Mumbai Court April 1991 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.
Bombay Warehouse Corporation Vs. Devraj and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Bom374; 1991(1)MhLj988
ORDER1. Plaintiff apply for amendment of the plaint by deleting the words 'portion of' appearing in para 5 and prayer clause (a) of the plaint. It is their case that these words 'portion of have been inadvertently written and have remained through oversight.2. The other side opposes. The contention of the other side is that by removing the words 'portion of' the plaintiffs now want possession of additional premises and the relief, so far as these additional premises is concerned, is barred by time as the suit was filed in 1975and the present amendment is sought in 1991.3. The relief as per amendment will not be time barred if the amendment relates back to the date of filing of the suit otherwise it would be time barred. If the real dispute between the parties was in respect of possession of the entire premises and not merely portion thereof then the amendment, if allowed, would relate back to the date of filing of the suit.4. Now, in the first place the Court fees are paid as if posses...
Ramjibhai Jogibhai Tandel Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1991
Reported in: (1992)(57)ELT672Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original No.49/Addl-Collr/1984 dated 8-8-1984 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs & Central Excise, Ahmedabad, imposing a personal penalty of Rs. 5000/- on each of the appellant.2. On 22-8-1980 one Ambassador Car No. MRG-5791 driven by one Shri Suresh T. Desai and occupied by Nanu Desai Alias Nanu Customs and two other occupants was intercepted and on search, the same was found to have contained silver bars weighing 344.456 kgs valued at Rs 8,26,694.40. On interrogation of the occupants of the car, amongst others, it was revealed that the car was heading for Daman and was carrying the silver from Ujjain and that at Daman the same was to be delivered to Sukar Naran Bhakhia. During the interrogation the names of Ramjibhai J. Tandel and Premabhai Mangalbhai Tandel were also disclosed as those associated with the illicit transaction. Accordingly on completion of the investigation show cause notices were issued and the notices m...
Morarjee Goculdas Spg. and Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC258Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise - order-in-original No. 35 of 1990 dated 27-9-1990, confirming a demand for differential duty of Rs. 5,05,995.21 under Section 11A of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944.2. At the outset, Shri Kudav stated that he is not disputing the classification or rate of duty and his arguments are mainly confined to the question of time-bar and for that limited purpose, he is putting forth certain arguments on technical aspects of test results for establishing bona fides in their declaration.3. The facts of the case, as stated by Shri Kudav, are that the company had declared the fibre content of the blended yarn contained in sort No. 8744 of fabrics as 33% polyester, 33% viscose and 34% cotton and got classification approved under 18A(ii) of Central Excise Tariff.Shri P. A. V. Kudav, indicated that first a sample was drawn of the processed fabrics on 7-10-1980 mainly for testing the blend composition of fibres in the ...
Pandurang Dhondu Bhuwad and Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1991
Reported in: 1991(3)BomCR263; 1991CriLJ3177
Saldanha, J.1. The four Appellants in this group of criminal appeals mere original Accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1985 decided by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, on 8-4-1988. It was alleged that the present Appellants, along with original Accused No. 1, had committed an act of dacoity with murder on 7-10-1984 at flat No. 18, 8/2 situate on the 18th floor of Woodlands building, Peddar Road, Bombay. It was alleged by the Prosecution that the five Accused were instrumental in tying up, gagging and ultimately committing the murder of a sole inmate of the flat one Veerchand Dhanji Tajani at about 4 p.m. on the afternoon on that day. It was further alleged that after committing the aforesaid murder, the Accused had ransacked the flat and that Accused Nos. 2 to 5 had hurriedly left the building; whereas Accused No. 1 was found in a tied condition near the entrance of the flat. According to the Prosecution, one Dr. Shroff, who is a neighbour, had n...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Crompton Parkinson (Works) Ltd. (Now Kn ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1991
Reported in: [1992]195ITR622(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. In this departmental reference relating to the assessee's surtax assessment for the assessment year 1965-66, the Tribunal has referred to this court the following three questions of law for opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as applied to surtax by section 18 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the retirement gratuity reserve of Rs. 16,17,966 constitutes a reserve includible in the computation of capital in terms of rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, for the assessment year 1965-66 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the dividend reserve of Rs. 10,00,000 constitutes a reserve includible in the computation of capital in terms of rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, for the assessment year 1965-66 (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the taxa...
Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1991
Reported in: (1991)96CTR(Bom)14; [1992]195ITR682(Bom)
B.N. Srikrishna J.1. This reference pertaining to the assessment year 1972-73, made at the instance of the assessee, refers the following questions of law for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in holding that, for computing the capital employed for the purpose of section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, liabilities of the assessee were to be deducted from the value of total assets in computing the capital employed in the undertaking 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that house rent allowance and club fees paid to employees are perquisites for the purpose of section 40(a)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that loss arising of theft of motor car and motor cycle cannot be allowed in computing income ?' 2. Out of the above questions, we may straightway answer q...
Tata Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1991
Reported in: [1992]195ITR561(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. In this reference at the instance of the assessee relating to its assessment for the year 1973-74, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred to this court the following question of law for opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment of Rs. 1,12,715 to the National Chemical Laboratory, Poona, for carrying out research for manufacture of anhydrous aluminium chloride from bauxite was not deductible under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act on the ground of being expenditure of the nature described under section 35 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in rejecting the assessee's claim for deduction of the sum of Rs. 4,52,000 in respect of gratuity liability in view of the provisions of section 40A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. As regards the first question of law, we would like to obs...
Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1991
Reported in: [1992]195ITR328(Bom)
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. In this reference made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Officer was justified, while passing his order dated January 4, 1974 (giving effect to the Appellate Tribunal's order dated May 3, 1972), in revising the quantum of the reduction in rebate in super tax, though the period of 4 years from the date of the original assessment had expired on February 16, 1972 ?' 2. The assessment year concerned is 1963-64. The assessee had issued bonus shares of Rs. 1,33,75,000 in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1963-64. Under the Finance Act, 1963, for such an issue, the rebate of 30 per cent. on super tax admissible was to be reduced by 12.5% per cent. of the bonus issue. 3. The Income-tax Officer referred to this aspect in the or...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Madhavnagar Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1991
Reported in: [1992]195ITR444(Bom)
T.D. Sugla, J.1. In this departmental reference relating to the assessee's assessment for the assessment years 1962-63 to 1970-71, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred to this court the following question of law for its opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no obligation on the part of the assessee to show the initial depreciation in the form of return and, therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment within the meaning of section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee had installed items of new machinery during the assessment years 1949-50 to 1954-55 in respect of which it was entitled to and was allowed initial or further depreciation at the rate of 20% of the cost of the new machinery under section 10(2) (vi), proviso, clause (c) of the Indian...
Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1991
Reported in: (1992)107CTR(Bom)95; [1992]195ITR386(Bom)
B.N. Srikrishna J.1. These two references made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, pertain to different assessment years. Income-tax reference No. 447 of 1977 pertains to the assessment year 1962-63 while Income-tax reference No. 295 of 1978 pertains to the assessment years 1963-64, 1965-66 and 1966-67. Both these references have been made at the instance of the assessee and the questions referred for the opinion of this court are as under : '(1) Whether there is any evidence on record to support the finding that right from the first purchase in 1942, the intention of the applicant acquiring the land was stamped with the character of a trading venture and, therefore, the tax authorities were correct in taxing the profits as business income (2) Whether the conclusion of the Tribunal that, right from the first purchase in 1942, the intention of the applicant in acquiring the land was stamped with the character of a trading venture and, therefore, the tax authorities were c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »