Mumbai Court November 1993 Judgments
V.N. Cantol Vs. Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1993
Reported in: (1994)50ITD386(Mum.)
1. These appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90 are directed against the order of the CWT (Appeals) firstly, deciding the issue ex parte and secondly, on merits against inclusion of Rs. 5,75,500 being the value of assessee's membership card of Stock Exchange for assessment year 1988-89 and Rs. 6,75,500 for assessment year 1989-90.2. Assessee filed return for assessment year 1989-90 on 30-12-1988 disclosing net wealth of Rs. 11,18,117. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee was holding a Stock Exchange membership card and the same had been claimed as an exempt asset. The claim of the assessee was rejected holding that the Stock Exchange card is a property under the Wealth-tax Act and added the value of the asset.3. In appeal before the CWT (Appeals), the assessee contended that the membership of the Stock Exchange is a personal privilege and the right of the member is inalienable. Relying upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Mrs...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. S.E. Phadtare and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR674]; (1995)ILLJ70Bom
M.L. Pendse, J.1. The appellant is a statutory corporation duly constituted under the provisions of Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, and is entirely engaged in public utility service of supply of electricity and transport services to the citizens of Bombay. The appellant had engaged large number of employees and runs a fleet of buses in the city of Bombay. The employees in the year 1982, were represented by three rival unions, viz. (a) BEST Workers Union controlled by George Fernandez; (b) BEST Employees Union controlled by Bhaurao Patil and (c) BEST Kamgar Union controlled by Datta Samant. The elections for 7 seats of the BEST Employees Co-operative Credit Society were held on December 17, 1982 at 19 centre spread over Bombay. The ballot boxes were brought to Electric House for the purpose of counting. Electric House is situated next to Colaba Police Station and is used as the head office by the undertaking and also as a terminus for buses. The counting of votes commenced at ab...
Tag this Judgment!H.U. Vaidya and ors. Vs. the Government of Maharashtra Medical Educati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR429
S.P. Kurdukar, JJ.1. This batch of writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can be disposed of by this Judgment since the challenge in all these writ petitions is concerning to portion of a Rule bearing sub-heading 'Waiting List' in Rule VIII titled as 'selection process'. The relevant portion of the said Rule will be set out at the appropriate place.2. At the outset it may be stated that all these petitioners before us are admitted to M.B.B.S. course on free seats but in private Medical Colleges. It is further made clear that the controversy in these petitions is restricted to the portion of Rule VIII having sub-heading 'Waiting List' and in respect of free seats in Government Medical Colleges. 3. For the purpose of this Judgement, we may refer to the facts of Writ Petition No. 2777 of 1993.4. The Government of Maharashtra, Department of Medical Education and Drugs framed Rules for admission to the Government and Private Medical Dental, Ayurvedic, Homeopath...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Magatul Chemicals P. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1993
Reported in: (1994)(70)ELT651Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Reference Applications have been moved in respect of the common order of this Bench bearing No. 619 & 620/93 WRB dated 23-4-1993.2. Though the applications are styled as Reference Application, I find that it is nothing but a memo of appeal agitating the same points on factual position. In the applications it is stated that "as per Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the MODVAT Credit can be availed on the inputs which are used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products but in this case, nitrogen gas cannot be termed to have been used in the manufacture of final product. Since nitrogen gas is used to create the inert atmosphere and it does not take part in chemical reaction directly or indirectly, it is outside the purview of definition of the input as provided in Rule 57A." This is the main crux of the entire note styled as question of law and the concluding prayer is that the order is required to be set aside since it is not proper, correct and legal.3....
Tag this Judgment!Collector of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Rishabha Chem Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1993
Reported in: (1994)(73)ELT190Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Invoking the provisions of Section 35G(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the department seeks reference to the High Court on the question, as formulated by them, and reproduced herein below, pleading the same to have arisen from the Order No. 637/93/WRB, dated 30-4-1993 of this Bench in appeal ED (BOM) 279/86, which arose out of Order-in-Appeal No. M-382/BD-243/86, dated 28-5-1986 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. The Respondent-Assessee filed a refund claim, pleading themselves to be eligible for the same pursuant to Notification No. 43/82-C.E., dated 28-2-1982. Part of the claim was sanctioned by the Assistant Collector, rejecting the other part of the claim as barred by limitation, however, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), held that, in considering the refund claim available under such notification when the liability is dependent on the annual turn over, the period of limitation would start running from the end of the Financial Year an...
Tag this Judgment!Babulal Shivlal Upadhye and anr. Vs. Dr. Yadav Atmaram Joshi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1993
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR583
V.A. Mohta, J.1. A suit for declaration that an absolute order passed under section 138, Criminal Procedure Code, ordering demolition of a house property on the ground of it being a public nuisance was null and void and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from enforcing an order under section 141, has been dismissed on a preliminary ground that Civil Court's jurisdiction was barred and without going into merits and hence, this second Appeal.2. The courts below have placed reliance upon section 133 sub-section (2), Criminal Procedure Code, which lays down that no order under section 133(1) is questionable in any Civil Court. Now, section 133 deals only with conditional order of removal of public nuisance within specified time or in case of objection to do so to appear before a Magistrate and show cause why the conditional order should not be made absolute. Scheme envisaged in Chapter X - Part B of Criminal Procedure Code which deals with the subject of 'Maintenance of Pu...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra S/O Suryabahan Salunke Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR181
M.S. Vaidya, J. 1. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent.2. Heard Mr. N.P. Jamalpurkar Patil, advocate for the petitioner and Mr. P.B. Varale, learned A.P.P., for the State.3. On the basis of a first information report dated 19-2-1993, an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, came to be registered against the petitioner at Bembli Police Station at Crime No. 7/1953. The petitioner was arrested for the offence on 26-3-1993. The petitioner continued to be in jail all along till he was granted, in this proceeding, interim bail under the orders passed by this Court (Chapalgaonkar, J.) on 21st September, 1993.4. The petitioner had preferred before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Osmanabad Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 287/1993 contending that the charge-sheet in the matter was not filed though 90 days were already over and that, therefore, the petitioner was entitled to be released on bail under section 167(2) proviso (a)(ii) of the Code of Crimina...
Tag this Judgment!iklIn Laboratories Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1993
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT896Tri(Mum.)bai
1. For hearing the applicants' appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 38,745 towards duty, vide Order-in-Appeal No.GS/26/B E/92, dated 28-7-1993.2. After hearing both the sides, we find the following undisputed factual position: The applicants are a Small Scale Unit availing the benefit of exemption Notification No. 175/86-C.E. They also undertake to do the job work on behalf of another manufacturer, who is not entitled to avail the small scale exemption. All the same the value of the clearance effected on job work has also been included for purpose of computing the eligibility of small scale exemption in respect of the applicants' unit. However, the lower authority has denied the small scale exemption on the ground that the person for whom the job work is done is not entitled to avail the small scale exemption.In the circumstances, prima facie we hold that the Collector's (Appeals) view is not in confirmity with the provisions of Notification No. 175/86 and hence...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. thermax Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1993
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT891Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Reference Application has been moved by the Revenue and there is a delay of 8 days in riling the reference application. After hearing both the sides, we condoned the delay and took up the reference application for consideration on merits.2. The Reference application is in respect of this Bench Order No.742/93-WRB, dated 25-5-1993, whereunder, the respondents were allowed the modvat credit, which was sought to be denied by the lower authorities. In the aforesaid order, we observed that there was a deliberate violation of the provisions of the Modvat Rules in storing the modvat inputs in the unlicenced premises and their utilisation in their final products which were cleared from the unlicenced premises, on account of which a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs was sustained. A cross-objection has also been filed, which is to be considered as a reference application, suggesting reference of certain questions on the point of imposition of penalty. The questions framed by the revenue are as bel...
Tag this Judgment!Associated Cables Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1993
Reported in: (1994)48ITD141(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee, by status a company, in respect of the assessment year 1990-91. The grievances of the assessee are two-fold.2. The first challenge is in respect of a sum of Rs. 52,80,660 assessed by the Assessing Officer as the appellant's income affirmed during first appeal. The other grievance of the assessee is against a disallowance of Rs. 8,400 out of the interest paid by them to various banks qua, a sum of Rs. 56,000 lent to Sri S. .G. Hoskote, one of their wholetime directors.3. We take up the first issue first. The assessee-appellant were following the mercantile system of accounting until the assessment year 1989-90. The system underwent some change as is reflected by Note No. 9 to the accounts.4. The assessee-company is engaged in the manufacturing of instrumentation cables. It is the assessee's case that the cables being highly sophisticated and costly ones, they are manufactured as per the specifications provided by their clients. No manufacturing was...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »