Mumbai Court June 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.
Colour-chem Limited Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1990
Reported in: 1990(50)ELT340(Bom)
Rule. Returnable forthwith.Shri Mehta waives service on behalf of the respondents.Heard counsel.1. The petitioner company is inter alia manufacturing Synthetic Tanning Agents and other various chemical products. The Company had imported certain material in the year 1984. The Superintendent of Central Excise issued show causes notice dated October 22, 1984 in accordance with Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules. The Company appeared before the Assistant Collector of Central Excise and the hearing was concluded in 1985, but the Assistant Collector did not pass any order for over four years. On September 12, 1989 the Superintendent of Central Excise directed the Company to appear for hearing before the Additional Collector of Central Excise claiming that in view of the amendment to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act all proceedings pending on December 27, 1985 with the Assistant Collector stand transferred to Additional Collector. This notice was open the basis that the earlier show cau...
Toshniwal Exports Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1990
Reported in: 1990(50)ELT199(Bom)
Rule. Returnable forthwith.Shri Devdhar waives service on behalf of the respondents.Heard counsel.1. The petitioners are export house carrying on business of exports, inter alia video cassettes. In 1988 the petitioners secured from their customers order for supply of 10,000 blank video cassettes. The cassettes were to be exported by the customers. In terms of the Import & Export Policy 1988-91 a party manufacturing an item for 100% export becomes entitled to an Imprest Licence in terms of which the party is permitted to make import into India free of customs duty, the raw material required for manufacture of the said item. In accordance with the Policy, on August 26, 1988 the petitioners applied for issue of Special Imprest Licence under the Duty Exemption Entitlements Scheme. Respondent No. 2 issued the Imprest Licence on December 18, 1988. The petitioners submitted on March 1, 1989 another application for issue of Special Imprest Licence, but on this occasion the respondents claimed ...
Suhas Bhaskar Gadre Vs. V.V. Savjee, Presiding Officer, Ii Labour Cour ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1990
Reported in: [1991(61)FLR153]; (1994)IIILLJ626Bom
H.H. Kantharia, J.1. The petitioner's services as a Librarian working in the Central Railway Library were terminated with effect from 31st March, 1984. A reference with regard to his demand for reinstatement and continuity of services with full back wages was made by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation) to the Second Labour Court at Bombay under Section 10(1) read with Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The reference was numbered as Reference (IDA) No. 163 of 1985. On appreciation of the evidence adduced before him, the learned Labour Judge came to the conclusion that the petitioner could not prove that his services were illegally and wrongfully terminated by the Library. He also held that he had no jurisdiction to try the said reference as it was not maintainable. His further conclusion was that the Library could not prove that it had given all the terminal dues of the petitioner and that it had paid to the petitioner only some dues. In the ultimate analys...
R.S. Jadhav and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)BomCR645
S.M. Daud, J.1 Government Resolution dated February 1, 1965 (GR 1965) has given birth to these petitions by rival groups aspiring for promotion in the Maharashtra Finance & Accounts Service, Class II (Service).2. Accounting constitutes a vital function of all State departments and offices. Prior to 1960 this function was attended to by sections of employees in each office or department of the Government. These employees possessed a more or less common basic knowledge of accounts. Regard being had to the institutional divide, the accounts knowing personnel were placed at a disadvantage. Avenues for promotion were few and far between. Some offices had a surplus of them and some a severe shortage. The Secretary to the Government, Finance Department, was the Head of Department vis-a-vis as many as seven offices and much of his time was taken by the routine required of such head. To solve the problem, Government decided upon the establishment of a Directorate of Account & Treasuries (DAT). ...
Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Bandra (East) Vs. A.S. Joshi and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-08-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR140
H. Suresh, J.This is a petition filed by the petitioners for removing the first respondent as the sole a arbitrator, under section 11 of the Indian Arbitration Act, in respect of certain reference of disputes between the petitioners and the second respondents. Alternately, the petitioners pray that leave may be granted to the petitioners under section 5 of the Indian Arbitration Act to revoke the authority of the first respondent. Consequently, they pray that this Court may be pleased to appoint another fit and proper arbitrator to act as sole arbitrator in place of the first respondent.2. The second respondents have not contested this petition. It is the first respondent who is the arbitrator who has contested this matter. He has been an arbitrator in several matters referred to by the petitioners and he says that many of his awards have been accepted by the parties without any challenge.3. The relevant facts are as follows :The very first meeting of the arbitration was held on March ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Vimla Tulsidas and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1990
Reported in: [1991]190ITR433(Bom)
T.D. Sugla J.1. The only question of law referred to this court by the Tribunal under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the value of the gold ornaments not studded with precious stones would be exempt under section 5(1)(viii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act, of 1971 and not includible in the 'net wealth' of each of the assessees for each of the assessment years under consideration before the Tribunal ?'2. Counsel are agreed that, in view of this court's decision in the case of CWT v. Smt. Godavaribai R. Podar : [1988]169ITR245(Bom) , the word` 'jewellery' as used in the said clause (viii) of section 5(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, cannot, for the period prior to April 1, 1972, be held to include within its embrace ornaments made of gold or silver or platinum or other precious metal or alloy thereof which do not contain precious or semi-precious stone or stones. Since the asses...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR403(Bom)
1. This estate duty reference pertains to the estate of the late Rani Urmila Devi Bishnu of Nepal. Rani Urmila Devi was the daughter-in-law of Maharani Bala Kumari Devi who died on February 3, 1952. Maharani Bala Kumari Devi, at the time of her death, had two sons, General Shankar and General Madan who were alive. Her son, General Bishnu, had predeceased, Maharani Bala Kumari Devi. Maharani Bala Kumari Devi also left behind a daughter, Maharani Raj Laxmi Devi. Rani Urmila Devi was the wife of General Bishnu who had pre-deceased Maharani Bala Kumari Devi.2. General Madan died on June 20, 1953, leaving behind his widow, Rani Jagdamba Devi. He also left behind a mistress, Manik Devi, who had the status of an avaruddha stri, and her two minor sons.3. Rani Urmila Devi died on or about November 29, 1957. It is the contention of the Department that Rani Urmila Devi was the owner of one-sixth share in the estate of Maharani Bala Kumari Devi at the time of her death and, therefore, the estate o...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Narandas Jamnadas Gokani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR380(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following four questions of law to this court for opinion under section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1957 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that since no part of the goodwill of the firm vested in the accountable person by reason of the partnership agreement 1969, can section 9 of the Estate Duty Act be applied ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in determining the deceased's share in the goodwill of the firm which passed on his death at 25 per cent. instead of 60 per cent as determined by the Assistant Controller ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that only 25 per cent. of the amount of development rebate reserve standing in the firm's account as at the time of the deceased's death, should be taken as having passed on his death under se...
Mrs. Patsy P. Mistry Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1990
Reported in: [1991]191ITR452(Bom)
1. Paper book in each of the above references dispensed with.2. The following questions have been referred to us for decision under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 :3. Wealth-tax Reference No. 72 of 1976 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee had any interest in the trust corpus on the relevant valuation date ? (2) If the answer to question No. (1) is in the affirmative, whether the same was includible in the net wealth of the assessee ?'4. Wealth-tax Reference No. 73 of 1976 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the applicant that she had no interest in the corpus of the trust on the relevant valuation date and so it was not includible in her net wealth was rightly rejected ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the applicant had any interest in the corpus of the Bhabha trust on the relevant valuation date ?'5. Wealth-tax Reference No. 74 of 1976 :'(1) Whether, on the ...
Seth Rasesh N. Mafatlal Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-1990
Reported in: [1991]190ITR311(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The following questions are referred to us under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, at the instance of the assessee and at the instance of the Department :At the instance of the assessee : '(i) Whether the Tribunal erred in law in holding that rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, was mandatory in valuing the 4,229 shares of Surat Cotton Spg. and Wvg. Mills Pvt., Ltd., at the valuation date March 31, 1968 and in confirming the valuation at Rs. 211 per share based on that rule ? (ii) Whether the Tribunal ought to have held that the said 4,229 shares of Surat Cotton Spg. and Wvg. Mills Pvt., Ltd., ought to have been valued at Rs. 175 per share, as was valued by approved valuers under section 24(6) in the connected case of Smt. Kusumben D. Mahadevia : [1980]124ITR799(Bom) ? (iii) Whether rule 1D in so far as it goes beyond the substantive provisions of valuation contained in section 7(1) is invalid and/or ultra vires the rule making power of the Board...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »