Mumbai Court February 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. Hukumchand Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: [1993]202ITR474(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following two question of law have been referred by the Tribunal to this court at the instance of the Revenue : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 2,38,140 which the assessee was called upon to pay under the provisions of section 21C(1) (b) of the Cotton Textiles (Control) Order, 1948, was not in the nature of a penalty for infraction of the law 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the aforesaid payment of Rs. 2,38,140 was a business expense allowable under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. This reference relates to the assessment year 1971-72. The assessee is a company carrying on business in the manufacture of textiles. During the relevant accounting year, the assessee paid to the Textile Commissioner a sum of Rs. 2,38,140 under...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Super Tool Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: (1993)114CTR(Bom)153; [1993]202ITR50(Bom)
DR. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, 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 assessee was entitled to the relief under section 84 of the Income-tax Act 1961, for the assessment year 1965-66 ?' 2. The assessee is a private limited company incorporated on April 28, 1960, for carrying on the business of manufacturing carbide-tipped tools. It started production on January 1, 1961. The accounts of the assessee for the first time were closed on March 31, 1961. Thereafter, the financial year was adopted as the accounting year. The manufacture of carbide tools was originally started by a firm known by the name and style of M/s. Standard Tool Company which had erected a factory building and installed its own plant and machinery, and started production in 1959. The original idea was to convert...
Universal Luggage Mfg. Company Ltd. Vs. General Employees Union and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ1207Bom
Kapadia, J. 1. This Appeal has been filed by the petitioner against order of the learned single Judge dated December 10th/11th, 1991 in Writ Petition No. 906 of 1991, dismissing the Writ petition filed by the appellant-company against interim order passed by the Industrial Court on February 26, 1991, in Complaint U. L. P. No. 392 of 1990, filed by respondent No. 1 Union under the provisions of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter, for the sake of brivity, referred to as 'the said Act, 1971'). 2. The facts giving rise to this Appeal, briefly, are as follows : (a) The appellant is a public limited company, engaged in the business of manufacture of moulded luggage, having factory in Bombay. The appellant-company has three other factories at Valuj, Paithan and Satara. (b) Respondent No. 1 - Union represents the employees working in the factory of the appellant-company at Bombay. (c) By notice of lock-out dated April 10, 1...
Jyotsna Nalinikant Kilachand and Others Vs. Nandlal Kilachand Investme ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)BomCR512; [1996]87CompCas361(Bom)
S.M. Jhunjhunwala J.1. On December 18, 1986, the petitioners had filed Company Petition No. 663 of 1986, inter alia, for winding up of Nandlal Kilachand Investment Pvt. Ltd. ('NKIPL' for short), Dodsal Pvt. Ltd. and Indmag Pvt. Ltd., being respondents Nos. 1, 7 and 9 therein on just and equitable grounds under Section 433(f) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the said Act'), and, in the alternative for reliefs under Sections 397 and 398 of the said Act. Company Application No. 11 of 1987, dated January 8, 1987, was taken out for and on behalf of the petitioners in the said petition for the interim and ad interim reliefs as more particularly set out therein. On December 18, 1986, the petitioners also filed another Company Petition No. 664 of 1986, against the said NKIPL, Rajen Arvindkumar Kilachand and one Puthucode Subramaniam who are described as respondents therein, inter alia, for declaration that the transfer by way of transmission of 1936 shares of NKIPL held by Lilavati Nand...
Vithoba Ram Rahane and anr. Vs. Bhalchandra Sadashiv Joshi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-01-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)BomCR95
Bhimrao N. Naik, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 filed by the tenants challenging the order passed by the Assistant Collector, Junnar Sub Division, Khed on 10th June 1977 whereby their application under section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of brevity) is rejected. This order passed by the Assistant Collector was confirmed by the Member, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune in MRT. VIII-4/77 (TNC-B-290/77).2. Few facts which are relevant for the purpose of this petition are as follows:One Vithoba Rama Rahane was the tenant of 9 pieces of land, namely ; 721/3, 721/5, 725/3B, 231/2B, 720/1, 721/1, 732/1, 333/2 and 744/2B. The proceedings under section 32G were initiated some time in the year 1962 and on 5th August 1962 the statement of petitioner No. 1 was recorded. He expressed his unwillingness to purchase 5 pieces of land out of 9 pieces of land, being Survey Nos. 720/1, 721/1, 732/1, 333/2 and 744/2B. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›