Mumbai Court August 1992 Judgments
The Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Limited and Another Vs. Padubidri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Bom91; 1993(1)MhLj1
ORDERMRS Sujata Manohar, J.1. Theappellants Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Ltd. are a multi-State Co-operative Society. The appellant-society is deemed to have been registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960 as well as the Multi- State Co-operative Societies Act 1984. The appellants carry on the business of banking. The 1st respondent had filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in this Court challenging the resolution of the appellantBank dated 21st of May 1987 and the consequent termination of his services by the appellant-Bank. A learned single Judge of this Court, by his judgment and order dated 31st March 1989, allowed the petition and ordered reinstatement of the first respondent with backwages as set out in the judgment and order. From this judgment the present appeal was filed by the appellants.2. One of the questions which the learned single Judge was called upon to decide was whether the appellant Bank was 'State' within the meaning of Ar...
Tag this Judgment!Dubon Project Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: [1993]200ITR577(Bom)
Srikrishna, J.1. by this petition, the petitioners challenge an order of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') dated January 24, 31, 1986, communicated to the petitioners under cover of the letter dated December 1, 1986, by which the petitioners application under section 80-O for approval of an agreement dated October 19, 1982, for rendering technical services to a foreign company known as Progress Engineering, Lagos, Nigeria, was rejected.2. The petitioner is company which carries on business as consulting engineering company in India and has expertise in the field of civil, structural, and soils engineering and other related disciplines. The petitioners had entered into five agreements with Progress Engineering, Lagos, Nigeria, for rendering technical services in connection with certain engineering projects in that country. Four of these agreements which were submitted for the purpose of approval under section 80-O were approved by the orders of t...
Tag this Judgment!Dhurunal Chhotalal Patel Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: 1993(63)ELT25(Bom)
ORDERKurdukar, J.1. The petitioner in this petition has raised a question as regards excisability of the Copper Scrap. The question is whether Copper Scrap imported by the petitioner falls under residuary Items 68 or Item 26A of the Central Excise Tariff, as it then stood prior to 1st April 1981. 2. The petitioner has imported Copper Scrap some time in 1980. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay, by his order/letter dated 9-3-1982/23-9-1982 (Ex. D), has opined that Item 26A of the C.E.T. will apply to Copper Scrap as the name is covered by expression 'Copper/Brass in any crude form'. Accordingly, the Asstt. Collector held that duty leviable would be at the rate of 80% ad valorem basic duty under Chapter 74 of C.T.A. and Rs. 3300/- per metric tonne additional duty under Item 26A of C.E.T. This liability assessed by the Assistant Collector is sought to be impugned in this writ petition. 3. Mr. D. H. Mehta, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner draw our attention to a reported...
Tag this Judgment!Vidarbha Veneer Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: 1992(62)ELT712(Bom)
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. Parties by Counsel. Rule heard forthwith. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged before us that the order dated 10-3-1992 passed by the learned Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division No. 1, Nagpur i.e. the respondent No. 3 modifying the classification list on the basis of the earlier order passed by him in F. No. V(44)3-149/86/CVC dated 28-2-1992 is illegal and contrary to the principles of natural justice because as required by Rule 173(B) of the Central Excise Rules, he had not made any enquiry and had not given any opportunity to the petitioner of being heard in the matter. Further, he has urged that the aforesaid previous order of the Assistant Collector dated 28-2-1992 is stayed by the Collector (Appeals) by his interim order dated 3-8-1992. 3. The learned Counsel for the Department has urged before us that there is an adequate remedy of appeal available to the petitioner, particularly when in an identical matter viz. W.P. No. 949 of 1992, th...
Tag this Judgment!Bashir Oil Mills and Another Vs. Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal and Ot ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)MhLj133
DR. B.P. Saraf, J.1. The petitioner, a registered partnership firm, runs an oil-mill at Warora in district Chandrapur and manufactures vegetable oil and oil-cakes for sale. It is registered as a dealer, both under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. 2. Oil-cakes fall under entry 13, Part I of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act and sales and purchase thereof in the State of Maharashtra are taxable at the rate of 2 per cent. Entry 13 is reproduced below : ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 'Sl. Description of goods Rate of Rate of Period of No. sales tax purchase tax operation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 13 Oil-cakes 2% 2% July 1, 1981 to-date' ------------------------------------------------------------------------ By a notification dated July 24, 1981, issued under section 41 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, the State Government exempted all sales of oil-cakes includi...
Tag this Judgment!Balaji Cotton Company Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)MhLj105
DR. B.P. Saraf, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in this writ petition relates to the scope of the power of the Sales Tax Officer to impose penalty afresh once the same has been set aside on appeal by the appellate authority under section 55 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ('the Act'). 2. The facts of the case in brief are : The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, was assessed by the Sales Tax Officer, Wardha, for the period from October 20, 1971 to November 5, 1972, by his order dated September 24, 1973. By the said order, in addition to the amount of tax due which was determined at Rs. 1,42,249.02, penalty of Rs. 45,000 was also imposed on the petitioner under section 36(2)(c) of the Act for non-payment of the tax with the return. On appeal, the order, so far as it related to imposition of penalty of Rs. 45,000, was set aside by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals), Eastern Division, Nagpur, by his order dated September 26, 19...
Tag this Judgment!K. C. (Exports) and Company anr. Vs. N. D. Puntambekar, Income Tax Off ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: (1992)108CTR(Bom)404
MRS. SUJATA MANOHAR, J. :For the accounting year ended 30th June, 1984 which is the relevant previous year for the asst. yr. 1985-86, the petitioner firm filed its return of income on 25th September, 1985 disclosing an income of Rs. 9,080. Thereafter the assessee of the petitioners was completed under s. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 on 27th February 1986. The ITO assessed the total income of the petitioners for the asst. yr. 1985-86 at Rs. 1,67,080. In doing so he made an addition of Rs. 1,58,000 as income from undisclosed sources. Out of this amount of Rs. 1,58,000, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 represented a loan given by M/s. Bright Diamonds, an associate company of the petitioners, to the petitioner firm. This loan was obtained on 24th September, 1983. It was, however, not reflected in the cash book of the petitioner firm though it was taken into account in the balance sheet. This loan was repaid by the petitioners by two cheques one for Rs. 50,000 and the other for Rs. 1,00,000, dt. 16th Au...
Tag this Judgment!Pukhraj Chunilal Bafna Vs. J. Ram, Tax Recovery Officer and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: (1992)108CTR(Bom)378
MRS. SUJATA MANOHAR, J. :The petitioner was a partner with one Samrathmal Phoolchand Seth, carrying on business of builders in the name of M/s. Empire Investment Corporation. The petitioner retired from the partnership on 8th April, 1974. After retirement of the petitioner from the firm, the ITO assessing the firm assessed the firm for asst. yrs. 1973-74 and 1975-76. The petitioner contends that he was not given any notice and was unaware of these assessment proceedings which all took place after he retired from the firm.2. On 19th December, 1986 the petitioner received these notices of demand as a defaulter which were issued by the 1st respondent. The particulars of these notices are set out in paragraph 4 of the petition. They are the subject-matter of challenge before us in this writ petition.3. The petitioner has now filed an affidavit dt. 27th August, 1992 in which the petitioner has annexed as Exhibit A, a statement showing his present tax liability, as per those notices of deman...
Tag this Judgment!Vishnu Narayan Shingate Vs. Kumar Sham Shankar Parit and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-28-1992
Reported in: II(1992)ACC684
P.S. Patankar, J. 1. This Appeal arises out of the claim petition filed by the respondent No. 1 under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 for the injuries suffered by him claiming compensation of Rs. 50,000/-.2. The respondent No. 1 was studying in the school in 2nd Standard and on the date of the accident i.e. 26th June, 1982, he was 10 years of age. It is alleged by respondent No. l that the appellant was driving motor-cycle bearing No. MXC 604 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. The said motor-cycle was owned by the appellant. Inspite of giving dash, the appellant did not stop. He was later on stopped by some other persons and the respondent No. 1, who had suffered serious injuries, was taken to the Civil Hospital. The respondent No. 1 suffered fracture to his right tibia and fibula. An operation was performed upon him. He was required to be an indoor patient for 1-1/2 months. Even though the final plaster was removed, the leg was not cured. He suffered ...
Tag this Judgment!Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. S.B. Potnis, Chief Commissioner of ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-27-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Bom)97; [1993]203ITR947(Bom)
B.N. Srikrishna J.1. By this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners impugn an order dated April 11, 1991, made by the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay, declining to grant approval for the purpose of section 80-O of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), to an agreement dated April 18, 1978, between the petitioners and a company in Indonesia known as 'P. T. Godrej, Indonesia' (which shall, hereinafter be referred to as 'the foreign company'). 2. The petitioners are well known manufacturers of steel and metal products such as sates, security equipment, indexing reference and retrievable systems, storage, shelving and locking systems including slotted angles, seating and desk systems, hospital fabrication equipment, locks and locking devices, cash boxes, cabinets and custom-oriented metal fabrication, etc. They entered into two agreements dated April 18, 1978, with the foreign company for establishing plant in Indonesia f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »