Mumbai Court January 1993 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1993
Reported in: (1993)112CTR(Bom)328; [1993]201ITR1036(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two question to this court for opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case apprentices employed by the assessee in terms of the contract of apprenticeship were in law the assessee's employees and such the assessee was entitled to initial depreciation at 20 per cent. of the actual cost under section 32(1)(iv) in respect of the apprentice school building and apprentice shop building ?' 2. Whether the sum of Rs. 1,73,849 paid by the assessee to Messrs. Harnischfeger Corporation, U. S. A., in terms of the agreement is admissible revenue deduction for the assessment year 1968-69 ?' 2. The first question is common to the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70, whereas the second question is confined to 1968-69 only. 3. As is evident from the question set out above, the dispute in the fi...
Matlub Khan Rehmat Khan Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR226; (1993)95BOMLR624; 1993CriLJ3624; 1993(2)MhLj956
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. The appellant before us, the original accused No. 2 in Sessions Case No. 689 of 1988 assails the correctness of his conviction under section 8(c) read with Sub-Sections 29 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. It was alleged that he, along with original accused No. 1 came to be apprehended in room No. 48, plot No. 53, at Chunabhatti at about 11.20 a.m. on 23-1-1988. The Malwani Police Station, on receipt of information that brown sugar was being sold at this particular place, sent a raiding party under P.S.I. Rajadhyaksha. On reaching the spot two panchas were sent for and the party entered room No. 48. It is alleged that the two accused were found seated in that room and that they stood up when the party came in. The prosecution alleges that the two accused were engaged in the act of preparing small packets of brown sugar out of the bulk of the material that was in a pot which was found in front of them. Ten small packets of approximat...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: [1993]201ITR1058(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1992, made at the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order that interest payable by the assessee under section 18A (6) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was to be calculated after deducting the D. I. T. relief admissible to the assessee-company from the total income-tax demanded even through the assessee's claim for D. I. T. relief was allowed subsequently by an order under section 154 of the Act passed by the Income-tax Office ?' 2. This reference relates to the assessment year 1954-55. As is evident from the question itself, the controversy relates to the chargeability of interest under section 18A (6) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ('the Act' hereinafter). Under se...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: (1994)119CTR(Bom)213; [1993]202ITR309(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf J. 1. This reference has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue. It relates to three assessment years, viz., 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1973-74. Four questions have been referred by the Tribunal. The first two questions are common to all the three assessment years. The third and fourth questions relate to assessment years 1970-71 and 1973-74, respectively. These questions are : For the assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1973-74 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payment by way of technical fees to Messrs Westing House Brake and Signal Co. Ltd. in the respective previous years relevant to the assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1973-74 was a permissible deduction 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment by the assessee-company to Me...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kanubhai R. Shah (Huf)
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: (1993)115CTR(Bom)12; [1993]201ITR1050(Bom)
B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the Revenue :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the market value of the land at the time of the acquisition by the assessee-Hindu undivided family, i.e., March 25, 1970, is, in view of the provisions of Section 55(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to be taken as the cost thereof to the assessee for the purposes of computation of the capital gains ?'2. The assesses is a Hindu undivided family known as ' Shri Kanubhai R. Shah of Bombay (HUF)'. The assessment year involved in this reference is 1972-73, the corresponding previous year being Samvat year 2027. The dispute in this case relates to the ' cost of acquisition ' of certain land which had been acquired by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act from the assessec for the purpose of computation of ca...
Mrs. Faridabano ShahabuddIn Kadri and anr. Vs. ShahabuddIn MuzzaroddIn ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)BomCR242
M.F. Saldanha, J.1. This Criminal Writ Petition No. 1160 of 1992 came up for hearing before Dhabe, J., and the learned Single Judge vide his judgment dated 30th October 1990 referred the matter to the Division Bench as it involves a rather important issue touching the enforceability of a maintenance order that has been passed prior to the promulgation of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which came into force on 19th May 1986. The learned Single Judge had before him two proceedings, Criminal Revision Application No. 289 of 1989 from Bombay, and the other Criminal Writ Petition No. 1160 of 1988 from Nasik. Both cases concerned divorced Muslim women. In both instances, order for payment of maintenance had been passed in favour of the divorced wife under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the applications relating to enforcement of those orders were pending before the Court in May 1986 when the new Act came into force. Section 7 of the Act requir...
Chandrashekhar Trimbak Patwardhan Vs. Sau. Vaijayanti Chandrashekhar P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR267
D.J. Moharir, J.1. By this appeal the appellant Chandrashekhar Patwardhan who is the original petitioner-husband in Marriage Petition No. A-582 of 1989 takes exception to the judgment and decree passed by the learned judge of the Family Court, Pane, dismissing his petition for a decree of divorce against his wife on the grounds of adultery and cruelty under Section 13(1)(i) and (i-a) respectively of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This petition was originally filed in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune,. but upon the establishment of a family court at Pune under the Family Court Act, was transferred to that Court and decided as such.2. Reference to the parties would be made in this judgment by their original status, the Husband being the petitioner, the wife being the Respondent No. 1 and the alleged adulterer being co-Respondent No. 2.3. The petitioner Chandrashekhar and the respondent No. 1 Vaijayanti were married at Pune according to Hindu religious rites on 9-1-1983....
Swiss Bank Corporation and Canara Bank Vs. Jai Hind Oil Mills Co. and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: (1993)95BOMLR412
M.L. Pendse, J.1. Both these appeals are directed against the judgment and decree dated April 17, 1989, passed by the learned single judge in Suit No. 807 of 1986. By the impugned judgment the learned judge decreed the suit and dismissed the counter-claim filed by defendant No. 1. The facts giving rise to institution of the suit are as follows :The plaintiffs (Jai Hind Oil Mills Co.) are a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, and carry on the business of dealing in the manufacture of various types of edible oils and are also engaged in the business of importing and exporting diverse goods into and from India. On August 3,1985, the plaintiffs agreed to purchase diverse quantities of Turkish chick peas 1985 crop from defendant No. 4 (Interocean Reefers A. G., a firm incorporated under the laws in force in Switzerland) under the terms and conditions which are incorporated in confirmation notes issued by Tri Une, Produce, Brokers of defendan...
Ganesh S/O Kishanrao Lande Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)BomCR549
B.N. Deshmukh, J.1. These two petitions raise points of interest and importance regarding admission to First Year M.B.B.S. Course.2. Both the petitioners, after passing XIIth Standard examination, have applied for admission to First Year M.B.B.S. Course. They belong to V.J.N.T. category. A common merit list of V.J.N.T. category only is produced at Ex. E. Shri Lande (petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2375 of 1992) is at Sr. No. 10 while Miss Pawar (petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2186 of 1992), is at Sr. No. 16.3. The candidates at Sr. Nos. 2 to 8, excluding at Sr. No. 3, are admitted to the First Year M.B.B.S. Course in the reserved category meant for V.J.N.T. There is one more candidate belonging to Banjara Community who is admitted in this category as per the directions of this Court.4. The contentions raised in the petition with regard to admission relate to the denial of admission to the petitioners as, according to the petitioners, the candidates at Sr. Nos. 2 to 8, excluding at Sr....
The Pune Art Industries Vs. Narayan Kashinath Date
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR68; (1993)95BOMLR200
Bhimrao N. Naik, J.1. This petition is filed by a petitioner - tenant challenging a decree for possession passed against him on the ground of erecting permanent construction and on the ground of non payment of rent.2. Few facts which are relevant for the purpose of this petition are as follows:3. The premises in dispute consist of one big room admeasuring 20 x 15 feet forming part of City Survey No. 136 and bearing plot No. 34/11/2 in the industrial Zone at Pune. The petitioner was inducted as a tenant for running a lathe machine workshop in the premises. The premises were let to the petitioner sometime in the year 1972. The agreed rent was Rs. 175/- per month and according to the landlord the education cess and other taxes were to the tune of Rs. 59.50 per month. Respondent - landlord sent a letter on 6th of July, 1977 informing the petitioner - tenant that he wants to occupy the premises himself and the tenant is in arrears of rent from 1st of December, 1976. There was not a whisper ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »