Mumbai Court September 1993 Judgments
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Garware Nylons
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: (1994)(69)ELT142Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal from the revenue against the Order in Appeal No.M-1299/PN-212/85 dt. 14-8-1985.2. The facts of the case limited for disposal of the appeal are that the respondents filed a classification list No. 49/82 dt. 31-3-1982 effective from 28-2-1982 in respect of non-cellulosic unstretched waste. This classification list has been filed under Tariff Item 68 as per the approval granted by the Asst. Collector in an earlier classification list No. 54/81 effective from 1-3-1981. However while approving this classification list No. 49/82 effective from 28-2-1982, the Asst. Collector directed that the classification for this waste is approved provisionally subject to observance of provisions of Rule 9(b) of the Central Excise Rules. Subsequently a show cause notice was issued on 10-2-1983 proposing to classify the product under Tariff Item 18(IV) instead of Tariff Item 68. Thereafter the Asst. Collector decided the classification under Tariff Item 18-IV, as a result of which dema...
Tag this Judgment!Extrusion Processes Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: (1993)(44)ECC231
1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No.SKM-178/89-B-II dated 17-2-1989 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, passed in relation to Order-in-Original No.V-Adj(EP)4-71/ 87 /5264 dt. 12-9-1987 of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division-VII, Bombay-II.2. By issuance of Show Cause Notice dt. 24-2-1987, it was alleged that the appellants had wrongly availed of the Modvat Credit in relation to the duty paid on gummed/adhesive tapes in rolls, as they could not be considered as inputs or goods used in relation to manufacture of final product namely Aluminium Collapsible Tubes, adjudication proceedings were conducted, but vide order-in-original dt. 12-9-1987, of the Assistant Collector, the demand was withdrawn, on the ground that the assessee had declared the said item as input in their declaration vide Rule 57G of the Rules, and had correctly availed of the Modvat Credit during the period in question. In exercise of the powers Under Section 35E o...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Laxman Gilankar Vs. Udaykumar Kashinath Kaushik and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Bom152; 1994(2)BomCR161; (1994)96BOMLR470; 1993(2)MhLj1653
1. (i) Does Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956(the Act) apply to the disposal of minor's undivided interest in the joint family property by a natural guardian? (ii) Has a minor, during his minority, right to challenge the transaction as being in violation of S. 8? These two questions of law -- and no other points -- are pressed for consideration in this second appeal.2. First the short undisputed relevant factual background -- House No. 22 situated at Malegaon, District Nasik, belonged to deceased Kashinath Kaushik. He died on 4th April, 1951 leaving behind widow Rukminibai (original defendant No. 2) and minor sons Uday kumar (original plaintiff No. 1) and Babulal (original plaintiff No. 2). Half northern portion was sold in a Court auction dated 11th November, 1952 in execution of a decree passed against deceased Kashinath. Remaining half southern portion was sold on 4th October, 1962 by Rukminibai on her behalf as well as on behalf of minor sons as natural gua...
Tag this Judgment!Bhojraj Kishanchand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR500(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka, 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 to this court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee's explanation as regards the nature and source of the sum of 3,57,000 Hong Kong dollars appearing as his capital in his Hong Kong balance-sheet as on March 31, 1969, was not satisfactorily explained and, consequently, the said sum was assessable as his income from undisclosed sources for the assessment year 1959-60 ?' 2. In our opinion, the question referred to us is a question of fact and not a question of law. In the reference jurisdiction, it is not open to this court to reappreciate the evidence an record findings of fact. It is well-settled that the Tribunal is the final fact-finding authority. We are, therefore, inclined to return the reference unanswered. Learned counsel for the...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dorr-oliver (India) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR691(Bom)
ORDERDr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with section 18 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, at the instance of the Revenue, has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in computing the chargeable profits for purposes of the Surtax Act, by excluding the interest received from the Indian branches of foreign banks as falling within the Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ?' 2. The assessee is a non-resident company which had not made the prescribed arrangements for the declaration and payment of dividends within India. During the previous year relevant to the assessment years 1072-73, 1973-75, the assessee received certain amounts by way of 'interest' from the First National City Bank and the Chartered Bank. The assessee claimed exclusion of the said amou...
Tag this Judgment!Keshavji Karsondas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: (1994)120CTR(Bom)109; [1994]207ITR737(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 assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, for the purpose of ascertaining capital gains, in law, the cost of acquisition of agricultural lands belonging to the assessee is to be taken as on January 1, 1954, as contended by the Department or as on March 1, 1970, as contended by the assesse ?' 2. The facts of this case are in a very narrow compass, so also is the controversy. The assessee transferred agricultural land admeasuring 5,308 sq. yards during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1972-73. The transfer took place on June 17, 1971. The admitted position is that agricultural land was not included within the definition of 'capital asset' till April 1, 1970. It was only by the Finance Act, 1970, that with effect from April 1, 197...
Tag this Judgment!Trustees of Shri Kot Hindu Stree Mandal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: (1994)116CTR(Bom)22; [1994]209ITR396(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. By this reference made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law to this court for its opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amounts of Rs. 9,565 and Rs. 8,105 received by the assessee for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, respectively, were voluntary contributions and hence income within the meaning of section 12 of the Income-tax Act, and therefore, liable to be included in the total income of the trust for the two years 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding alternatively that section 11 also applied to the facts of the case and that the subscription amounts received by the assessee for both the years partook of the nature of income even without reference to the provisions of section 12 when the case of the Revenue was th...
Tag this Judgment!Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh and ors. Vs. K.B. Wagh, Presiding Officer ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR377; [1994(68)FLR260]; (1995)ILLJ629Bom
A.V. Savant, J. 1. This is a petition by the Trade Union and its President seeking to challenge the concurrent findings recorded at the interlocutory stage in a complaint pending under the M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act, 1971. Under the impugned order dated September 6, 1993 passed by the Industrial Court while dismissing the revision application of the petitioners, the Labour Court has been directed to expedite the hearing of the matter so as to complete it within six months. 2. Respondent No. 3 - workman has filed the complaint which is pending. He was working with the first petitioner-Union which claims to represent the Cotton Textile Industry in the city of Bombay. It has a membership of about 1,50,000, a board of 917 representatives; a managing committee of 64 with a President who is petitioner No. 2 and a General Secretary. The first petitioner Union employs about 165 employees. It runs a printing press and a canteen. On May 24, 1993 about 47 out of 64 members of the Managing Committee ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhruhaspatinath Chauranginath Ramkejogi Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: 1994(2)BomCR36
M.S. Vaidya, J.1. This is successively the second appeal arising out of the decisions given by the Additional Sessions Judge, Washim, under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act cases wherein the question regarding identification of Muddemal property before the Court has been ignored at the trial.2. The appellant in this case was a priest in Balanath Maharaj temple belonging to a public trust. On 9-3-1992 P.W. 4 Patil, P.S.O. of Risod Police Station in Akola District received an information that Ganja had been stocked in the aforesaid temple premises at Balkheda and the appellant was engaged in selling the same. Therefore, on taking an entry, vide Exh. 24, in the station diary, he proceeded to Balkheda and secured two panchas near the school premises. The Panchas were informed about the proposed performance of the raid and then, the temple premises were raided, after performing necessary formalities. In course of the raid, the appellant was found present there. One plastic...
Tag this Judgment!Zebunnissa and anr. Vs. FaiyajuddIn Through Lrs. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1993
Reported in: I(1995)DMC322
A.D. Mane, J.1. This revision application arises out of an order dated 11.6.1993 passed by the learned Civil Judge J.D., Ambajogai, rejecting the plaintiffs' application Exhibit 64/D for amendment of the plaint.2. The plaintiff No. 1 filed a suit against her husband Faizuddin Abdul Wahed Kazi for maintenance for herself and for her minor son-plaintiff No. 2. In the plaint, the plaintiffs have averred that the plaintiff No. 1 is the legally wedded wife of the defendant No. 1 and that the plaintiff No. 2 is one of four children begotten from the defendant to the plaintiff No. 1. In 1975, she claimed maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by filing Misc. Application No. 78/1975. In that application, the defendant No. 1 agreed to discharge his obligations to maintain the plaintiffs and entered into a compromise on 24.1.1977, It is the plaintiffs' case that in spite of that, the defendant No. 1. did not provide proper maintenance to the plaintiffs. On the contrary, ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »