Mumbai Court September 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.
Tushar Tulsidas Tanna Vs. Ram and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)BomCR721; [1993]203ITR696(Bom); 1993(1)MhLj606
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the orders of attachment dated January 28, 1977, January 22, 1981, and January 31, 1981, levied on a property, being flat No. 71 in a building known as 'Zenia Abad' situated at Bombay. The petition also impugns a letter dated March 30, 1987, written by the Tax Recovery Officer, Bombay, by which the objections raised by the petitioner to the validity of the attachment on the said flat were held to be without substance. 2. The short facts, relevant for disposal of this writ petition, need be stated. 3. The income-tax authorities levied an attachment on flat No. 71, in Zenia Abad Building, owned by a co-operative society formed of the individual flat owners therein. although the said flat was standing in the name of one Ravichandran at the material time, the income-tax authorities levied attachment on this flat on the footing that the flat really belonged to one Loganathan, who was a defaulter ...
Dhrunal Chhotalal Patel Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)BomCR68; (1993)95BOMLR45; 1993(63)ELT27(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J.1. The petitioner carries on business in the name and style of Star Metal and Tubes Corporation at Bombay. The petitioner, in the course of his business, imported copper scrap which arrived in Bombay per vessel 'RISHI VALMIKI' on or about 19th of March 1980. In respect of the copper scrap so imported the respondents demanded, inter alia, additional duty of customs. The petitioner, however, contended that copper scrap cannot be said to be 'goods' and/or 'Manufactured goods' within the meaning of the Central Excise Law and, hence, the goods were not exigible to any additional duty of customs under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Assistant Collector of Custom has released the goods on the petitioner's executing a bond for payment of additional duty of customs under Entry No. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. In the present petition, the petitioner's has challenged the levy of additional duty of customs under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 on...
Bombay Cloth Syndicate Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: [1995]214ITR210(Bom)
V.A. Mohta, J.1. At the instance of the assessee as many as ten questions were referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Seven questions arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal relating to penalty imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner and three out of the order relating to penalty imposed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. 2. Shri L. S. Dewani, learned counsel for the assessee, has not pressed questions Nos. 1 and 2 arising out of the order relating to penalty imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, and any of the three questions arising out of the order relating to penalty imposed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Question No. 3 is reframed by consent of the parties. 3. Thus, the following renumbered questions need to be answered in this reference : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the return of income filed by the assessee on May 24, 1971, could be treated as a revised return under ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dhable, Bobde Parose, Kale, Lute and Ch ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: [1993]202ITR98(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax the following two questions have been referred us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, for our opinion : '1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that income arising out of purchase and sale of agricultural lands which constitutes a business of the assessee, is also income from agriculture and as such is not taxable at all 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Manubhai A. Sheth relied upon by the Tribunal applies to this case ?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1967-68. The assessee, which is an association of persons, purchased a plot of agricultural land on October 1, 1966, for Rs. 42,085 which was sold by it to one Shri Shivaji Griha Nirman Sahakari Sanstha, Nagpur, on January 6, 1967, for Rs. 84,759. The assessee claimed exemption in respect of the profits arising out of this deal on...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR995(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the following two questions of law have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, for our opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowing depreciation on the trust which was registered in the name of another person 2. Whether the depreciation was admissible under section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to the beneficial owner of the truck and the decision of the Tribunal was in accordance with the provisions of la ?' 3. The relevant assessment year is 1976-77. The facts giving rise to the reference are briefly as follows : The assessee had purchased a truck from on Shri Ashokkumar Rajaram Agrawal. The truck was originally allotted as a brand new truck to the said Shri Agrawal (herein...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Yavatmal Co-operative Ginning and Press ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: [1993]203ITR874(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The relevant assessment years are 1980-81 and 1982-83. The following questions of law have been referred to this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellant Tribunal is correct in holding that the ginning of cotton amounts to manufacture 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in granting deduction under section 80HHA to the assessee 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in granting deduction in respect of investment allowance to the assessee for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1982-83 ?' 2. The reference to reference to section 80HHA in question No. 2 appears to be wrong. It should be section 80HH. This question, ...
Barium Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Union of IndiA.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: 1993(63)ELT209(Bom)
A.V. Savant, J.1. By this petition, the petitioners-Barium Chemicals Limited, and a shareholder of the said company have inter alia prayed for the following reliefs in the petition : (d) make a declaration that Section 3(2) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 is ultra vires the Constitution of India and the Bill of Entry (Forms) Regulations, 1972 in so far as the same are based on the said section are ultra vires the Constitution of India; (e) issue a direction for determining the value of the goods imported by the first petitioner company on the basis of the value of the like goods under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 after deducting all the expenses that are deductible under Section 4 of that Act; (f) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to load the assessable value by including therein the packing charges or lending charges or by loading any post importation charges including customs duty and surcharge to the value of the goods imported by first ...
Transport and Dock Workers Union Vs. Bombay Stevedores Association and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ338Bom
1. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner impugns an Award dated December 19, 1984, and by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Bombay, in Reference No. COTT-14 of 1983 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The petitioner is a registered trade union which represents, inter alia, the workmen employed in the Bombay Docks including the workmen employed by the individual members of the first Respondent which is an Association of the Stevedores operating in the Bombay Docks. The second Respondent is an Industrial Tribunal constituted under the provisions of the Act. 3. The petitioner, on behalf of the workmen employed by the members of the first Respondent-Association, had raised an industrial dispute for payment of bonus or payment of ex-gratis in lieu of bonus for the accounting year 1982-83. Failing settlement and conciliation, the said demand came to be referred fo...
Abdul Hamid Ismail Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR235
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This appeal and the Companion Appeal No. 516 of 1985 have been preferred by the same appellant. At the relevant time, the appellant was a police constable in the office of the Police Commissioner at Pune. The prosecution had alleged that he offered to assist persons who are interested in joining the police department and that he had accepted certain amounts of money for rendering such assistance which would bring him within the ambit of a corruption charge. Apart from this, by virtue of the fact that such false assurances were made, that certain intimation letters were issued, etc., the prosecution had also invoked sections 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Judge has convicted the appellant under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 163 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been awarded R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 100/- in default R.I. for two months under the first head; R.I. for six ...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Annarkhan Sulemankhan Musalman
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1992
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC28
B.V. Chavan, J.1. The State has challenged the order of acquittal of the respondent passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Wani acquitting the respondent of the offence for contravention of Section 42 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 punishable under Section 123 of the said Act.2. Relevant facts are that the respondent was found carrying 20 passengers in the truck driven by him bearing No. MHG 784 on 24-9-1982 by P.W. 1 Suresh Sant, Security Officer, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. Respondent had no pass or permit in his possession allowing the carriage of passengers in the said truck. Therefore, he was prosecuted for contravention of Section 42 punishable under Section 123 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.3. The learned Magistrate accepting the position that factually respondent was carrying passengers in his truck on the date in question without any pass or permit in his possession, came to the conclusion that inasmuch as Section 42 of the Motor Vehicles Act says...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »