. 1. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are, respectively, the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the said Bank. In this Judgment, the Respondent No. 1 shall, hereinafter be referred to as 'the Bank'. The Petitioner impugns the validity of Clause 4 of the Contract of Service dated 19th May, 1984 and the Resolution of the Board of Directors dated 21st May, 1987 whereby his employment was terminated in accordance with the terms of the contract.1. THE QUESTIONS 2. Is a Co-operative Bank, registered under the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 1984, an Act of the Parliament, 'State' as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution of India The Bank urges that it is not. This is one of the questions arising in this petition.. 3. The Petitioner was appointed as Additional General Manager on 19th May, 1984. He was promoted to the Office of the General Manager and Chief Executive on 6...
Tag this Judgment!Marathwada Banjara Jagrati Sanghatana Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-31-1989
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR27
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. Heard.The petitioner in the instant writ petition is an association established for organizing the people of the Banjara Community in the Marathwada Region of the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner has challenged in the instant writ petition the relevant Licensing Rules for sale of country liquor and foreign liquor contained in the Maharashtra Country Liquor Rules, 1973 (for short, 'the Country Liquor Rules') and the Bombay Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953) (for short 'the Foreign Liquor Rules') respectively, framed under the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (for short, the 'Act'), on the ground that the said Licensing Rules are arbitrary, discriminatory and are thus violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India (for short 'the Constitution'). The petitioner has also challenged the said Rules on the ground that they are mala fide as they are intended to promote the interest of the liquor lobby in the State.2. The basic submission urged on behalf of the petitioner in sup...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Perfect Circle Victor Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1989
Reported in: (1989)29ITD646(Mum.)
1. These three appeals are by the revenue against the orders of the CIT(A) for the assessment years 1982-83 to 1984-85. Since a common issue is involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this common order. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that in the case of expenditure incurred on maintenance of Guest House, the entire expenditure is not disallowable under Section 37(4) and on that ground directing the ITO to requantify the disallowance under second proviso to Rule 6D(2) of the IT Rules.3. The assessee has reimbursed a sum of Rs. 1,09,178 in the assessment year 1982-83, Rs. 83,633 in assessment year 1983-84 and Rs. 47,538 in assessment year 1984-85 to its associate concern, M/s. Automotive Corporation Services Limited. This was in connection with common facilities like office premises, consultancy, transit home and telex and telephone facilities. The ITO, applying the provisions of Section 37(4) read w...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Ravindra Sahadeo Sonawane Vs. the Dean, Grant Medical College, Bom ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-30-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Bom31; 1989(3)BomCR138; (1989)91BOMLR89; 1989MhLJ456
ORDERSawant, J.1. The petitioner, who belongs to a Scheduled Caste Community. has filed the present petition for a writ of mandamus directing respondents land 2, who are the Dean, Grant Medical College, Bombay, and the State of Maharashtra respectively to grant him a seat for the Post-Graduation Course. namely M.D. (Anaesthesia) in the 1st respondent's college and to quash the seat which is allotted to respondent 3. In the petition, two grounds are urged in support of the claim. Firstly, it is contended that Anaesthesia should be considered as an allied subject with General Surgery, including Paediatric Surgery, Neuro Surgery. Plastic Surgery. Orthopaedic Surgery, Oph-thalmology, Dentistry, Radiology. E.N.T.. Burns Surgery, etc. and seats reserved for all the said subjects should be considered together. Secondly, it is submitted that respondents 1 and 2 have converted one reserved seat into an unreserved seat and had thereby deprived the candidates belonging to the reserved categories ...
Tag this Judgment!Ratnagiri District Central Co. Op. Bank Ltd. Vs. Dinkar K. Watve and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1989
Reported in: (1989)91BOMLR165; [1989(59)FLR530]; (1994)IIILLJ447Bom; 1989MhLJ445
Sujata Manohar, J.1. The appellant is the original Respondent No. 2. The 1st Respondent is the original petitioner. Respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are original Respondents No. 1, 3 and 4. The appellant. The Ratnagiri District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. is hereinafter referred to as the Respondent. The 1st Respondent -Dinkar Kashinath Watve-is hereinafter referred to as the petitioner.2. The petitioner was an internal auditor of the Respondent-Bank at all material time. On 14.6.1965 he was served with a charge-sheet. This charge-sheet, after setting out various charges which were levelled against him, stated that the charges amounted to misconduct under the Standing Orders. Strict action was liable to be taken against the petitioner. The petitioner denied the charges by his reply dated 18.6.1965. Thereafter on 4.4.1966 the petitioner was served with a second charge-sheet containing further charges. Once again the charge-sheet reiterated that these charges constituted indiscipline and i...
Tag this Judgment!Sadashiv Dattatray Sonar Alias Chandgadkar Vs. Laxman Gopal Takkekar a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1989
Reported in: 1990(1)BomCR200; (1989)91BOMLR421
Sharad Manohar, J.1. This is a proceeding arising under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (hereafter, the Tenancy Act.).2(a). The petition is filed by the petitioner landlord, who had obtained Exemption Certificate under section 88-C of the Tenancy Act. This Certificate was granted to him after full hearing having been given to the two tenants who were parties to the section 88-C proceedings. He filed two applications under section 33-B of the Tenancy Act for recovery of possession of the suit land from the respective tenants. Both the applications were decided in his favour. One of the two tenants, one Hiremath, did not file any Appeal against that order. That tenant was directed to make over the possession of only 8 Acres out of 14 Acres of the land which was veritably fallow. Neither the tenant nor the landlord filed Appeal against that order and, thus, the landlord got possession of that 8 Acres of land which was, as stated above, veritably fallow. So far the other land...
Tag this Judgment!inspecting Assistant Vs. Hoechst India Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-27-1989
Reported in: (1990)32ITD689(Mum.)
1. These two cross appeals (one each by the Department and by the assessee) are consolidated and disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.. We shall deal with the appeal by the department first 2. The first ground in this departmental appeal is that the CIT(A) erred in allowing relief of Rs. 28,66,066 under the provisions of Section 35B on commission paid to Chemi Exports Kontours, G.M.B.H.It is submitted by the learned Departmental Representative that the relief granted by the CIT(A) is without any justification. Adverting to the amendment made by the Finance Act, 1980 w.e.f. 1/4/1981, it is pointed out that several of the sub-clauses of Section 35B(l)(b) have been deleted and those that survived did not enable the assessee to claim the relief as was ordered by the CIT (A). The claim has been processed by the CIT(A) under Clause (iv) of Section 35B(l)(b). This clause speaks of maintenance of an agency outside India for promotion of sale outside India of goods, servic...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »