Mumbai Court September 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bharat Barrel and Drum Mfg. Co. Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1989
Reported in: (1990)81CTR(Bom)94; [1990]182ITR21(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. There are two questions in this reference raised at the instance of the Department. The questions read thus :' (1) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, correct in treating the amounts of Rs. 63,432 and Rs. 38,592 being penalties levied for non-payment of sales-tax within the prescribed time, as interest for late payment of tax, and further in holding that the liability to pay it arose during the normal course of the assessee's business and that it represented a liability incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business and that it was, therefore, an allowable expenditure under the Income-tax Act ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law justified in holding that the entire amount of Rs. 7,32,260 paid to Jalan Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. as forwarding and freight charges was an expenditure laid out for the purposes of the assessee's business a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.C. Tangal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1989
Reported in: (1990)81CTR(Bom)126; [1990]184ITR88(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. It appears from a perusal of the appellate order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal that penalty had been imposed upon the assessee in the sum of Rs. 35,000 by the customs authorities on the ground that he had under-invoiced certain imports and thereby imported more goods than were authorised by the import licence. The assessee went in appeal and the penalty amount was reduced to Rs. 15,000. The assessee claimed before the Income-tax officer an allowance in the said sum of Rs. 35,000 on the ground that it was an expenditure incurred wholly, exclusively and necessarily for the purpose of his business. The Income-tax officer rejected the claim. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed an allowance of the reduced penalty amount of Rs. 15,000. The Tribunal, in second appeal, upheld the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order. It found that the assessee had, upon payment of the penalty amount, cleared the goods and sold them. Thereby he had made profits...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sassoon J. David and Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1989
Reported in: (1990)81CTR(Bom)50; [1990]181ITR363(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. The only question of law raised in this reference at the instance of the Revenue is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee-company was entitled to interest under section 244(1) read with section 297(2)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even though the assessments were made under the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?'2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that the assessee is a company. The assessment years involved are 1958-59 and 1959-60. The assessments for both the years were completed under section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, before the commencement of the Income-tax Act, 1961. However, on account of appeals and reference, the assessments became final only with the decision rendered by this court in 1971. A copy of the judgment was received by the assessee on April 13, 1971. But the Income-tax Officer gave effect to the above order by her orders dated July...
Trade Wings Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1989
Reported in: (1989)80CTR(Bom)176; [1990]185ITR267(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha1. The reference is made at the instance of the assessee. Two questions are raised which read thus :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the nature of the business carried on by the assessee, the entertainment expenditure of Rs. 13,200 was liable to be disallowed for 1961-62 assessment year under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and similar expenditure of Rs. 24,269 and Rs. 20,101 was liable to be disallowed under section 37(2A)/(2B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for 1970-71 and 1971-72 assessment years ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-company was not entitled to deduction for 1971-72 assessment year in respect of Rs. 15,200 being the expenditure incurred on the feasibility of a hotel project in Goa ?'2. The reference was first heard by this Bench as far back as on April 20, 1987. We had then passed an order calling for a supplemental statement of the case se...
Kusum Bapurao Dhonre Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1989
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ121Bom; 1989MhLJ901
Dhabe, J. The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that she was not given the legitimate promotions to her in her service in the Department of Public Health and Medical Education of the State Government. 1. The facts are that the petitioner who is a Scheduled Caste Candidate passed 31/2 year-Diploma Course in General Nursing and Midwifery in 1967. She also passed an additional Diploma Course in Auxiliary Nursing and Midwifery in 1960. She was registered with the Nursing Council of the State of Maharashtra originally under the Provisions of the C.P. & Berar Nurses Registration Act on 5-1-1967, and thereafter under the Maharashtra Nursing Council Act. She was then appointed as a Staff-nurse in the payscale of Rs. 125-5-145 in the District Hospital, Akola, by the order dated 4-3-1967. During her service, she was deputed for B.Sc. (Post- Basic) Degree Course in Nursing on 26-6-1970. She obtained the said degree in 1973. After obtaining the said degree, she was appointe...
Shakuntala Vs. Vithalrao Akaram Navkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1989
Reported in: II(1990)DMC24
W.M. Sambre, J.1. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati in Criminal Revision No. 77/86 dated 8-9-1988, the applicant has come in revision.2. The main contention of the applicant is that the learned Magistrate has after considering the evidence on record has granted maintenance to the applicant and her son at the rate of Rs. 100/- and Rs. 50/- per month respectively by order dated 13-2-1986. It is further contended that her marriage was solemnised in the year 1978 with the non-applicant. She claims to be the first wife of the non-applicant and she contended that non-applicant married Suman in the year 1984. As such, she being the first wife is entitled for the maintenance. She contended that she served a notice on the non-applicant for maintenance which was not replied by him. Hence she filed an application before J.M.F.C. under Section 125 Criminal Procedure Code. In the W.S. filed by the NA he denied the relationship but subsequently he filed amendme...
Manisha Vs. Pramod
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1989
Reported in: I(1990)DMC540
A.A. Cazi, J.1. This is a Second Appeal filed by the wife who was respondent in the original petition and who had succeeded in that petition but who failed in appeal which the husband had filed against the dismissal of his petition.2. The parties were married on 16th December 1981 and have been living separate since 21st June 1982. On 10th November 1983 the husband filed the divorce petition being H.M.P. No. 7/83. Originally he prayed for a decree of divorce only on one ground, viz. that the wife had been incurably of an unsound mind or had been suffering continuously or intermittantly with mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner could not reasonably be expected to live with the respondent. (Section 13(1)(iii)). It may be mentioned that even earlier, the husband had filed a petition for divorce, but that was also on the single ground under Section 13(1)(iii). At that time, the petition for divorce was premature, and therefore, was not maintainable. In a...
i T C Ltd. Vs. Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1989
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas459(Bom)
DR. G.F. Couto J.1. In this petition under section 434(e) of the Companies Act, 1956, I.T.C Ltd., a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1882, prays that Ferment Resorts and Hotels Ltd. (for short, registered office at Villa Flores de Silva, Erasmo Carvalho Street, Margoa 403601, Goa, be would up as it is unable to pay its debts. 2. The petitioners case is that the company entered into an agreement with them on April 12, 1979, for availing of their consultancy, advisory and operational services. The duration of the agreement was for five years commencing on February 1, 1982, and ending on January 31, 1987, but the company, nonetheless, continued to avail of the petitioners' services up to January 15, 1988. Various amounts were payable to the petitioners by the company as remuneration, fees and charges for technical services and also for reimbursement of expenses incurred by them for and on behalf of the company. The petitioners 'account current' with the company showed ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Byramjee Jeejeebhoy (P) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1989
Reported in: [1990]182ITR6(Bom)
T.D. Sugla J.1. The only question of law raised in this reference is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest income amounting to Rs. 2,85,495 taxed in accrual basis and subsequently written off as bad debt is an admissible deduction under the head 'Income from other sources' '2. The assessee is a company. Proceedings relate to the assessment year 1970-71. The assessee wrote off a sum of Rs. 2,85,495 representing interest accrued on an amount paid in advance to New Swastik Land Development Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') as bad debt during the previous year. The amount was not received in the year of accrual and the assessee was taxed on it on accrual basis. The amount having not been received for a number of years, the assessee filed Suit No. 650 of 1968 against the Corporation in this court. Consequent upon the order of this court, the amount of Rs. 2,85,495 was no longer receivable for which re...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kirloskar Brothers Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1989
Reported in: [1990]181ITR523(Bom)
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. The reference raises, at the instance of the Revenue, four questions which read thus :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payment made by the assessee to Messrs. Sulzer Freres of Switzerland in pursuance of an agreement dated October 1, 1958, between them was expenditure capital in nature and not revenue expenditure ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payment made by the assessee to Messrs. Bullard and Co. of U.S.A. in pursuance of an agreement dated January 30, 1960, between them was expenditure capital in nature and not revenue expenditure ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that sugarcane crushers are agricultural implements within the meaning of item No. 9, Schedule V, and that profits arising from the manufacture of sugarcane crushers would be entitled to relief under section 80E of the Income-tax Act 1961 ? (4) Whether, on the fact...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »