Mumbai Court March 1992 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.
State of Maharashtra Vs. Nanasaheb Bhikaji Tambe
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-1992
Reported in: (1992)94BOMLR223
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. In what situations would the State be justified in presenting an appeal against an order of acquittal? Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, undoubtedly, confers on the State the right to direct the Public Prosecutor to prefer an appeal against acquittal, but the section does not specify as to in what circumstances this should be done. It is not a matter of discretion, but a question of duty in those cases where a trial Court in the face of unimpeachable evidence records an acquittal, where a technicality is wrongly upheld, or where the law is misapplied. Conversely, it is equally necessary to lay down guidelines circumscribing the situations in which no such appeal should be filed as the legal system, which is already overstrained, cannot tolerate the burden of frivolous or unjustified appeals. Merely because the complainant or the relatives or, for that matter, the Police or the Prosecutor are unhappy over a verdict is no ground on which an order of...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.A. Baniyan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1992
Reported in: (1992)106CTR(Bom)276; [1992]197ITR717(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J.1. This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, praying that we should direct the Tribunal to raise the following question of law and refer it to us for determination : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that 40 per cent. of the bonus commission (incentive) which had been received by the assessee as per terms of employment should be deducted in the computation of the assessee's income ?' 2. The assessee is a Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India. Apart from salary and allowance, he had also received, during the relevant assessment years, incentive bonus commission. This has been held to be the professional income of the assessee for these assessment years. This finding is not under challenge. The assessee, however, claimed that 40 per cent. of the incentive commission received by him should be allowed as a deduction for the probable and likely e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›