Mumbai Court August 1990 Judgments
Suresh Arjundas Bakhtiani Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-29-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR26
D.R. Dhanuka J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition for an interim injunction seeking to restrain the first respondent, their officers, servants, representatives and agents from encashing bank guarantee bond No. 1-10, dated January 23, 1990, for Rs. 1,00,000 issued by the Vijaya Bank, Thane, pending disposal of the petitioner's application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, numbered as Arbitration Suit No. 2644 of 1990. The Vijaya Bank if not impleaded as a party to the main petition or to this petition for interim relief, presumably because the said bank is not a party in the arbitration agreement relied upon by the petitioners. The petitioner has invoked section 41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, in support of this petition for interim relief. I have heard counsel appearing in this petition as well as companion petitions, i.e., Arbitration Petitions Nos. 156 of 1990 and 135 of 1990 at some length. Having regard to the well-settled principles of law laid down by the Hon...
Tag this Judgment!Karim Babasaheb Fakir Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT630(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The short question which falls for determination in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is whether the Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi, was justified in rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner for non-appliance with the provisions of Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962. It is not necessary to deal with the facts in great detail as the issue involved is a very narrow one. On receipt of certain secret information, the Inspector of Customs. Harnai, intercepted a launch carrying foreign goods and anchored near Dabhol in Ratnagiri District. On entering the launch, the Inspector found 27 packages of T.V. sets, 10 packages of playing cards and five packages of fabric. The vessel 'Hirasagar' was towed to Harnai Port and the goods and the launch were seized on reasonable belief that the goods were of smuggled origin. Statements of Trindle as well as crew members were recorded and after investigation, show-cause notice for confiscation and Im...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Lever Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1990
Reported in: (1990)92BOMLR480; (1990)ILLJ11bBom
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. These three writ petitions challenge the constitutionality of Maharashtra Ordinance No. 9 of 1989, and the Maharashtra Act No. 2 of 1990 which replaced it. They have been heard and can be disposed of together.2. The petitioners in each writ petition manufacture, inter alia, vanaspati in the State of Maharashtra and, for the purpose, purchase vegetable non-esestial oil within the State. They despatch and sell vanaspati, inter alia, outside the State.3. Maharashtra Act No. 28 of 1982 introduced with effect from July 1, 1982 section 13AA into the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ('the said Act'). The provision, which we shall call 'the old section 13AA', purported to levy an additional purchase tax on goods specified in Part I of Schedule C of the said Act when the dealer who purchased them used such goods in the manufacture of taxable goods and despatched the same outside the State. The petitioner challenged the constitutionality of the old section 13AA by writ petitions fi...
Tag this Judgment!Suruchi Chand (Mrs.) and ors. Vs. Naresh Chand (Dr.) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-27-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)BomCR693
S.M. Jhunjhunwala, J.1 By this petition the petitioners are seeking enlargement of time to make and publish the award and directions to the effect that the arbitration proceedings pending before the arbitrators viz., Chief justice P.N. Bhagwati (Retired) and Mr. Justice V.D. Tulzapurkar (Retired) be proceeded with notwithstanding the filling of a suit being O.S. Suit No. 1016 of 1989 filed by respondent No. 32 on behalf of respondents 18 and 21 herein in the Court of the First Additional Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad, which suit has now been transferred to this Court and is still pending. The petitioners are also seeking certain inter-locutory reliefs as prayed for in the petition it is necessary to recall material facts which led to the present dispute.2. One Ramesh Chand (since deceased ), Dr. Naresh Chand and Mahesh Chand have been real brothers. Ramesh Chand died in a car accident at the age of 47 years on 18th December, 1986. The last petitioner is the widow and the 2nd an...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Cynamid India Ltd
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: (1990)89CTR(Bom)40; [1992]198ITR323(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar J.1. This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, requiring that we should direct the Tribunal to refer to us the following question as a question of law arising out of the Tribunal's order. The question is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the following funds constituted 'reserves' and were to be included in the computation of the assessee-company's capital for the purpose of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 :(i) Reserve under the Drugs Order (Price Control)(ii) Provision for contingencies (salary)(iii) Provision for contingencies (bonus)(iv) Reserve for depreciation(v) Provision for taxation(vi) Provision for doubtful debts ?'2. The affidavit-in-reply of the respondent explains that the reserve under the Drugs Order (Price Control) is created as per the provisions of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1970. The amount standing to the credit of the said reser...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Union Bank of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: (1990)90CTR(Bom)100; [1990]186ITR129(Bom)
ORDER--Income--Accrual--Question of taxability of interest or allowing any relief in the light of Board's circular not raised earlier before TribunalHELD:The question raised evidently is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that income by way of interest of sticky loans had not accrued to the assessee. However, the Tribunal had not held that the interest on sticky loans receivable but credited separately in interest suspense account was not an interest accrued to the assessee. What it has held is that the instructions issued by the Board in the form of a circular in September, 1984, were binding on the department and that the question of its taxability or any relief was required to be considered in the light of that circular. The question of taxability of this interest or allowing any relief in respect thereto in the light of the circular has not been raised and the question as raised does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in ref...
