Mumbai Court March 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.
Akola Oil Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT715Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the order-in-original No. 9/88/V.R, dated 16-5-1985 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Nagpur, imposing a penalty of Rs. 3.25 lakhs under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Vanaspati. They filed a Writ Petition No. 4852/76, in the Nagpur Bench of the High Court challenging the assessable value determined by the Dept. The said petition was allowed by the Nagpur Bench of the High Court, according to which duty was to be paid on value excluding post manufacturing expenses. After this judgment, the appellants filed a price list effective from 25-12-1980 claiming assessment on the assessable value reportedly worked out on the basis of manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit. But the details of actual sale price and the post manufacturing deductions were not shown in the said price list. Hence the Supdt. under his letter dt. 29-12-1980 asked for these details. The appellants in their letter dt. 14-...
Nilesh Shipping Agency Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: (1994)(53)LC66Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is directed against the Order passed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, bearing No. S/8-5/92 Admn. dated 17.3.1993 in exercise of his powers conferred under Regulation 21(1)(c) read with Regulation 23(7) of the Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as "the CHA Regulations") declaring Mr.Bhupendra B. Adatia, the partner in the CHA firm M/s. Nilesh Shipping Agency unfit to transact business as clearing agent in any of the Customs sections and also revoking the CHA Licence No. 11/659 held by M/s. Nilesh Shipping Agency.2. Only the CHA firm has come in appeal against the said order and Mr.Bhupendra Adatia, in his individual capacity has not preferred any appeal, in relation to the order holding him unfit to transact business as clearing agent.3. Proceedings culminating in passing of the impugned order have the nexus to gathering of report through their intelligence wing by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, (DRI) about clandestine ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Aspee Distributors Association
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: [1994]209ITR294(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, C.J. 1. The assessee is an association of persons consisting of about 125 distributors of Messrs. American Spring and Pressing Works Pvt. Ltd. The association was formed some time in 1971 and had adopted a written constitution at its meeting held on October 30, 1971. The aims and objects of the association are as follows : '1. To forge and foster co-operation amongst the members of the association and to strengthen the ties between the members corporately and the principles. 2. To develop business relationship mutually amongst the members. 3. To develop and strengthen fellowship amongst members. 4. To promote knowledge of scientific methods of sale promotion, service, market research, publicity, planning, statistics and display amongst Aspee Distributors. 5. In general, to undertake such activities of a temporary or permanent nature, as may be deemed necessary, for promoting the cause of trade, in particular, and to undertake such other measures which might con...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jamnadas Dwarkadas and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: [1994]209ITR1(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, C.J.1. This income-tax reference relates to the three assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. The assessments were originally made under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In the assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to furnish details of particulars which were furnished by the assessee in the course of assessment proceedings, relating to purchase transactions of Rs. 10,000 and above, the assessee had shown, inter alia, purchases from one Messrs. Daswani Trading Corporation Pvt. Ltd. as under : 1964-65 Rs. 1,58,1871965-66 Rs. 2,41,0341966-67 Rs. 1,32,9942. For the assessment year 1966-67, the assessee had also made purchases amounting to Rs. 7,692 from another concern, viz., Messrs. T. U. Patel and Sons Pvt. Ltd. This purchase transaction was not separately shown in the particulars which were furnished by the assessee, because this purchase transaction was below Rs. 10,000. While making the original assessments, the Income-tax Officer di...
New Shorrock Spg. and Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: [1994]208ITR765(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, C.J.1. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1973-74. For the assessment year 1973-74, the relevant previous year of the assessee was January 1, 1972, to March 31, 1973. The assessee-company carried on the business of running a textile mill. On May 25, 1972, the assessee-company declared its dividend for the year 1971. A company called Mafatlal Gagalbhai and Co. Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'M. G. Ltd.'), holding shares in the assessee-company, received dividend in respect of its holdings in the assessee-company. However, on October 27, 1972, a proposal was initiated for the amalgamation of M. G. Ltd. with the assessee-company, the assessee-company being the transferee-company while M. G. Ltd. being the transferor-company. Petitions were filed in the Bombay High Court as well as in the Gujarat High Court by the two concerned companies for amalgamation. The order of the Bombay High Court approving the amalgamation was passed on September 24, 1973, ...
Abdulla Kalingal Andu Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: 1994LC361(Bombay); 1994(71)ELT349(Bom)
ORDERAgarwal, J.1. Shri R. M. Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents, on taking instructions, states that the ownership of gold and silver is not a criterion for its eligibility to be imported by the passenger under the Gold Import Scheme. Accordingly incoming passengers can import the gold so long as they satisfy the conditions of stay abroad and those relating to payment of duty in foreign exchange. 2. In view of the above statement, the present prosecution does not survive and the petitioner is entitled for order of discharge. The prosecution sought to be initiated against the petitioner is quashed. Bail bond of the petitioner to stand cancelled and cash security, if paid, will be returned to the petitioner. Similarly gold and silver seized from possession of the petitioner including related documents and passport be returned to the petitioner forthwith. Rule made absolute....
ishtiaq Khan Sada HusseIn Khan Etc. and Etc. Vs. the Municipal Corpora ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: (1994)96BOMLR724
Bhimrao N. Naik, J.1. These are six appeals filed by the Appellants challenging the order passed by the learned Judges of the City Civil Court on 17-2-1994, whereby the Notice of Motions taken out by them in their respective suits came to be dismissed. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides and I propose to pass a common order in respect of these appeals.2. The Corporation on 3-6-1991 issued a notice under Section 351 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act to each one of the Plaintiffs in Suit Nos. 5531/91, 5532/91, 5233/91, 5238/91, 5236/91 and 5237/91, since they had constructed unauthorised structures, being hutments in Indira Nagar, Parshi Naka, Mahul Road, Chembur, Bombay. It does appear from the record that the three plaintiffs, namely Shaikh Rahimtulla Noor Mohammed (Plaintiff in Suit No. 5236/91), Shaikh Maqbulla Noor Rahimtulla (Plaintiff in Suit No. 5238/91) and Shaikh Whals Mohammed Noor Mohammed (Plaintiff in Suit No. 5237/91) are holding photo-passe...
Chamber of Income-tax Consultants and Others Vs. Central Board of Dire ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-14-1994
Reported in: (1994)120CTR(Bom)209; [1994]209ITR660(Bom)
ORDERDr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by four professional bodies, viz., the Chamber of Income-tax Consultants, Bombay Chartered Accountants' Society, All India Federation of Tax Practitioners and Forum of Indian Professional Organisations and a Chartered Accountant, Shri Narayan Krishnadas Varma, who also happens to be the President of the Forum of Indian Professional organisations and a member of three other organisations. By this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the validity and legality of Circular No. 681 (see [1994] 206 ITR 299), dated March 8, 1994, issued by the first respondent, the Central Board of Direct Taxes. This petition has been filed by way of public interest litigation on behalf of professionals and, in particular, the professionals who are members of the petitioner associations. By the impugned circular, the first respondent had issued instructions, inter alia, that the payment of fees for professional services is also covered by t...
Pune Municipal Corporation, Pune Vs. Nanasaheb Nagoji Bhosale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Bom164; 1995(2)BomCR162; (1994)96BOMLR614; 1995(1)MhLj427
1. With the uncontrolled growth of unauthorised structures erupting in the cities, the time has come now for the Courts to specify in no uncertain terms as to what is the correct ambit and scope of the powers vested in the Corporation to order demolition or to themselves pull down or remove the structures. The traditional argument that has been advanced to the effect that it is a basic requirement of law that the procedure of showing cause or hearing and passing of an order must precede the demolition has unfortunately resulted in a time-consuming and laborious exercise in every case, inevitably followed by litigation, with the result that for decades together the structures continue in existence without any legal justification whatsoever. In the meanwhile, ration-cards are obtained, licences are issued, names are put down on the voters' lists and all sorts of evidence establishing long-term user comes forth in support of the plea that it would be harsh and improper to order demolition...
T.T. Blades Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-1994
Reported in: 1997(57)ECC178; 1994LC362(Bombay); 1994(71)ELT911(Bom)
Pendse, J. 1. The controversy in this petition lies in a narrow compass. The petitioners filed an application for refund of duty alleged to be paid in excess, in respect of manufacture of the goods covered under Tariff Item No. 68. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim. The petitioners preferred appeal before the Appellate Collector and appeal was decided in favour of the petitioners. The order passed by the Appellate Authority was challenged by the Department by filing appeal before the CEGAT. 2. During the pendency of the appeal before the CEGAT, the petitioners filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution claiming a direction to the Department to deposit amount of refund ascertained by the appellate authority in this Court. The petitioners also claimed that on deposit the amount shall be paid over to the petitioners. The learned Single Judge while admitting the petition on December 19, 1984 directed the Department to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,59,814/- in this C...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »