Mumbai Court November 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.
Mrs. Shamim Banu Vs. Mr. R.H. Mendonca and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(5)BomCR146
ORDERN. Arumugham, J. 1. By virtue of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who is the mother of the detenue by name Mr. Mohamed Sadakat Hussain Shaikh who was detained by Mr. R.H. Mendonca, Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay by virtue of the Detention Order in D.O. No. 25/PCB/DP/Zone-VIII/1998 dated 29th January, 1998 detaining the prisoner by virtue of section 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 as amended 1996 and r/w Government Order No. DDS-1397/1/ SPL-3(B) dated 12th December, 1971 impugned the same for want of regularity and propriety. The order of detention shown in Exh. 'A' and the grounds of detention shown in Exh. 'B' and the documents relied upon shown in Exh. 'C' were contemporously served on the detenu on 31-1-1998. 2. The prejudicial activities of the detenu said to have been committed and referred to in the grounds of detention Exh. 'B' are briefly sta...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing (Weavi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-02-1998
Reported in: [1999]237ITR253(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 16 questions of law to this court for opinion. The first six questions are at the instance of the Revenue and the remaining ten at the instance of the assessee. The questions have been numbered consecutively for the sake of convenience :At the instance of the Revenue: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the amounts of Rs. 4,38,842 and Rs. 3,62,588 for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68, respectively, on account of bank charges and interest on unpaid purchase price of the private forest land ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to recompute the capital employed in the industrial undertaking according to the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the c...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›