Tag this Judgment!Sadichha Chitra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: (1990)90CTR(Bom)135; [1991]189ITR774(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka J.1. This reference is made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'B' Bombay, under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in pursuance of an order of this court dated July 18, 1985, in Income-tax Application No. 599 of 1982 at the instance of the assessee. The question for our consideration is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the financial assistance of Rs. 2,10,085 (Rupees two lakhs ten thousand eighty-five only) received by the applicants from the Government of Maharashtra constitutes a revenue receipt ?'2. The relevant assessment year is 1976-77.3. The facts leading to the making of this reference are as under :(a) The assessee is a producer of motion pictures in Marathi language. (b) By a Government resolution bearing No. ENT 1075-F dated February 19, 1975, the Government of Maharashtra sanctioned its subsidy scheme for grant of financial assistance to Marathi film producers for their ensuing ventures. By the sai...
Tag this Judgment!V.i.P. Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-23-1990
Reported in: 1991(51)ELT288(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. The petitioners are a company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act and are engaged in the manufacture of plastic moulded luggage articles. The petitioners have a factory at Nasik where plastic moulded brief cases, suit-cases, vanity cases and overnight cases in the brand name of 'V.I.P.' and 'V.I.P. Travelite' are manufactured. The products are manufactured by molding into shells of different sizes a basic raw material called high density polyethylene (plastic) by a process called 'injection moulding.' After the moulding process, the resultant shells are assembled in the factory's assembly section along with aluminium frames, hinges, locks, channels etc.Between March 1, 1975 and April 20, 1979 the petitioners paid excise duty on the manufacture of the articles under Tariff Item 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944. Tariff Item 68 is a residuary item and excise duty was paid under Tariff Item 68 on an advise and directions given by...
Tag this Judgment!Changdeo Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-1990
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1240
G.D. Patil, J.1. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18th November, 1986 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal in Sessions Case No. 52 of 1986 convicting the accused for the offence punishable under S. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. The appellant accused was prosecuted on the charge that on 6-2-1986 at 4 a.m. at village Belora, P.S. Yavatmal Rural he stabbed his wife Vithabai by means of a knife, who died on 9-2-1986 due to stab-injuries and thereby he committed murder intentionally or knowingly causing the death of Vithabai Deotale and thereby committed the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The prosecution story was that the appellant accused Changdeo was resident of village Belora and was married to Vithabai of village Sayphal before about 14 years. After the marriage ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. American President Lines Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-1990
Reported in: [1992]194ITR571(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Department. It is the case of the Department that the Tribunal ought to have referred the following question of law to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law holding that the fresh claim of loss under section 32(1) not made earlier by the assessee in the original assessment proceedings have to be considered in the reassessment proceedings with out examining the question whether such claim, if allowed, would result in no escapement of income in the original assessment ?'2. The proceedings relate to assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessments were originally completed computing the income, subject to tax in India under rule 10(ii) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Since, in the opinion of the Income-tax Officer, the assessee's taxable income had escaped assessment, the assessments were reopened under section 147(a). In t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »