Mumbai Court January 1996 Judgments

Bhupen Dalal Vs. A.K. Menon

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1996(3)BomCR429; [1997]89CompCas121(Bom)

G.D. Kamat, J. 1. These two appeals can be disposed of under a common order. 2. The Special Court under the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, in Suo Motu Contempt Notice No. 1 of 1995 by its order dated June 22, 1995, convicted the appellant, Bhupen Dalal, a notified person for not having complied with the order of the court for disclosing his assets on affidavit and upon having held him guilty, imposed a sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of 2,000. The court also observed while passing the order that undergoing imprisonment and payment of fine shall not absolve the appellant from filing the affidavit disclosing all his assets. This order is the subject-matter of challenge in Appeal No. 856 of 1995. 3. An affidavit disclosing his assets was filed by the appellant and upon that event, a review petition, being Review Petition No. 1 of 1995, was instituted seeking to get the order of June 22, 199...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Tribhovandas Bhimji Zaveri an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)55TTJ(Mumbai)477

ORDERK. C. SINGHAL, J. M. :These two appeals by the Revenue are against the orders of the CIT(A) cancelling the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) and under s. 273 pertaining to asst. yr. 1982-83.2. The brief facts of the case are these.Assessee is one of the leading jewellers of Bombay. It filed its return of income on 15th June, 1982, declaring its income at Rs. 5,63,910. On 21st Sept., 1982, a search was conducted at the premises of the assessee. A petition under s. 273A was filed by the assessee before the CIT on 27th Jan., 1983, offering Rs. 20 lakhs for taxation purposes with a view to avoid further inquiries and investigations and to buy peace. This petition related to asst. yrs. 1979-80 to 1982-83. This offer was increased gradually to Rs. 30 lakhs and later on further increased to Rs. 52 lakhs plus vide letter dt. 22nd Sept., 1984. This offer was not accepted by the Department. In the meanwhile assessee filed a settlement petition before the Settlement Commission on 31st Oct., 1983, p...

inspecting Assistant Vs. Ramkumar Jalan

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the CIT(A), dt. 31st March, 1986, whereby an addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made on account of cash credits appearing in the names of two creditors, i.e., M/s Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Amarchand Dharmachand has been deleted and following grounds of appeal have been taken : 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources even though the creditworthiness of M/s Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Amarchand Dharamchand has not been proved. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources even though the assessee has not furnished the details of the person or persons who are supposed to have brought this money from Delhi in cash. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources.2. The facts of the ...

inspecting Assistant Commissioner Vs. Ramkumar Jalan.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)56TTJ(Mumbai)648

ORDERI. S. VERMA, J. M. :This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the CIT(A), dt. 31st March, 1986, whereby an addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made on account of cash credits appearing in the names of two creditors, i.e., M/s Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Amarchand Dharmachand has been deleted and following grounds of appeal have been taken :1. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources even though the creditworthiness of M/s Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Amarchand Dharamchand has not been proved.2. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources even though the assessee has not furnished the details of the person or persons who are supposed to have brought this money from Delhi in cash.3. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources.2....

Rhone-poulenc (i) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs, Acc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT155Tri(Mum.)bai

1. This is an appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 259/91 BCHF. No.S/49-99/90 VL (Air), dated 25-2-1991 rejecting the appellants' appeal.2. The appellants were manufacturing and exporting the goods under DEEC scheme. In the DEEC licence, for each individual item allowed for import, quantity as well as value restrictions were imposed. In the case of import of Pipotiazine, the quantity restriction was 63 kgs. and the value restriction was Rs. 1,16,09,325/-. However, on account of the fluctuation in exchange rate due to delay in supply of 60 kgs. of the product, the value has exceeded marginally. Hence on account of the objection of the Customs, they paid the duty involved on the quantity, which exceeded the value and cleared the goods to fulfil their export obligation. Subsequently, they approached the JCCI & E vide their letter, dated 1-2-1990, wherein they have explained the position and requested them that the individual item [-wise] value restriction should be deleted or enhan...

Overseas Chinese Cuisine (India) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These are cross-appeals-three by the assessee and three by the Department in respect of the assessment years 1988-89 to 1990-91, which arise out of a consolidated order dated November 29, 1991, by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).2. The main thrust of these appeals revolves round the following additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of suppressed sales by the assessee.3. The first appeals filed by the assessee were partly allowed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as a result of which the additions which survive now are tabled below : 4. Thus, the two sets of appeal assail before us the additions sustained and the relief granted by the first appellate authority.5. The assessee runs a leading Chinese restaurant in a prime area of this megametropolis which is known as "Chinese Garden".6. The premises of the assessee were subjected to a search on September 18, 1989, which falls during the assessment year 1990-91. On the basis of the materials collec...

Overseas Chinese Cuisine Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1996)56ITD67(Mum.)

1. These are cross-appeals - 3 by the assessee and 3 by the Department in respect of the assessment years 1988-89 to 1990-91, which arise out of a consolidated order dated 29th November, 1991 by the CIT (Appeals).2. The main thrust of these appeals revolve round the following additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of suppressed sales by the assessee.A. Y. 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 Rs. 54,79,200 Rs. 1,10, 10,950 Rs. 82,80,285.The first appeals filed by the assessee were partly allowed by the learned CIT(A) as a result of which the additions which survive now are tabled below :- 3. Thus the two sets of appeals assail before us the additions sustained and the relief granted by the first appellate authority.Assessee runs a leading Chinese Restaurant in a prime area of this megametropolis which is known as 'Chinese Garden'.4. The premises of the assessee were subjected to a search on 18th Sept. 1989 which falls during the assessment year 1990-91. On the basis of the material coll...