Mumbai Court May 1994 Judgments
Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Smt. Shantidevi Saraf
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-31-1994
Reported in: (1994)51ITD83(Mum.)
(1) The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition of capital gains of Rs. 23,370 on sale of 485 shares of TISCO which were converted into stock-in-trade before their sale. (2) The learned CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that conversion of shares into stock-in-trade and their subsequent sale was with a view to avoid capital gains tax. He ought to have applied the ratio of the Supreme Court decision in McDowell's case (154 ITR 148) and confirmed the addition. (3) Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT (Appeals) ought to have enhanced the income under the head 'Capital gains' representing the difference between the cost price and the conversion price as he himself has considered the amendment to Section 34 w.e.f. 1-4-1985 in the appellate order.Thus, the dispute is about the taxability and quantification of capital gains.2. The assessee is an individual and the relevant previous year ended on 31-3-1985. The assessee had sold 485 equity shares of TISCO for ...
Tag this Judgment!Nirfabrics Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-20-1994
Reported in: (1994)50ITD336(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee, which is directed against the revisional order of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 20-3-1989.2. The assessee has raised a specific ground vide ground No. 1 challenging the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income-tax and three other specific grounds challenging the merits of the revisional order of the Commissioner.3. The assessee is a resident company. The assessment year involved is 1984-85 for which the accounting year ended on 30-6-1983. Against a loss of Rs. 74,631 returned by the assessee, the Assessing Officer determined the loss at Rs. 7,52,029. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer is said to have not properly enquired into the expenditure of Rs. 1,04,139 on conveyance and commission and brokerage paid at Rs. 6,81,186 on sales promotion. Further, the assessee has paid bonus at the rate of 20% though on account of loss sustained only the minimum bonus of 8.33% was payable...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Lever Employees Union Vs. Hindustan Lever Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-18-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR465; [1995]83CompCas1(Bom); (1995)ILLJ1099Bom
V.A. Mohta, J.1. These are five appeals under section 391(7) of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act'), against a common order dated March 3, 1994, made by the company court under section 391/394 of the Act sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation of the Tata Oil Mills Company Limited (TOMCO) - the transferor with the Hindustan Lever Limited (HLL) - the transferee. Company Petition No. 332 of 1993 is by TOMCO and Company Petition No. 333 of 1993 is by HLL - both for the similar relief of sanction. On these two petitions the impugned order was passed. Since these appeals are against a common judgment they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment. 2. Appeal No. 244 of 1994 is by the Federation of Tata Oil Mills and Allied Companies' Employees' Unions in Company Petition No. 332 of 1993, connected with Company Application No. 250 of 1993. Appeal No. 298 of 1994 is by Mr. Rabindra Hazari - a shareholder of TOMCO - in Company Petition No. 332 of 1993, connected with Co...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Uhde Gmbh.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-13-1994
Reported in: (1996)54TTJ(Mumbai)355
ORDERN. R. PRABHU, A. M. :The only ground of appeal in this case is that the learned CIT(A) was in error in directing the Assessing Officer (AO) to tax the income on various projects on receipt basis as against accrual basis and further erred in directing that provisions of s. 145 were not applicable for determining the total income of the assessee.2. We have heard the parties to the dispute. Assessee is a foreign company and had entered into an agreement for rendering among other things, technical services to the following companies, viz. :(i) Punjab Alkalies (ii) Modi Alkalies (iii) Kothari Madras (iv) Gujarat AlkaliesThe dispute in this case is only regarding the fees for rendering technical services and whether the same is to be taxed on accrual basis or on receipt basis.3. The AO, inter alia, relying on the Madras High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Standard Triumph Co. Ltd. (1979) 119 ITR 573 (Mad), had held that the income by way of fees for technical services was liable ...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Pushpa B. Sheth Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-11-1994
Reported in: (1994)50ITD314(Mum.)
1. Assessee's this appeal is directed against the refusal of the Departmental authorities to rectify under Section 154 an adjustment made under Section 143(1)(a).2. Assessee is an individual. She had sold a self-occupied flat at Usha Kiran in Bombay, for a sum of Rs. 1,01,64,884. After deduction of brokerage and transfer charges totalling Rs. 1,60,400, the net sale proceeds came to Rs. 1,00,04,484. Cost of acquisition deductible came to Rs. 2,24,000 leaving a balance of Rs. 97,80,484. In the return of income, assessee dealt with the abovementioned sum of Rs. 97,80,484 as follows :On first Rs. 10,000 100% 10,000On balance 97,70,484 50% 48,85,242 48,95,242 __________ ____________(Capital gains) (Value exempt under Section 53)________________________________________________ 1,01,64,484 1,92,437 __________(full value of consideration) 46,92,805Less : Exemption under Section 54.Long-term capital gains Rs. 16,455. ___________ 3. The Assessing Officer made adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) ...
Tag this Judgment!Girish Ghanshyam Dube Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-10-1994
Reported in: 1994(4)BomCR376
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. This is an application under sections 439 and 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of one Girish Ghanshyam Dube for quashing the order dated 3-5-1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, in Sessions Case No. 409 of 1993 cancelling the applicant's bail for offences under sections 395/398/342/327/171 I.P.C. read with section 34 I.P.C. and sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act. Another prayer to in this application is that this Court be pleased to release the applicant on bail. A short recital of the relevant facts is necessary for the disposal of this application.2. It appears that initially the applicant was being run down for offences punishable under the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities Act, popularly known as 'TADA' and hereinafter referred to as 'TADA'. The designated Court having jurisdiction to try the TADA case refused bail to the applicant and on 18.7.1991 the Apex Court was pleased to grant bail to the applicant; the bail order being hemmed by certain stringent ...
Tag this Judgment!Antifriction Bearings Corpn. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-09-1994
Reported in: (1995)LC274Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal against the Order-in-Original No.41/MP/93, dated 13-12-1993 ordering confirmation of a demand in respect of Auoto the machines manufactured and captively installed. The Collector also Confiscated 9 Autolathe machines but ordered appropriation of a sum of Rs, 2,14,500/- from the security furnished and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh.2. Shri M.H. Patil, the ld. advocate does not challenge the duty which has already been paid in respect of the machines. He Would only Challenge the order of confiscation of the machines and imposition of penalty ofn them. He points out that the undisputed factual position in this case is that the machines assembled by them are for their own use and were put to use Only after clearance on appropriate duty under TR challan and the fact of payment of duty was intimated to the Range Supdt. In fact, when the duty was paid on machine on 19-12-1991, the Range Supdt. raised an objection that the profit margin has to be added to the value ...
Tag this Judgment!Consolidated Pneumatic Tool Co. Vs. C.C.E. and Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-04-1994
Reported in: (1995)(79)ELT183Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Though this day only the stay application was listed for hearing, the issue convassed is linked to considering the question of penal liability and the extent of penalty, which could be justified in this case, with the consent of both the sides, we have taken up the appeal itself for disposal.2. The allegation is that inputs received under the Modvat Scheme were removed as such, without debit of appropriate duty payable on these inputs and without taking the permission and filing the classification list and price list. An amount of Rs. 5,60,957/- was quantified by the Department, which is reported to have been paid even before issue of Show Cause Notice and the Collector has imposed a penalty of Rs. 2.50 lacs and also ordered confiscation of their building, plant and machinery etc. but allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 2.00 lacs (vide Order-in-Original No. 37/MP/93, dated 30-11-1993 [V(Ch.84)15-2/OA/93].3. Shri M.H. Patil, the Ld. Advocate mainly pleads that they are ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›