Mumbai Court January 1997 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.
Mohmad Ismail H. HusaIn KumaThe Vs. Abdul Bashir Husensaheb Waddo
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR726
D.K. Deshmukh, J.1. This is landlord's petition challenging the order passed by the Appellate Court dated 14th September, 1989 in Civil Appeal No. 662 of 1987 allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment passed by the trial Court decreeing the suit of the landlords for eviction of the respondent. The trial Court by its judgment dated 23.9.1987 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 185 of 1985 had decreed the suit of the landlords on the ground of bonafide need.2. The Appellate Court held that the landlords have not been able to establish that the landlords need the premises bonafidely for their personal occupation. The learned Counsel for the petitioner urged before me that the family of the landlord is a very big family and therefore their need ought to have been taken into consideration by the Appeallate Court. Perusal of the judgment of the Appellate Court shows that the plaintiff No. 1 had issued notice dated 21.3.1984 to the tenant-respondent alleging that the tenant was in defau...
irene Fernandes Vs. Neo Pharma (Pvt.) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-20-1997
Reported in: (1997)99BOMLR633
V.P. Tipnis, J.1. As these petitions raise common questions of law and fact they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In writ petition No. 1630 of 1994 the petitioner was employed with 1st respondent company M/s Neo Pharma Pvt. Ltd. from 16.3.1983. She was appointed to the post of Junior Executive in the accounts department. The petitioner was paid consolidated salary of Rs. 700/- per month. Ultimately by March 1991 her consolidated salary was raised to Rs. 1,475/- p.m.. It is the case of the petitioner that the work done by her and that done by one Mr. Vithal Shetty working with the 1st respondent company is similar in nature. However, for similar work when Shri Vithal Shetty was being paid Rs. 1,357/-, she was being paid only Rs. 700/- p.m.. The petitioner therefore filed claim under Section 7(1)(b) of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 claiming payment at the same rate at which her male counterpart i.e. Vithal Shetty was paid.3. The Assistant Commis...
Gallotti Raoul Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-19-1997
Reported in: (1997)61ITD453(Mum.)
1. These are all appeals filed by various French nationals, who are all employees of Spie Capag, who have been assigned by their employer in France to carry out the various works relating to the contract of construction of Bandra and Worli Marine Outfalls for the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. All the appeals involve the identical issues, viz, (a) whether the salary for the period when the assessees were out of India should be treated as salary earned in India and brought to tax on that basis and (b) whether the social charges which these foreign nationals are liable to contribute in France should be treated as if the French national has an over-riding title on the income from salary of French nationals and thereby it is only the net of salary be taxed or the gross salary without adjustment of the social charges.For the assessee, Senior Advocate, Mr. Dinesh Vyas argued and Mr.Arvind Modi, the learned Sr. Departmental Representative, represented the department's point of view...
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Larsen and Toubro
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)(100)ELT471Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The assessee manufactures nuclear power plants and parts thereof. In the course of manufacture of such goods weld joints of parts to X-ray photography in order to determine the parts have been properly welded.Some of them are small and not visible to the naked eye and are only shown during such X-ray or similar examination. Credit was refused by the Assistant Collector on the ground that the X-ray film is not an input which goes in the manufacture of the finished product. He held that the X-ray was to be considered a tool in the manufacture of plant and machinery. In appeal, the Commissioner held that the goods are required in the manufacture of the final product and were not tools.Hence this appeal.2. The departmental representative agrees that the issue is covered by the unreported decision of this Tribunal dated 1-1-1995. He however seeks to distinguish this decision on the ground that the X-ray film can only be used in a camera and X-ray film are in the nature of tools and appl...
Assistant Commissioner Vs. Varma Mukherji (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-1997
Reported in: (1997)61ITD462(Mum.)
1. The revenue is in appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 15th March, 1990 pertaining to the assessment year 1986-87.2. The assessee-company derives its income from labour charges on processing of grey cloth, i.e., dyeing and printing. It had claimed investment allowance of Rs. 3,10,290. This claim was denied by the Assessing Officer with the following observations : "The assessee has claimed investment allowance of Rs. 3,10,290 and shown in the Appropriation A/c. According to section 32A of the Income-tax Act, investment allowance can be allowed only to those plants and machineries installed for the purpose of business of manufacture or production of any article or thing other than those included in the 11th Schedule. As the assessee-company was, during the previous year relevant to assessment year 1986-87, engaged in the business of processing of grey cloth and not in manufacture or production of any article or thing, the assessee is not entitle...
Sunderlal Daga (Decd.) and Another (Through Lrs) Vs. Tax Recovery Offi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-17-1997
Reported in: [1997]225ITR10(Bom)
L. Manoharan, J. 1. The challenge in this writ petition is against the order annexure-E rendered by the first respondent. For the income-tax dues from Adam Ali and Hatimbhai, 1/4 share each of the said defaulters in 7.73 acres of land comprised in Kh. No. 20 situated at Mouza Kachimeth, Tq. and Dist. Nagpur, was attached by the first respondent. The said attachment orders dated May 4, 1974, are at annexures 'A' and 'B'. Against the said attachment, the petitioners had preferred annexure 'C' objection by way of claim contending, the said survey field belonged to the firm - K.S.M. Hassonjee and Sons and that the senior partner Mulla Akbar Ali sold the property to the petitioners pursuant to an agreement to sell in their favour, on February 1, 1972. They contended that they were put in possession pursuant to the said agreement to sell, and later sale deeds were also executed. Thus, according to them, they were in possession of the entire property, which included the said 1/2 share which w...
Commissioner of Customs Vs. Hari and Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-1997
Reported in: (1997)(92)ELT518Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai against the "decision" 807/95 BCH, dated 30th November, 1995 made by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) setting aside the so called impugned order of the lower authority and direct the lower authority to passed speaking orders in all the disputed assessment of the respondent within a period of one month.2. Facts of the case are that the respondents during the period 1983 to 85 had imported six consignment of OFFSET LITHO plates. They were assessed under Tariff Heading 4801 and the duty was paid by the importers without any protest. However, at a later stage the respondents requested for issuance of orders in assessment by letter dated 9-11-1993. By letter F. No. S/VIII-6(7) POC/43, dated 8-12-1993 Dy. Collector of Customs (PC Unit) had informed that the respondent's request for issuance of order-in-original could not be accepted to as several years have passed after assessment of Bills of Entry. Further, the assessme...
Central Bank of India Vs. M/S. Multi Block Private Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Bom109
1. Both the suits are being disposed of by the common judgment. The plaintiffs herein are the same. The first defendant who are the principal borrower are also the common. Some of the defendants in both these suits are also common. Defendant Nos. 2 to 9 in both the suits are suited in their Capacity as guarantors and they were also the Directors of the first defendant Company. The another element which is common in both the suits is that decrees have been already passed against the first defendant, the principal borrower. The defendants in both the suits are sued in their capacity as guarantors. The defendants who are contesting and are appearing before the Court have raised common contentions with regard to their liability and have challenged the efficacy of the guarantee bond. The contentions raised are common and, therefore, the issues raised are also common.2 It may be stated at this stage itself that the issue was also raised in both the suits by and on behalf of the contesting de...
Aps Star Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Star Textile Engineering Employe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-1997
Reported in: [1997(75)FLR906]; (1997)ILLJ1059Bom
ORDER1. It is common ground that no application has been made by the petitioners under Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for permission of the Appropriate Government for closing down its undertaking. Vires of Section 25-O, we are informed, is pending consideration in several petitions. In the circumstances, we issue rule. We also issue notice to the Attorney General of India. As far as interim relief is concerned we find that the Industrial Court in a complaint filed under the Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1947 has passed an interim order, operative part of which provides as under : 'The respondents are hereby directed to adjust the amount of terminal dues of each of the workers towards the wages from March 1, 1996 and notify them the account within one month from the date of this order. The respondents also shall pay to the workers their monthly wages after adjustment of the above said amount, on the pay day for the respective month.' 2. Proceedings under the Sick Indus...
Suresh Vadilal Vyas Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-16-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)BomCR488
A.V. Savant, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel.2. This is a petition by Suresh Vadilal Vyas, who is an employee of the detenu Suresh Dhansiram Agarwal. By Order dated November 20, 1995 issued by Shri K.L. Verma, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, who was specially empowered under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short, COFEPOSA Act), the detenu has been detained under section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods in future. The period of detention is one year. The order of detention alongwith the grounds was served on the detenu on 17-2-1996.3. It appears that the officers of the Marine and Preventive Wing of the Customs Preventive Commissionerate, Mumbai, received some information regarding export of textile fabrics wherein large-scale fraud and misuse of the Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate (D.E.E.C.) Scheme was being committed by mis-declaring the blend/composi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »