Mumbai Court November 1994 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.
Nitco Marble and Granite (P) Ltd. Vs. Dy. Collector of Customs
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: 1995(58)LC96(Bombay)
ORDER1. This is an appeal filed by M/s. NITCO Marble and Granite (P) Ltd., against the order of Dy. Collector of Customs, Jawahar Customs House, Sheva.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant filed a Shipping Bill No. 523900 dated 8.8.1994 for export of 10.26 M CBM (42.12 M.T. Nt. Wt.) 'Marble Blocks Cut & Minimum One Side Polished', valued at Rs. 3,53,739/-FOB. The export was sought under provisional DEEC Scheme, as the appellant had applied for duty free advance licence vide D.G.F.T. receipt No. 289899 dated 26.7.1994.3. The goods were examined on 19.8.1994 and it was found out that the Marble block sought to be exported were not having 'Minimum one side polished' as declared in the Shipping bill, but they were found to be roughly cut from all six sides. In order to ascertain the status of the goods as Marble or otherwise, the sealed samples were sent for test to DYCC, IIT Bombay and Coechem. The Goechem reported that the sample is a Lime Stone which in all probabilit...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lallubhai Jogibhai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR769(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. The following question of law has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court at the instance of the Revenue : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in setting aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dated January 28, 1977, as also the order of the Income-tax Officer dated February 20, 1976, adding Rs. 55,000 to the total income of Rs. 30,000 as per the original assessment order ?' 2. The facts of the case relevant for determination of the controversy are as follows : The assessee is an individual. He was assessed under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for the assessment year 1966-67. The assessment was reopened by the Income-tax Officer by issue of a notice under section 148 of the Act. The notice was issued on March 29, 1975, but it was served on the assessee on April 7, 1975. The Inc...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Phoenix Scrap Processors
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: (1995)123CTR(Bom)329; [1995]217ITR341(Bom)
DR. B.P. Saraf, J.1. The following question of law has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of profits derived from labour charges from Messrs. Nathani Steel Pvt. Ltd. for the business of processing of scrap materials in the assessment year 1977-78?' The assessee is a registered firm. It used to carry on the business of processing scrap material. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1977-78, by an agreement in writing, the assessee agreed to allow one Nathani Steel Pvt. Ltd. to get its own raw material processed in the factory of the assessee by its own labour. The assessee was to be paid the remuneration specified therein which was termed 'labour charges'. The undisputed factual position is that no ot...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rohit J. Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: (1995)123CTR(Bom)413; [1995]211ITR250(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of section 16(i)(a) and (b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to the deduction from salary derived by him from each of his two employment individually in the year under consideration?' 2. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1975-76. 3. The assessee is an individual who was getting salary income from two concerns, viz., Messrs. Vijay Flexible Containers and Messrs. Pranav Trading Company. He claimed standard deduction under section 16(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), from each of the two employers at Rs. 3,500 each. The Income-tax Officer allowed only one deduction of Rs. 3,500. The ass...
Protos Engineer Co. P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: (1995)123CTR(Bom)510; [1995]211ITR919(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 questions of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the assessee : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the deduct surtax payable by it under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, while computing the income from the business carried out by it under the Income-tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amounts received in the course of the business carried on by the assessee and later written back to the profit and loss account as unclaimed, partake of the nature of the trading receipts taxable under section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?' 2. The first question is covered by the decision of this court in Lubrizol India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 25. Following the same, we answer this question in the negative and in favour of the Rev...
Rohit Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: [1995]215ITR919(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference, the following five questions of law have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any amount paid to the employee-directors of the assessee-company which is beyond the amount of Rs. 72,000 is taxable under clauses (i) and (ii) of section 40(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, irrespective of whether the expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the legitimate business needs of the company, and also irrespective of whether the remuneration has been approved by the Government of India under section 310 of the Companies Act 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the commission paid to the managing director of the assesee-company partakes the character of salary and is, therefore, subject to the limits prescribed under section 4...
Vita Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: (1995)123CTR(Bom)256; [1995]211ITR557(Bom)
DR. B.P. Saraf, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee-company was not engaged in the business of manufacturing of goods within the meaning of the definition of an industrial company under section 2(8) (c) of the Finance Act, 1975 ?' 2. The assessee is a private limited company. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1975-76, the corresponding previous year being the year ended on September 30, 1974. Prior to March 23, 1972, apart from other activities, the assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling various kinds of brushes including tooth brushes, hair combs and articles, tooth paste and other toilet articles which were marketed by it under its own brand names. For this purpose, it install...
Dattatraya Gopal Paranjpe Vs. Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR246; (1995)IILLJ913Bom
B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. These writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the orders of the Labour Court under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) raise identical issues of facts and law and, therefore, can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment. 2. There are two important issues thrown up by these writ petitions and they are : (a) Whether a Trade Union registered under the Trade Unions Act is an 'industry' within the meaning of section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and, (b) even if it is, whether an office bearer of a Trade Union doing work of Trade Unionist, properly so-called, would be a 'workman' within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 3. Patanjali says in his Mahabhashya : 'Dushtah Shabdah Swarato Varnato Vaa mithyaa Prayukthah na tamarthammaaha'. ['A word, wrong in accent or sy...
Shri Gabriel De Sa Vs. Shri Babuso Pednekar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR204
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. The short question that arises in this writ petition is as to whether the order passed by the appellate and revisional authorities declaring that the respondent No. 1 is a mundkar in respect of the disputed house and that he is entitled to the benefit under the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975 (hereinafter called the Act). As is discernible from the preamble of the Act the sole purpose of bringing such an enactment is to protect the mundkar against eviction from the dwelling house and from granting him the right to purchase the same and also to abolish the system of free services rendered by mundkars. The provisions of an enactment whenever certain difficulties arise for understanding and interpreting the same, emphasis should be to its objects that are to be achieved. In this case provisions should be interpreted in favour of the mundkars.2. Now coming to the facts emerge in this case. It has been established before the au...
The Cidco Engineers Association and anr. Vs. the City and Industrial D ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)BomCR477
Ashok Agarwal, J.1. An order passed on 7th January, 1986 reverting the petitioner No. 2 from the post of Assistant Engineer to the post of Junior Engineer is impugned in the present petition. The order, inter-alia, recites :-'The overall performance of Shri Pawar during the probation period is found to be unsatisfactory and as such he is reverted to the lower cadre of Junior Engineer with immediate effect....'The petitioner at the material time was working as an Assistant Engineer on probationary basis. The order by which the petitioner was promoted was passed on 23rd November, 1984. The same, inter-alia, provides that conditions governing the promotion are as per the annexure to the said order. The condition No. 1 of the annexure provides :'He shall be on probation for a period of one year and subject to the provisions of CIDCO Service Regulations and these conditions he will be confirmed in the service of the Corporation on satisfactory completion thereof.'2. Based on the above condi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »