Mumbai Court April 1990 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.
Shaikh Mohd. Rafiq Mohd. HussaIn Vs. Preventive Detention Secretary to ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2422
Pendse, J.1. The Secretary (Preventive Detention) to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department, and Detaining Authority passed order dated May, 9, 1989 in exercise of powers under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, directing detention of the petitioner with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods. The order of detention was served on February 15, 1990 and the grounds of detention were furnished.The grounds, inter alia, recite that on suspicion, Customs Intelligence Officers intercepted the detenu on his arrival on March 17, 1988 at Sahar Airport. The detenu had arrived from Dubai. On search of the detenu, 50 gold bars with foreign markings weighing 5,830 grams and valued Rupees 18,18,960/- were recovered. The statement of the detenu was recorded and the detenu incriminated himself in the commission of smuggling of gold. The detenu was arrested on March, 18, 1988 but was released on bail by th...
Assistant Collector Vs. Evangelist Francies Almeida
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT295(Bom)
1. The Assistant Collector of Customs, the original complainant, has preferred this appeal against the order of acquittal of the Original accused No. 2 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 412 of 1980.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are as under.The present appellant filed a complaint against the present respondent No. 1 and original accused No. 1 Mohsin Abdul Kadar alleging that on 12-2-1976 at about 8.00 p.m. the Customs Officer Shri Tiverekar had stopped the car bearing registration No. B.M.C. 9762 which was driven by original accused No. 1 and by his side the present respondent No. 1, the original accused No. 2, was sitting. The complainant alleged that the Customs Officer Shri Tiverekar after stopping the car searched the car after asking the accused Nos. 1 and 2 if there were any dutiable goods in the car and after he was informed that there were none and in the search 32 electronic calculators of Japanese m...
G.G. Rajadhyaksha, Assistant Collector of Customs Vs. Evangelist Franc ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-09-1990
Reported in: 1991(33)LC729(Bombay)
I.C. Shah, J.1. The Assistant Collector of Customs, the original complainant, has referred this appeal against the order of acquittal of the original accused No. 2 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 412 of 1980.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are as under.2A. The present appellant filed a complaint against the present respondent No. and original accused No. 1 Mohsin Abdul Kadar alleging that on 12.2.1976 at about 8.00 p.m. the Customs Officer Shri Tiverekar had stopped the car bearing registration No. B.M.C. 9762 which was driven by original accused No. I and by his aide the present respondent No. 1, the original accused No. 2, was sitting. The complainant alleged that the Customs Officer Shri Tiverekar alter stopping the car searched the car after asking the accused Nos. 1 and 2 if there were any dutiable goods in the car and after he was informed that there were none and in the search 32 electronic calculators...
Atlas Copco Mct Ab of Sweden Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-1990
Reported in: (1991)39ITD328(Mum.)
1. These are three appeals by the assessee against the consolidated order of the CIT (A), dated 10-7-1985. Most of the grounds raised in all these three appeals are common grounds. These appeals are, therefore, dealt with and disposed of by a consolidated order.2. The appellant here is M/s. Atlas Copco MCT AB assessed to tax as a non-resident company. The company has been taxed for these three years on royalties amounting to Rs. 4,46,570, Rs. 4,80,834 and Rs. 4,52,158 receivable by it as royalties under Clause 1(b) of the agreement entered into by it with M/s. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd. Such assessment has been confirmed by the CIT (A) whose order is now challenged before us. Shri S.E. Dastur, learned counsel for the appellant firstly took us painstakingly through the agreement that the appellant had entered into with M/s. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd. at Stockholm on 25-3-1977. He argued that Clause 2 of the agreement provided that the appellant company (hereinafter referred to as Swedish c...
Sanmukh Singh Sethi Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: (1990)(50)ELT260Tri(Mum.)bai
1. All these appeals have a common question involved and hence with consent from both the sides, they are heard together, and are disposed of by this common order.2. Appeal No 565/88 is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No 1071S 88 BCH dt. 24-2-1988, where the articles of which clearance is not permitted under OGL are (i) Pneumatic sealer and (ii) Pneumatic Tensioner. Appeal No. 697/88 is directed against the Order-in-Original No. S/10-113/88 ACCII-A dt. 15-1-1988 where items are (i) pneumatic sealer and (ii) pneumatic combination tool. Appeal Nos. 885/88, 886/88, 887/88,888/88 and 889/88 are directed against the common Order-in-Appeal No 2755/88 BCH dt. 18-7-1988 where is the Appeal Nos.885/88 and 886/88 the items involved are pneumatic tensioner, in Appeal No. 887/88 aned 889/88, the item involved is pneumatic tool and in appeal 889/88, the item involved is pneumatic sealer.3. The appellants here on various dates, but during the policy period 1985-88, imported amonst others, the ...
J.M. JaIn Vs. Ahmed Sodek Vaid and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ244
1. It is apparent that the present Criminal Appeal is not maintainable under any of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The impugned order is a permission granted to the first respondent accused to go abroad. Such an order is not appealable. Hence, on the request of Shri Khan, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant, the same is permitted to be converted into an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The first respondent is facing a prosecution for contravention of the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. He is a South African national. On 28th February, 1990, on information being received, the Narcotic Control Bureau raided room No. 201 of Hotel Diplomat, Colaba. At the time of the raid the first respondent along with one Shaikh Mohammed Usman was present. On search, an amount of U.S. $ 2190 in travellers cheques, U.S. $ 230 and pound 150 pounds in currency notes and Rs. 9,63,000/- and certain incriminati...
Mustafa ShamsuddIn Shaikh Vs. Shamshad Begum Mustafa Shaikh and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR697; (1990)92BOMLR239; 1991CriLJ1932; I(1991)DMC34
Pendse, J.1. The petitioner married respondent No. I on May 20, 1977 and a daughter, respondent No. 2, was born out of the wedlock on May 3, 1978. The parties fell apart within four months of the marriage and the wife started residing with her parents. On October 2, 1979 and on January 23, 1980, the petitioner made efforts to bring his wife back to matrimonial home but the efforts did not succeed for one or The other reason. On January 24, 1980, the petitioner served legal notice on the wife requesting her to return back to matrimonial house. The wife gave reply on February 14, 1980 complaining that she was required to leave the house due to the cruel treatment meted out by the petitioner. On February 19, 1980, the petitioner instituted Reg. Civil Suit No. 171 of 1980 against the wife claiming restitution of conjugal rights. The wife filed written statement on September 10, 1980.2. On September 11, 1980, the wife along with her minor daughter instituted criminal miscellaneous Applicati...
Apeejay Premises Co-operative Society Ltd., and Another Vs. Nishar Ahm ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR468; (1990)85CTR(Bom)46; [1990]185ITR487(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a co-operative society, has challenged the validity and legality of the notice dated April 11, 1977, issued by the Competent Authority under section 269D(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. A private limited company by name Fleury's Swiss Confectionery Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'vendors') were the owners of a piece of land together with two buildings standing thereon at Forbes Street, Fort, Bombay. They demolished one of the old structures and constructed a new building in that place now known as Apeejay House consisting of office blocks, godowns and car-parking spaces. The building was sold to various persons on what is known as ownership basis by blocks and godowns. Certain portions were retained by the vendors for their own use or for letting out to tenants. All this happened during the period from 1967 to 1972.3. The blocks and godowns so sold could not, in law, be registere...
Technocraft Industries and Others Vs. G.S. Tung, Second Ito, Ai Ward, ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR270; (1990)85CTR(Bom)185; [1990]185ITR465(Bom)
T.D. Sugla J.1. By these two petitions under articles 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to issue notices under section 148 read with section 147(a) dated February 7, 1984, for the assessment years 1977-78 and 1978-79.2. The petitioner is a partnership firm. The proceedings relate to the assessment years 1977-78 and 1978-79. Returns of income were filed on July 24, 1977, and June 19, 1978, respectively. The assessments were completed under section 143(3) on June 22, 1977, and February 20, 1981, respectively.3. On receipt of an appraisal report dated October 24, 1983, from the Assistant Director of Inspection (Investigation), Unit-III (3), the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that the income of the petitioner chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for the two years by reason of non-disclosure of necessary material fully and truly at the time of the original assessment. Accordingly, he issued the impugned...
S.G. Rajadhyakshya Vs. Leela Daulatram Uttamchandani.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT3(Bom)
1. The State has come in appeal against the order of acquittal passed in favour of the original accused of the offence under Sections 135(1)(a)(ii) and 135(1)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act and under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Criminal Appeal No. 399 of 1981.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are as under.The accused was tried and convicted of the offence under Sections 135(1)(a)(ii) and 135(1)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act and she was sentenced to suffer imprisonment till rising of Court and fine of Rs. 40,000/- on each of the first two counts and she was also sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act. Being aggrieved by the said order of conviction the accused preferred an appeal to the Court of Sessions at Greater Bombay and the learned Ad...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »