Mumbai Court March 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.
Bhagwant Narayan Tendulkar and Others Vs. Goa Co-operative Marketing a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)ALLMR671; 1998(3)BomCR735
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The appellant had filed a suit for declaration and compensation. Brief facts leading to the filing of the suit are:-The appellant had entered into an agreement dated 28-2-69 for purchase of three second-hand trucks bearing registration Nos. GDT-6229, GDT-6230 and GDT-6233 belonging to the respondent for a total consideration of Rs. 1,32,000/- which was to be paid in monthly instalments of Rs. 4,500/- each. In pursuance of the said Agreement, the appellant paid two advance instalments and took possession of the said trucks. On 1-3.73 one of the said trucks namely truck No. GDT-6229 met with an accident. All the three trucks were comprehensively insured for Rs. 40,0007- and the insurance continued in the name of the respondent. Accordingly, the Insurance Company settled the insurance claim in respect of the said truck No. GDT-6229 at Rs. 32,000/- on total loss basis and the said amount was paid to the respondent somewhere in the month of May, 1970. The appellant lai...
Amogsidha Bhima Pujari Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1998
Reported in: (1998)100BOMLR460
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 16.6.1994, passed by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, in Sessions Case No. 229 of 1991, convicting and sentencing him to undergo RI for life, for an offence under Section 302 IPC, has come up in appeal before us.2. In short, the prosecution runs as under :-On 25.11.1991, the deceased Dhondiba Yellu Karve was grazing cattle of Ravsaheb Mahimkar, P.W. 6, in the land of the latter situated within the limits of village Antroli, Taluka South Solapur, District Solapur. At about 12 noon, the appellant reprimanded Dhondiba for grazing the cattle in his field. On this score, there was a quarrel between the appellant and Dhondiba and during the course of the same, the appellant gave three blows with axe; the first on the hand of Dhondiba, the second on the left leg and the third on the upper side of the left thigh. It is alleged that hearing the cries of Dhondiba, a large number of people, including Jagannath P...
Vidyut Metalics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: (1998)(101)ELT86Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The assessee is a manufacturer of shaving blades and shaving system.It sells these goods to its dealers. No delivery is made of these goods to any dealer unless the dealer pays the price of the goods ordered by him in advance to a person to the appellant through a person nominated by appellant. The advance remains with the appellant for a maximum period of two weeks and depending on the stock held by the appellant at a particular point of time delivery of the goods may be affected earlier than 15 days. The Department issued notice to the assessee alleging that the interest payable on the advance received from the dealers should be included in the assessable value of the goods manufactured. Notice alleged that by taking such advance the assessee had avoided borrowing from banks on an equivalent amount on which it would have paid the interest the advances were equivalent to bank loan.The notice, issued in 1997 for the goods cleared between July, 1992 and 1995' invoked the extended pe...
Cc Vs. Famous Auto Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: (1998)(77)LC149Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Collector, Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. None appeared on behalf of the respondent in spite of notice. In the circumstances, the appeal is being taken up in the absence of the respondent.4. In this case, the respondent made import of Pneumatic Sealer, Cutter, Manual Tensioner and Pneumatic Tensioner and sought their clearance under OGL 6(1) and claimed classification of cutter and manual tensioner under heading No. 8205.59 of the Customs Tariff and that of Pneumatic sealer and pneumatic tensioner under heading 8467.19 of the Customs Tariff. The adjudicating authority vide adjudication order dated 18.7.1987 held that the goods were classifiable under heading 8422.40 of the Customs Tariff and held that the goods were not covered by OGL and the goods were ordered to be confiscated and released on redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/-.5. The present respondent filed an appeal and the Collector, Customs (Appeals), Bombay v...
Hind Condensors Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: [1998]230ITR830(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, 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, the Tribunal erred in upholding the levy of interest under Section 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The facts of the case giving rise to the above controversy briefly stated are as follows :The assessee is a limited company. The assessment year involved in this reference is 1975-76, the relevant previous year being the year ending June 30, 1974. While making the assessment of the income of the assessee for the above assessment year, the Income-tax Officer levied interest under Section 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) rejected the appeal of the assessee in so far as it pertained to levy of interest under Section 217 on the ground that no such appeal w...
Indian Rayon Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: (1998)146CTR(Bom)138; [1998]231ITR26(Bom)
B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this common reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the three assessment years, viz., 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following four questions of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the assessee :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in not allowing the claim of deduction of gratuity liability of Rs. 5,28,289 (assessment year 1974-75), Rs. 3,29,037 (assessment year 1975-76) and Rs. 1,24,730 (assessment year 1976-77) ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in not allowing the claim of deduction of surtax liability ? 3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the deficiencies in respect of the assessment year 1968-69 amounting to Rs. 31,42,777 and 1969-70 amounting to Rs. 31,39,662 under Section 80J of the Income-tax ...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Bhimgonda Nagonda Parvate-patil and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: (1998)100BOMLR50
S.S. Parkar, J.1. All the above appeals are filed against the judgment and Order dared 15th April, 1994 delivered by the learned Special Judge, Kolhapur in Special Case No. 55 of 1993.2. Then were in all seven accused who were facing various charges under Sections 147, 148, 341, 504, and 302 of IPC read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in respect of murder of Baburao Laxman Hegacle, resident of Sulkud, Taluka Kagal. Dist. Kolhapur on 4th March, 1993 at about 7.45 a.m. in front of the house of one Seedgonda Veergonda Parvate on the road between Sulkud and Kagal, By the impugned judgment and order of the Special Judge Accused Nos. 1, 4, 6 and 7 were acquitted of all the charges which were levelled against them. The State has, therefore, filed the above appeal against the order of acquittal being Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1995. So far as the rest of the accused Nos. 2, 3 and 5 are concerned they had be...
Crystaline Corporation Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
Reported in: (1998)(76)LC47Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Crystaline Corpn., the matter relates to the eligibility of the machine referred to as Fax Air 36 Dryer, for the benefit of Notfn. No. 16/85-Cus. dated 1.2.1985 (as amended) which provided for the concessional rate of customs duty on the T-Shirt Printing Curing Machine. I he adjudicating authority, the Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay, had observed that the Tax Air 36 Dryer was an individual and independent machine and did not form part of the Tee Shirt Printing Curing Machine and that it had no nexus with the printing curing machine. He had denied the benefit of Notfn. No.16/85-Cus.2. We have heard Shri G.L. Rawal, advocate, with Shri Rajesh Rawal, advocate, for the appellant. Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR, is present for the respondents/Revenue.3. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides.Shri G.L. Rawal, advocate, had explained that they had imported three machines; one for the screen printing machine, second for spot cure unit, ...
Kiran N. Makasare Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1939
A.P. Shah, J.1. Rule. Mr. Patil, learned Addl. P.P. waives service for respondent No. 1. Name of respondent No. 2 is deleted. By consent, petition is taken up for hearing forthwith.2. The petitioner, an Advocae, was arguing an application for anticipatory bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai on behalf of one Hawaldar Singh s/o Lalata Singh. The said Hawaldar Singh was apprehending arrest by M.R.A. Marg Police Station in C.R. No. 488/97 for offences punishable under Sections 448, 457 and 380 of the IPC for committing house trespass and theft. Before the Sessions Court the case of Hawaldar Singh was that the took possession of the premises from one Freny Dinshaw, proprietor of General Typewriters (Bombay) Company. During the course of the hearing of that application, the learned Judge made a query as to how much consideration Hawaldar Singh had paid to Freny Dinshaw.The learned Judge was told that there was no occasion to pay any consideration to Freny Dinshaw as Haw...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›