Mumbai Court September 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.
Procter and Gamble India Limited and anr. Vs. the Municipal Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR403
A.V. Savant, J.1. The first petitioner Procter & Gamble India Limited is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The second petitioner is its shareholder. By this petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the letter dated 16th November, 1988 - Exhibit 'J' to the Petition, issued by the second respondent Additional Assessor & Collector (Octroi) of the first respondent Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay. Under the said letter - Exhibit 'J', the first petitioner Company was informed that its product 'Chatpat Churanets' attracted octroi under Entry 8 of Schedule `H' to the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. Schedule `H' deals with articles liable to payment of octroi. Class-I in the said Schedule `H' deals with the articles of food and drink. Entry 8 deals with edibles and excluding the specific items mentioned in Entry 8, the concluding portion, which is relevant in the present case, reads as under :-' .... and all kinds of food or drink not specifically provided...
Shekhar Shantaram Dighe Vs. Roshan Lal Uday Bhan and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1993
Reported in: I(1994)ACC355; 1994ACJ1115
M.K. Mukherjee, C.J.1. For personal injuries sustained in an accident, while travelling in a luxury bus, on July 3, 1981, whereby he lost his left arm, the appellant filed an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhule, claiming a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-from the owners and insurers of the bus, who are the respondents herein. The learned Tribunal disposed of the application by directing the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 69,140/-, with interest at the rate of 5 per cent per annum and proportionate costs to the appellant as compensation. Aggrieved by the inadequacy of the compensation, the appellant has filed the instant appeal.2. Though before the Tribunal various defences were raised on behalf of the respondents to resist the claim which, needless to say, were negatived, the respondents have not filed any cross-objections or cross-appeal. Consequently, the only question that falls for our determination is as...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Hosiery Industries
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR383(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 of law to this court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenditure of Rs. 60,678 incurred for management training of Shri Vijaykumar Kejriwal, a partner of the assessee-firm, was an allowable deduction in determining the business profits of the firm for the assessment year 1978-79 ?' 2. The assessment year concerning this reference is 1978-79. 3. At the material time, the assessee-firm consisted of five persons, i.e., including one Shri Vijaykumar Kejriwal. The assessee was a family concern of a mother and her four sons, among whom Shri Vijaykumar Kejriwal was one. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1976-77, Shri Vijaykumar Kejriwal was sent for higher studies to the United States of America (U. S. A). Shri Vijaykumar got a deg...
Rajnikant Bros. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1993
Reported in: [1996]217ITR272(Bom)
Dr. 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 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the following expenditure incurred by the assessee did not qualify for weighted deduction under section 35B?' 1974-75 1975-76Rs. Rs.Bank interest 55,290 1,12,406Reassortment charges 26,398 27,867Assortment charges 15,900 25,900Motor car expenses 6,021 9,472 2. Learned counsel for the assessee submits before us that though the claim in regard to the number of items mentioned in the above question, is covered by a number of decisions rendered recently, the assess is entitled to weighted deduction in respect recently of assortment charges under item No. (ii) or (viii) of section 35B(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. We have carefully gone through the record. We, however, do not find any mater...
Keshavji Meghaji Dediya Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR640
S.W. Puranik, J.1. Appellant stands convicted for the offence under section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act read with Clause 3(a) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Articles (Display and Marking of Prices) Order, 1966 and sentenced to suffer S.I. for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 300, in default S.I. for three weeks. This order was passed by the Special Judge (E.C. Act), Thane on 17th June, 1987 in Special Criminal Case (E.C. Act) No. 7 of 1987. Mr. K.H. Parekh appears for the appellant, while Mr. Bhojne, A.P.P. appears for the respondent-State.2. It was the case of the prosecution that the appellant-accused is the proprietor of a grocery shop styled as 'Nemichand Kirana Stores' situated at Hazuri, Thane. On 14-9-1986, P.S.I. Patil P.W. 3 was patrolling the area along with his staff. He received information that no price boards were displayed at two shops one Jadhav Kriana Stores and the other Nemichand Kirana Stores. Upon this information, P.S.I. Patil called two pancha...
Ashok Organic Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1993
Reported in: (1995)(80)ELT584Tri(Mum.)bai
1. For hearing the applicants appeals on merits, they are required to.deposit Rs. 1,23,38,268/- (in E/Stay-2880) towards duty vide Order-in-Original No. 4/Demand/93[V.(Ch. 22) 15-4/OA/87], dated 28-6-1993 and to deposit Rs. 3,13,23,010.00 (in E/Stay-2881) towards duty vide Order-in-original No. 5/Demand/93 [F. No. V. (Ch. 22) 15-1/OA/91] dated 28-6-1993 both passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda.2. The issue relates to demand for duty in respect of rectified spirit (Industrial Alcohol) containing 6% water which was cleared subject to State Excise Control. The allegation is that this can be used as fuel for Internal Combustion Engine and hence duty was sought to be demanded as per the rate applicable under T.I. 6 (old Tariff) and Ch. 2204 of the New Central Excise Tariff. Shri Patel pleaded that apart from the contention that this type of alcohol because of its water content, cannot by itself be used as fuel for internal combustion engine, the demand is clearly hit by time ...
V.P. Hameed and anr. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1993
Reported in: (1994)(50)LC391Tri(Mum.)bai
1. As all the matters have identical issues and arise out of this Bench's common Order No. 256-257/93-WRD dated 1.3.1993 in Appeal Nos.C/435/92 Bom and C/458/92 Bom, and also common Order No. 1315-22/93-WRB dt. 24.7.1993 in Ref-18/93 (with C/COD-23/93, C-Misc-60/93 Bom and C/Misc-78/93)in C/435/92 Bom and C/Ref-19/93 Bom, (with C/COD-24/93 Bom, C/Misc-61/93 Bom and C/Misc-79/93) in C/458/92 Bom, all of them are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. C/Misc/129-93 and C/Misc-130/93 Bom filed by S/Shri Hameed and Abdul Jabbar, for rectification of mistake in this Bench's Order No.256-257/93 -WRB dated 1.3.1993, C/Misc-130/93 Bom and C/Misc-132/93 are filed by them for rectification of mistake in this Bench's Order No.1315-22/93-WRB dated 29.7.1993, whereas C/Misc-117/93 and C/Misc-118/93 are filed by the Collector of Customs, for grant of stay against the operation of the order No. 256-257/93-WRB dated 1.3.1993 passed by this Bench, pending the disposal of the ...
Polynova Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1993
Reported in: 1995(3)BomCR13
G.D. Kamat, J.1. Whether release paper used for the manufacture of coated textile fabrics commonly known as leather cloth is an input eligible for MODVAT (Modified Value Added Tax) credit, or it is a tool, equipment, or appliance and therefore, excluded from the benefit of the MODVAT scheme, is the essential controversy in this petition.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a manufacturer of coated textile fabrics coated with Poly Venyl Choride or with Poly Urethane at its factory at Kundaim, Goa. They are holding the necessary licence under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. In the manufacture of coated textile fabrics, they use release paper which is required to be imported and there is no dispute that upon import of release paper it is subject to the payment of customs duty. The product thus manufactured by the first petitioner falls under Chapter 59 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act which comes under the heading 'impregnated, coated, covered or laminated textile fabrics; textile ...
B.K. Paper Mills Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1993
Reported in: (1993)(68)ELT452Tri(Mum.)bai
1. All the three appeals involve consideration of the same issue. Hence they were heard together and proposed to be dealt with by this common order.2. The above appeals are against the orders of the Collector (Appeals) as indicated below:--------------------------------------------------------------Appeal No. Order of Collector (Appeals)--------------------------------------------------------------E/601/90-Bom. KW/458/90/B-in dated 23-7-1990.E/737/90-Bom. KW/581/90/B-in dated 26-9-1990.E/19/91-Bom. KW/636/90/B-in dated 9-11-1990.-------------------------------------------------------------- 3(1) The common issue in all the three appeals is whether Modvat Credit is admissible in respect of metallic wire netting of Phosphor Bronze and Dryer felt of woollen cloth, which are declared as inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of paper.3(2) The appellants filed declaration under Rule 57A declaring inter alia the aforesaid two items as inputs used in or in relation to the manufactu...
Laxmichand Bhagaji Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1993
Reported in: (1994)48ITD322(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against confirmation by the CIT(A) of levy of a penalty of Rs. 2,11,39,972 under Section 271 (1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for concealment.2. The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business of 'Indigenous Bankers' since 1960. The business consisted of taking deposits from the public as well as advancing loans to the public.During the accounting year relevant to assessment year 1985-86, the firm had 180 branches spread over the States of Gujarat, Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh besides its Head Office at Bombay.3. The assessee was following the calendar year as its previous year.Thus, the previous year for assessment year 1985-86 ended on 31st December, 1984. During this calendar year, certain amendments were brought about in the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, by introduction of Section 45S therein, with effect from 15th February, 1984. According to this newly introduced section, no firm shall, at any time, have deposi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »