Mumbai Court December 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.
Nenmal Airors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: [1999]238ITR266(Bom)
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 assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Income-tax Officer could make additions in respect of sources of income which were not considered by him in the original assessment proceedings ?' 2. The relevant assessment years are assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73. 3. None appears for the assessee. The matter was on board from time to time and on every occasion, the case was adjourned to enable the assessee to appear and argue the case if he is interested in pursuing the same. Despite that, none appeared. 4. We have heard Mr. R.V. Desai, learned counsel for the Revenue, who submitted that in this case the entire assessment having been set aside with a direction to make fresh assessments de novo, t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jolly Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: [1999]236ITR881(Bom)
B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under Section 250(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, the Tribunal was right in law that penalty levied under Section 36(3) of the Sales Tax Act will not be for infraction of law and will be an expenditure wholly or exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business ?'2. Heard Mr. Desai, learned counsel for the Revenue. None appears for the assessee.3. It is submitted by Mr. Desai that the controversy in this case is squarely covered by the decision of this court in CIT v. Vegetable Vitamin Foods Co. P. Ltd. : [1994]209ITR840(Bom) . In that case, on a careful consideration of the provisions of Section 36 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (the 'Act'), as it stood at the material time, it was held that penalty levied under Section 36(3) of that Act for delayed ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Albright Morarji and Pandit Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Bom)455; [1999]236ITR914(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 two questions of law to this court for opinion :At the instance of the Revenue : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that while computing 'profits and gains' derived from industrial undertaking for the purposes of granting relief at 20 per cent. thereof under Section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the provisions of Section 32A have to be ignored and the relief is to be allowed with reference to the profits and gains, without deducting the investment allowance allowed, in respect of that industrial undertaking?' At the instance of the assessee : '2. Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the applicant was not entitled to a deduction under Section 80V of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of interest paid by it on public deposits utilised for the payment of income-tax...
Harnya Shileder Kale Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: II(1999)DMC150
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal the appellant challenges the judgment and order dated 23.12.1994 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, in Sessions Case No. 36/1994, whereby he has been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter:(i) Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo 6 months R.I.;(ii) Under Section 323, Indian Penal Code to suffer 6 months R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to undergo 8 days R.I.The substantive sentences of the appellant were ordered to run concurrently.2. In short the prosecution case runs as under:The appellant alongwith his son Adam (absconding accused), Adam's wife Chivchiv and second wife Alaki (absconding accused) at the time of the incident was residing in a hut created in the land of one Dnyanu Shinde in Village Patkhal, District Satara. In the adjoining huts the informant Phonya PW 6, his father Meharlal PW 9, his mother Rand...
Ramchandra Mahadev Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ1428
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 23-11-1994 passed by Vth Assistant Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, in Sessions Case No. 127 of 1994, convicting and sentencing him to undergo 7 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default thereof, to suffer four months R.I. for an offence under Section 376, I.P.C. has come up in appeal before us.2. In short, the prosecution case runs as under:--The prosecutrix Shubhangi Shinde PW-1 and the appellant were residents of village Ambap situated within taluka Hatkanangale District Kolhapur. At the time of the incident, Shubhangi was studying in Class 4 in Kanya Vidya Mandir. On 21-5-1994, as the school was closed, she was playing with one Swati, whose house was situated near that of the appellant. At about 1.30 p.m. she felt the urge to take water and went to the house of the appellant. After taking water, she again resumed playing with Swati. At that time, the appellant lifted her, carried in the bathroom of his ...
Vijay V. Raut Vs. the Collector of Chandrapur and 2 ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ALLMR75; (1999)101BOMLR648
ORDERN.P. Chapalgaonkar, J.1. Heard parties.2. This petition takes exception to the order passed on 30th October, 1998 by the Collector, Chandrapur refusing to act upon the requisition, which was submitted by some members of the Municipal Council, Chandrapur, requesting to convene a meeting of Chandrapur Municipal Council to consider a vole of no-confidence. The Collector, Chandrapur, the respondent No. 1 in this petition, observed that in response to the earlier requisition, which was presented to the Collector on 29th June, 1998, a special meeting of the Council was convened on 6th July, 1998 and the resolution was not moved in that meeting. Therefore, the prohibition contained in Section 55(6)(b) of the Maharashtra Municipalities, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 operates; and no fresh resolution can be brought before the Council during the tenure of the present President's term.3. Shri Deshpande, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contende...
Mr. Diogo Afonso Vs. Mrs. Annie Afonso
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: (1999)101BOMLR784
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. The petitioner challenges the Judgment and Order dated 10th August, 1998 passed by the Additional District Judge, North Goa, Panaji, in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 13/98. By the impugned Order, the Lower Appellate Court while allowing the Appeal has set aside the Order of the temporary injunction granted by the Trial Court in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 258/97/D to Regular Civil Suit No. 142/97 by its Order dated 19th January, 1998. By the said Order, the Trial Court had restrained the respondent from doing any construction in the suit plot till the disposal of the suit. The Lower Appellate Court has, however, holding that the respondent has claimed to be mundkar and the materials on record do not show that the reconstruction of the house is being done beyond the original plinth area, has set aside the order of temporary injunction and has dismissed the application for temporary injunction filed by the petitioner.2. Upon hearing the Advocates for th...
Nenmal Champalal Shah and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(Bom)434
ORDERBY THE COURT: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 at the instance of the assessee.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the ITO could make additions in respect of sources of income which were not considered by him in the original assessment proceedings? 'The relevant assessment years are asst. yrs. 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73.2. None appears for the assessee. The matter was on board from time to time and on every occasion, the case was adjourned to enable the assessee to appear and argue the case. if he is interested in pursuing the same. Despite that, none appeared.3. We have heard Mr. R.V. Desai, learned counsel for the Revenue who submitted that in this case the entire assessment having been set aside with a direction to make fresh assessments de novo, ITO has the same powers to make assessment as he had when m...
Reliance Inds. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1998
Reported in: (1999)(108)ELT236Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Appellant applied for advance licence under the DEEC scheme for import of various goods required for manufacture of polyester staple fibre and partially oriented yarn. In pursuance of this licence, it imported consignment of Dowtherm (heat transfer fluid) and tri ethylene glycol (TEG) and sought clearance of these goods free of duty in terms of Notification No. 116/88 and the succeeding Notification No. 159/90 with effect from 30-3-1990. The Custom House issued notice proposing to deny exemption to these goods. The ground on which the denial with regard to Dowtherm based was that it was heat transfer medium which is superheated and distributed to vessels and pipe lines containing polymer and oligemer and therefore, never comes into contact with the polymers or any process materials and is not consumed the material but used repeatedly and, therefore, it is not used in the manufacture of the resultant product. It was alleged with regard to TEG that it is only used to clean the parts ...
Reliance Industries Limited and Anothers Vs. Associated Bulk Movers
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1998
Reported in: 1999(4)BomCR56
A.A. Halbe, President. 1. The complainants have filed this complaint for recovery of Rs. 6,43,434/- with 18% interest thereon from the date of loss till realisation, plus Rs. 30,000/- towards the cost from the opposite party-Associated Bulk Movers. 2. The few facts are that the first complainant M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd. had entrusted the consignment of 13.230 M.T. of Linear Alkyl Benzene (LAB) for carriage, consideration and safe delivery Ex. Patalganga to Chhindwara (M.P.). The said consignment was loaded as per Invoice No. L 0002440 dated 30-9-94 in Lorry Tanker No. MCY 508. The said consignment was booked under Lorry Receipt No. 2313 dated 30-9-94. The said consignment was lost during transit and on 29-10-94, the opposite party i.e. carrier, admitted the non-delivery of the entire consignment. The certificate to that effect was issued on 29-10-94. The consignment was valued at Rs. 6,06,688.60 ps. Vidarbha Engineers of Amravati were appointed as surveyors for assessment of loss ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »