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.
Vajubhai Patel and anr. Vs. Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR702
S.M. Daud, J.1 These are cross petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution aimed at the verdict of the Charity Commissioner (CC) in a proceeding under section 41-D r.w. 41-E of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (B.P.T.A.).2. Basic education is one of the many concepts which this country owes to Mahatma Gandhi. To popularise this ideal certain individuals including Vajubhai Patel in 1964 organised themselves into a Council known as the Indian Council of Basic Education. In April 1964, the Council was registered under the Societies Registration Act of 1860 (SR. Act) as also the B.P.T.A. Vajubhai, amongst others was recorded as a Manager as also a Trustee of the Council and the application for registration was moved by him. Accompaniments to the application included a Memorandum of Association and Rules and Regulations. The latter recited that the management of the affairs of the Council vested in the Board of Governors (B.G.) which was to be the sole executive of the Council. It was...
Blue Star Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi, and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR561(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the orders/letter dated June 11, 1987, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Foreign Tax Division, New Delhi, refusing to approve the petitioner's agreement dated November 15, 1985, with Van Leeman, Holland (Pipe and Fittings) (for short 'foreign concern'), for the supply of technical know-how. The Board, it may be stated, had refused to approve the agreement on the ground that the supply of technical know-how to the foreign party amounted to execution of any work undertaken forming part of a foreign project undertaken by any other person in pursuance of a contract entered into by such other person with the Government of a foreign State/foreign enterprise within the meaning of section 80HHB(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The petitioner made certain averments in the petition. The respondents, for reasons best known to them, did not til...
Rajaram Vyankatesh Munje Vs. Deputy Director of Education, Amravati
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-04-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR92
A.A. Desai, J.1 In this petition we have been called upon to examine the claim of a teacher for grant on attaining the age of superannuation.2. The petitioner was a Matriculate. He, as an untrained teacher, since 8-7-1966 served in the school of respondent No. 2 society. On attaining the age of superannuation, i.e. 58, he on 30-4-1978 retired from the service. He made a claim for grant of pension. The respondent No. 2 society subsequently vide Resolution dated 22-4-1988 confirmed the petitioner, Respondent no. 1 by the impugned order dated 2-12-1988 informed that the petitioner was untrained and in view of the provision laid down under Rule 68.4 of the Secondary Schools Code (the Code), he could not be confirmed in the service. The pension, therefore, cannot be granted.3. Mr. Deshpande, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, tried to urge for sometime that the petitioner held the post in clear and regular vacancy. Moreover, the society by the resolution has confirmed the pet...
American Dry Fruit Stores Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Bom376; 1990(2)BomCR671; 1991(32)ECC258
ORDER1. Whether statutory order could be displaced or modified by a public notice; whether such a modification would effect the doctrine of incorporation and whether the representation made to the statutory order, if acted upon, could be withdrawn in the summary manner, are some of the asserted questions that are posed in this proceeding. The compass of controversy is comparatively short and the facts are equally short. To understand the thrust of the controversy only a few aspects serving as land marks, could be mentioned at this stage itself.2. The petitioners are a firm registered under the Partnership Act and they carry on business of manufacturing, exporting anddealing in food products and importing for their business raw materials and other goods for stock and sale. The second Respondent is the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports at New Delhi, the 3rd Respondent is the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports at Bombay while the 4th Respondent is the Collector of Customs...
Babykumari Mohanlal Soni Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-1990
Reported in: 1991(55)ELT172(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The Joint Secretary to the Government of India passed Order dated August 31, 1989, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 3(1) of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, directing detention of Mohanlal S. Soni with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the argumentation of foreign exchange. The order of detention was served on January 29, 1990 and the Grounds of detention were furnished.The grounds of detention, inter alia, recite that on receipt of the information, the Enforcement Directorate raided the residential and business premises of the detenu on July 10, 1989. From the residential premises, large foreign currency was recovered, while from the business premises, Indian currency of Rs. 20,000/- was recovered. The statement of the detenu was recorded under Section 40 of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and the detenu admitted that he was carrying on business of unauthorised purchase and sale of fo...
Ambedkar (Dr.) Medicos Association, Maharashtra State, Aurangabad Bran ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR337
N.P. Chapalgaonkar, J.1. The first petition before us filed by Dr. Ambedkar Medicos' Association, Aurangabad an Organization formed by the medical graduates for the welfare of the Scheduled Castes and Other Backward Classes and the second petition filed by a student who wanted to opt for medical education raise a common question as to whether the rule prescribing manner in which, percentage of the reservation for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and denotified and nomadic tribes and other Backward Classes will be carved out, in the rules for admission for M.B.B.S. for the year 1988-89 of the Medical Colleges of the Government of Maharashtra is invalid. It is the contention of the petitioners in both the petitions that 34 percent of the seats of the total intake capacity was reserved for Backward Classes and the break-up was 13 percent for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes converts to Buddhism and 7 per cent for Scheduled tribes including those living outside specified area...
Dharamsi Morarji Chemical Co. Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1990
Reported in: [1994]206ITR608(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. This court is in respectful agreement with the observations of a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of J. K. (Bombay) Ltd. v. CBDT : [1979]118ITR312(Delhi) that the scope of judicial review in respect of an order passed by the Board under section 80-O of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), is not that of an appeal. The very fact that the Board has been given the power to approve or refuse to approve an agreement shows that the Legislature intends to give the Board to say in the construction of section 80-O. It is only if the understanding of section 80-O by the Board shows an error of law apparent on the face of the record that the court would interfere with the rejection of an application for approval by the Board. If the manner in which the Board understands the meaning and scope of section 80-O is reasonable and is in keeping with the object of section 80-O, the court may not interfere.2. The Board's impugned order, thus, requires to be ...
K.S.M. Massonji and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR435(Bom)
Tipnis, J.1. The order dated March 31, 1982, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur, under section 273A(4) of the Income-tax Act is impugned by this petition.2. The petitioner is a partnership firm. The petitioner-firm as well as its partners were assessed to income-tax and the firm was assessed from nearly 1922. Since about 1962, the firm started facing financial difficulties. While completing the assessments for the assessment years 1966-67 to 1974-75, the Income-tax Officer levied penalties under sections 271(1)(a), 271(1)(c) and 273(a) of the Income-tax Act. The petitioner has averred that there were heavy sales tax dues and the bankers of the petitioner also filed a suit for recovery against the petitioner-firm. Being in extreme financial difficulties, the petitioners filed a petition under section 273A(4) of the Income-tax Act before the Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur, in January, 1981, seeking waiver of the amount of penalties on the ground that the same ...
K.C. Kaushik Vs. P.B. Rane, Fifth Income-tax Officer, and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR160; (1990)84CTR(Bom)62; [1990]185ITR499(Bom)
T.D.Sugla1. The petitioner is in the service of the Bank of Baroda. He purchased a flat in Suvarnadeep Co-operative Housing Society Limited (for short 'Surnadeep'), Santacruz, Bombay, on March 21, 1973, for a sum of Rs. 49,140 for the purpose of his residence. He was residing in that flat On October 24, 1979, he sold the flat for Rs. 1,25,000 and on same the date purchased another flat in Jai Priyadarshini Co-operative Housing Society Limited at Khar. Bombay (for short 'Priyadarshini'), for a sum of Rs. 1,11,000. He resided in the Khar flat from October 24, 1979, to July 25, 1980. On July 26, 1980, he sold the Khar flat also for a sum of Rs. 1,20,000 and purchased another flat on the date in Kalpana Co-operative Housing Society Limited (for short 'Kalpana'). Santacruz, Bombay, for Rs. 1,20,000. Thereafter, he started residing in this flat. However, he vacated the flat on May 16, 1981, on being transferred to Baroda. From May 27, 1981, to July 1, 1983, the flat in Kalpana was let out to...
Malabar Hill Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-02-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR549; (1990)86CTR(Bom)4; [1990]184ITR216(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. By this petition under articles 14, 19(e), 300A and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a Co-operative Housing Society, has challenged the notice dated September 19, 1977, under section 269D(1) and notice dated December 24, 1985, under section 269F(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), issued by the Competent Authority and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Range I, Bombay.2. The relevant facts in brief are that Gautam Sarabhai Private Ltd. (for short 'the owners') were the owners of a plot of land admeasuring 8,077 square yards situate at Mount Pleasant Road. Bombay. In or about December, 1951/ January, 1952 it was agreed between the parties that the said plot of land would be leased out to the petitioner-assessee for a period of 21 years 7 months commencing from January 1, 1952, up to July 31, 1973, at a stipulated monthly rent, that the petitioner would construct 60 apartments thereon together with servants quarters, garages, swimmi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›