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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shrishakti Trading Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1993
Reported in: [1994]207ITR442(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference, pursuant to the order of the court under section 256(2) of the Act, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law for opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact that cash balance on hand and in the bank belonging to the assessee-firm did not become the property of Shree Shakti Insulated Wire Private Ltd., which succeeded to the other assets including plant and machinery and the business of the assessee-firm under the agreement dated February 14, 1963, the development rebate which have been allowed to the assessee-firm for the assessment years 1961-62 to 1962-63 must be deemed to have been wrongly allowed having regard to clause (i) of the Explanation to section 33(4) read with section 34(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and as such withdrawing the development rebate for the said assessment years and taking action under section 155(5)(i) was justified ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri Ashraf-ur-rehman Azimullah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR341(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 two questions of law to this court for opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in its conclusion that the assessee had become the owner of the flat and had occupied it for the purpose of his residence through the convenient medium of the company and that it is not a normal case where the provisions of section 2(24)(iv) should be invoked 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that to the extent of interest forgone by the assessee in respect of the advance and the corresponding benefit derived by him from the concessional rent, there is a quid pro quo and hence there cannot be said to be a benefit or advantage derived by the assessee ?' 2. The relevant facts having a bearing on question No. 2 are i...
Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1993
Reported in: [1995]216ITR479(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf J.1. This is a cross-reference at the instance of the assessee as well as the Revenue. The following three questions of law have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to this court for opinion : 2. At the instance of the assessee : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of the company to deduct the sum of Rs. 5,31,138 paid as interest on the usance bills drawn under the Scheme of the IDBI as business expenditure has been rightly rejected by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax, Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that no appeal lies against the levy of interest under section 215 of the Income-tax Act ?' At the instance of the Revenue : '3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest on loans borrowed for advancing it t...
Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable and Chaleshwar Temple Trust Vs ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1993
Reported in: (1994)118CTR(Bom)305; [1994]207ITR368(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 has rightly held that the assessee had not exercised the option within the time allowed under the Explanation to section 11(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee is a charitable trust to which the provisions of section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), are applicable. The due date for filing of its return of income for the assessment year 1972-73 was June 30, 1972. The return was, however, not filed within that date but it was filed later on October 14, 1974, under section 139(4)(a) of the Act and on the basis of the said return assessment was made by the Income-tax Officer under section 143(3) of the Act. In its return, the assessee claimed deduction of a sum of Rs. 90,000 which it had spen...
Balu Waghu Waghpure Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)BomCR655
S.W. Puranik, J.1. The appellant along with two other acquitted accused Raghu his brother and Waghu his father were initially charged with the offences under section 302, 325 & 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. However after the trial in Sessions Case No. 77 of 1987 concluded the original accused Nos. 2 and 3 Raghu and Waghu were acquitted of all the offences, while appellant-original accused No. 1 came to be acquitted of all other offences except section 325 of the Indian Penal Code for which he has been sentenced to suffer R.I. for two years and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default R.I. for six months. This judgment and order was rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.2. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the appellant has carried this appeal. Mrs. Anita Agarwal appears for the appellant, while Mr. B.R. Patil appears for the State. With the assistance of learned Counsel of both the parties I have gone through the record and papers of the case as well as the impugned judgment.3. ...
Hema Rajendra Shevate Vs. Rajendra Baribhau Shevate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC55
A.P. Shah, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant wife against the judgment and order of the Family Court, Pane, granting decree of judicial separation to the respondent-husband.2. The Trial Court has granted a decree for judicial separation on the ground of desertion. In this appeal, the appellant has challenged the decree for judicial separation and the respondent has filed cross-objections claiming a decree for divorce.3. The brief admitted facts may be stated first:The appellant and the respondent married according to the Hindu Vedic rites at Pune on April 9, 1983. The couple is blessed with two sons Chetan and Shrikant. The appellant left the matrimonial home in October 1987 and since then she has been staving with her parents along with son Shrikant. The respondent issued a notice dated August 15, 1988 requesting the appellant to come back to the matrimonial home and to resume the matrimonial relationship. There was no response from the appellant. In 1990, the appellan...
Consolidated Pneumatic Tool Co. (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1993
Reported in: (1994)120CTR(Bom)22; [1994]209ITR277(Bom)
ORDERDr. 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 right in law in relying upon the subsequent retrospective amendment of section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for upholding the rejection by the Income-tax Officer of the application by the assessee for rectification of the other of the Income-tax Officer?' 2. The controversy in this case pertains to the assessment year 1973, 74. The assessee-company filed its return of income on August 14, 1973. Subsequently, on December 29, 1973, it filed a revised return in which it also claimed deduction under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The assessment was completed on August 17, 1976, and in the same, relief under section 80J was not allowed by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee took up the matter...
Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1993
Reported in: [1994]206ITR505(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 two questions of law to this court for opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of relief allowable under section 80J(1) should be allowed as deduction by way of set off against the total income of the assessee consisting of capital gains 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of deduction by way of development rebate should be set off against the income from capital gains in the first instance ?' 2. The assessee is a company. It carries on the business of playing ships. The relevant assessment year is 1973-74, the corresponding previous year being the year ended on March 31, 1973. In the assessment for the above assessment year, the assessee was entitled to some relief under section 80J(1) and also deduction by way of developm...
J.C. D'souza and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR393(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to this court for its opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in sustaining the penalty of Rs. 24,137 for the assessment year 1971-72 ?' 2. At the material time, the assessee was carrying on business as a vendor of foreign liquor. On September 14, 1971, the assessee filed their return declaring total income of Rs. 28,263. Along with the said return, the assessee submitted a trading account, profit and loss and other relevant documents. The Income-tax Officer issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act and the case was adjourned from time to time. On December 22, 1971, the assessee filed a revised return declaring a total income of Rs. 35,396. By an order dated January 31, 1972, the Income-tax Officer computed the total income at Rs. 63,980 by estimating the sales at Rs. 7 lakh and the gross p...
Hindustan Lever Employees Union Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1993
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ388Bom
A.V. Savant, J.1. Heard all the learned Counsel at length, namely, Shri Gonsalves for petitioner-Union:Shri Master for respondent No. 1-State and Shri Andhyarujina for respondent No. 2 - Employer. This is a rather unusual petition seeking relief in terms of prayer (a) which says that this Court should issue a writ of certiorari permanently prohibiting respondent No. 1 from granting permission to respondent No. 2 to close any part of the department of their Sewree Factory or, in the alternative, if such a permission is already granted, to quash and set aside the order granting the same.2. The petitioner is the Hindustan Lever Employees' Union which is a registered trade union; the first respondent is the State of Maharashtra represented by the Department of Industries; and the second respondent is the employer viz., Hindustan Lever Limited. The dispute relates to the shifting of the Nickel Catalyst Department of the second respondent's factory from Sewree, Bombay to Taloja which is in R...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »