Mumbai Court January 1998 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.
Shri Victor Albuquerque Vs. Saraswat Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR393; 1998(3)BomCR93
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 182 days in filing an appeal against the order dated 15th March 1997 passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji in Civil Misc. Application No. 252/96/B in Special Civil Suit No. 132/96/B. It is the case of the applicant that he did not challenge the order dated 15th March 1997, even after obtaining the certified copy thereof on 20th March 1997, till 15th December 1997 for the following reasons namely:--(a) Prior to the passing of the order dated 15th March 1997, the applicant had already filed a comprehensive suit claiming for several reliefs and as such the applicant thought that there was no need of filing an appeal against the said order dated 15th March, 1997. (b) The applicant was holding compromise talks with respondent No. 3 regarding a global settlement between the parties and the same had reached in the final stage and the dispute seemed to be on the verge of amicable settlement and even adjo...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Harihar Jethalal Jariwalla
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: [1998]234ITR1(Bom)
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 question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the Revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the levy of interest under Section 215(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, can be maintained when the advance tax paid by the assessee is not lessthan 75 per cent, of the tax assessed in pursuance of the order of an appellate or revisional authority ?'2. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1976-77, the relevant previous year being the year ended March 31, 1976. For this assessment year, the assessee was assessed by the Income-tax Officer by his order of assessment dated May 28, 1979, and the total income was computed at Rs. 8, 31,250 and the tax payable was determined at Rs. 6,11,019. As the advance tax paid by the assessee was less than seventy-five per cent. of the assessed tax, simple inte...
Pillai G.M. Vs. A.P. Lakhanikar, Judge, Iii Labour Court and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-07-1998
Reported in: (1998)IILLJ44Bom
R.M. Lodha, J.1. By means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to assail the order dated April 29, 1987 passed by III Labour Court, Bombay, whereby the said Labour Court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on the ground that the petitioner was not a work man under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. The petitioner Shri G.M. Pillai was appointed as machine operator by respondent No. 2 herein M/s Automobile Products of India Ltd. (for short 'the employer') on October 10,1959.; He was confirmed as machine operator on November 7,1960. The petitioner was promoted as Inspector, Quality Control, by the employer in the year 1974 and further promoted as Supervisor on August 17, 1979. Thereafter on November 20, 1983, the petitioner was further promoted as the Senior Supervisor and then on March 4,1985 the petitioner was promoted as Superintendent in Qua...
Purvam Transformers (Guj.) P. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC589Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant manufactures electric transformers and supplies these to the Gujarat State Electricity Board. The purchase orders of the Gujarat State Electricity Board indicated, in addition to the price, a specific amount in each contract, towards freight. Thus for example, the price in contract in Order No. SP 2725/11/1446 was Rs. 13,200 per transformer and freight Rs. 200 per transformer. The department discovered that the amount incurred as freight by the appellant was less than the sum mentioned towards freight in the contract in the electricity board. It therefore concluded that the difference between the amount indicated for the freight and the freight actually incurred would form part of the assessable value. Notice was issued proposing recovery of the duty on this amount. In due course the Additional Collector confirmed the demand holding that the difference between the amount indicated as prayed in the contract and the amount should form part of the assessable value. He al...
Shri Mulam Abubakar Vs. State of Goa and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR687; 1998(3)BomCR57
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. By the present petition, the petitioners are assailing the orders passed by the respondents No. 2 and 3 allowing the application for eviction against the petitioner filed under section 22(2)(b)(ii), (c) and (d) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 (hereinafter called as 'the said Act').2. The facts, in brief, relevant for the decision are that somewhere in February, 1977, the owner of the premises by name Dr. Joao Manual Pacheco de Figueiredo filed proceedings for eviction of the petitioners on the grounds of change of user, material alterations and nuisance to the other occupants of the building and while the matter was pending at the appellate stage, transferred the property, including the suit premises in favour of the respondents No. 4 and 5 by deed of sale dated 15-12-1981 and the said respondents were substituted as parties to the proceedings in place of the original owner by order dated 17-3-1982, passed ...
Sitaram S/O Bansi Pawar Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)ALLMR151; 1998(3)BomCR689
ORDERA.D. Mane, J.1. Rule made returnable forthwith.2. The petitioner was elected as Up-Sarpanch of village Gram-panchayat Gevrai Brooke Bond, tq. and disl. Aurangabad. On 3-12-1997, the Collector, who is respondent No. 2 herein, has directed the Tahsildar to hold election of Sarpanch as per section 33 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958. The Tahsildar in exercise of his powers, appointed the respondent No. 4 as Presiding Officer for holding the election for vacant office of Sarpanch. It is, however, the contention of the petitioner that the Collector has not fixed the date of election when appointment of respondent No. 4 as Presiding Officer was made by the Tahsildar. Moreover, the date of election has been left to the discretion of the respondent No. 4. It is, therefore, submitted that there is an apparent error of law on the face of the proceeding of election of Sarpanch and hence, the petitioner seeks writ in the nature of direction that the respondent No. 2 Collector be dir...
The General Manager, U.P.S.B Corporation Limited and Another Vs. Shri ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-05-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)ALLMR696; 1998(3)BomCR64; [1989(79)FLR860]
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. By the present petition the petitioners are challenging the orders passed by the respondents 4 and 5 in the matter of application filed under section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter called as 'the said Act') by the respondent No. 1 on 5th October 1991 and subsequently amended by application dated 14th November 1991 claiming that certain amount of wages have remained to be paid by the petitioners to the Members of Goa Trade and Commercial Workers' Union for the period from 1st January 1988 to 31st October 1991 amounting to Rs. 9,99,942/- besides an amount of Rs. 1,79,990/- towards interest.2. The facts in brief relevant for the decision are that the U.P.S.B. Corporation Limited entered into a contract with the State of Goa for construction of a bridge across River Mandovi and in the course of the said construction employed the members of the said Goa Trade and Commercial Workers' Union as its employees. It is the case of the respondent No...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Smelting and Refining Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-05-1998
Reported in: [1998]230ITR194(Bom)
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 question of law to this court for opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is entitled for deduction on the provision made in the books amounting to Rs. 90,22,783 merely on the strength of receipt of a show-cause notice from the excise department ?'2. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of ingots, billets and castings. The assessee was liable to pay excise duty on the manufacture of ingots and billets, which it was paying regularly. The accounting year of the assessee is the calendar year. This reference pertains to the assessment year 1980-81, the relevant previous year being the calendar year 1979. In this year, the excise authorities felt that the excise duty paid by the assessee had not been ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Indian Smelting and Refining Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-05-1998
Reported in: (1998)147CTR(Bom)300
DR. B. P. SARAF, J. :By this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court, for opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is entitled for deduction on the provision made in the books amounting to Rs. 90,22,783 merely on the strength of receipt of a show-cause notice from the excise Department ?'2. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of ingots, billets and castings. The assessee was liable to pay excise duty on the manufacture of ingots and billets, which it was paying regularly. The accounting year of the assessee is the calendar year. This reference pertains to the asst. yr. 1980-81, the relevant previous year being the calendar year 1979. In this year, the excise authorities felt that the excise duty paid by the assessee had not been correctly calculated. Accordingly, two show-cause notice...
Spaco Carburettors (i) Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-03-1998
Reported in: (1998)(101)ELT435Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal arises out of a situation under Rule 56B of Central Excise Rules, which inter alia permits a manufacturer to remove excisable goods which are in the nature of semifinished goods for carrying out certain manufacturing processes to some other premises of his or of another person and to bring back such goods to his factory without payment of duty; it also provides for clearance of such goods from the other premises on payment of duty. The appellants manufacture carburattors. Besides the unit at Madhwas in Gujarat, they have another unit in Chinchwad near Pune. The department found that appellants were receiving semi finished components from their Chinchwad unit in terms of permission given to that unit under Rule 56B for further processing and that after carrying out certain processes the appellants were using the fully manufactured components without payment of duty thereon in producing carburettors in their own unit. Shri R.G. Vyas, who looked after production work and d...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »