Mumbai Court June 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.
Bhau Shankarrao Suradkar and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-11-1998
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR116; 1999CriLJ1230
ORDERV. K. BARDE, J.1. Heard Shri C.V. Thombre, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Geeta Deshpande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioners have contended that the photographs of God and Goddesses of Hindu religion are being printed on the coverings of the fire crackers and when the fire crackers are fired, those photographs are destroyed and this causes mental agony to the persons from Hindu community and,therefore, the manufacturers of the fire crackers be directed not to affix photographs of God and Goddesses of Hindu religion on the fire crackers.3. It is a fact that photographs of God and Goddesses of Hindu religion are being pasted on the fire crackers. This is not happening for the first time, but this practice is going on since last many years and up-till-now nobody has raised any objection regarding this practice. That has happened only because nobody thought it objectionable, nobody's feeling were hurt on seeing the firecrackers bursting and the pho...
Dhanamall Silk Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-11-1998
Reported in: [1998]234ITR682(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 Appellate Tribunal was right in law in refusing the continuance of registration to the assessee under Section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The controversy pertains to the assessment year 1973-74. The material facts of the case are as follows : The assessee, Dhanamall Silk Mills, was a partnership firm formed by five partners, P.D. Aswani, C.T. Sherwani, C.D. Aswani, D.N. Aswani and B.C. Sherwani. It had carried on the business of manufacture of rayon textiles with the aid of machinery, land and buildings which belonged to one of its partners, P.D. Aswani. On August 31, 1971, all the partners assigned the entire running business of the firm with all its assets and liabilities at book valu...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mahindra Ugine Steel Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-11-1998
Reported in: (1999)151CTR(Bom)682; [1998]233ITR204(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 questions of law for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing depreciation and investment allowance on the technical know-how holding it to be in the nature of plant ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to investment allowance on weighing scale and mobile crane under the provisions of Section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the reimbursement of medical expenses granted to the employees could not be treated as 'perquisites' for the purpose of Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that questio...
Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-10-1998
Reported in: (1998)(62)ECC350
1. Since we find that the issue--classification of rubberised/calendered dipped fabrics involved in these appeals is covered by precedent decisions of the Tribunal, after hearing both the sides, we grant stay and with the consent of both the parties, we take up the appeals for disposal.2. The appellants manufacture tyres falling under Chapter 40 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The issue in these appeals relates to levy of additional excise duty on the rubberised/calendered dipped fabrics cleared by the appellants for captive consumption. The appellants had claimed classification of these goods under heading 59.05 covering rubberised textile fabrics other than those of heading 59.02.Proceedings were initiated against the appellants for classifying the goods under 59.02 which covers tyre cord fabrics of high tenacity yarn of polyamides polyesters or viscose rayon, and the sub-heading 5902.10 covers such fabrics of polyamides.3. The Id. sr. counsel Shri A. Hidayatullah submitted before...
Madras Petrochem Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT336Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant imported a consignment of spindle oil. The entire quantity of this oil was lost due to the fact that the barge which was transporting the goods from the tanker in which they were imported to the shore sank in a cyclone. The importer sought remission under Sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962 of the goods. In the order impugned in the appeal the Commissioner disallowed the remission. Hence this appeal.3. The Commissioner's reason for denying the remission is that clause (b) to Sub-section (1) of Section 22 provides for abatement for duty on damaged or deteriorated goods on account of any accident not due to wilful act, negligence or default of the importer, his employee or agent and that in this case there has been negligence on the part of the importer in that he waited for 8 days after the goods were transferred to the barge before arranging to take delivery on shore.4. The importer had not claimed abatement of duty on damaged goods but remission on...
Bharat S/P. Balbhimrao Kulkarni Vs. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Par ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)BomCR768; 1999(1)MhLj139
ORDERA.D. Mane, J.1. The important question involved in this writ petition is whether the waiting period of posting of the Zilla Parishad employee/Assistant Teacher on his return from sanctioned leave is to be treated as duty period or not?2. In order to appreciate the question it is relevant to state facts which are not disputed by the parties. The petitioner is working as Assistant Teacher in the High School run by the Zilla Parishad at Beed. At present he is working at Dighol-Amba. He proceeded on medical leave on 1-7-1989 till 3-10-1989. When he was on leave he was transferred from Ambe Jogai to Dharmapuri, by order dated 6-7-1989. It was clearly stated in the transfer order that 'on expiry of the leave period he should join at his transferred place'. On expiry of period of medical leave, the petitioner went to Dharmapuri to join his duty on 4-10-1989 with a fitness certificate. The Headmaster of the School, however, did not allow the petitioner to join the duty. The Headmaster add...
Anna Deoram Londhe Deceased Through His L.Rs. Smt. Indirabai W/O Anna ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)ALLMR24; 1998(4)BomCR772; [1999(81)FLR304]; 1998(3)MhLj435
ORDERA.D. Mane, J.1. The petitioner (since deceased) had joined services as Assistant Teacher on 1-7-1943 and he worked till the date of his removal from service on account of his conviction for offence under sections 302, 323, 147 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, which was altered by the High Court in appeal under section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years. The incident had taken place on 4-5-1975 on account of family feud over the land Survey No. 46/2. The petitioner (since deceased) was, however, removed from service w.e.f. 18-1-1975 by reason of his conviction. The petitioner has challenged the order of removal by filing a special civil suit but he could not succeed in trial Court as well as in the Appellate Court. He filed his special leave petition before the Supreme Court. The Apex Court, while dismissing the special leave petition, however, granted liberty to the petitioner (since deceased) to make a representation to ...
Machindranath Bandu Kale and Others Vs. Satali V.K.S. Society Ltd. and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)BomCR928
1. Rule. By consent rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard parties. 2. In our view, the present petition is covered by the decisions of this Court in the case of Dinkar Pandurang Patil and another v. Chikali Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd., andothers, 1984 C.T.J. 147 and in the case of Utrane Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari (V) Society Ltd. and others v. Laxman Dalpat Patil and others, : 1990(1)BomCR217 , which decisions have been followed in a number of decisions of this Court. In the circumstances we hold that there is no justification to restrict the right to elect one representative from amongst the non-borrowing members through the non-borrowing members only and deny the right to elect the said member through the borrowing members also. Section 73-C(3) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, which applies to the society at hand, in so far as it is relevant, provides as under :-- 'In the case of an Agricultural Credit Society which gives loans to individuals for the rai...
All India Blue Star Employees Federation Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-10-1998
Reported in: [1998]234ITR155(Bom)
B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner, which is a trade union of the employees of respondent No. 4-company, seeks to challenge the validity of the provisions of Clause (10C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act'), and Rule 2BA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (the 'Rules'), on the ground of violation of articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners also seek to challenge theapproval granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai, to the voluntary retirement scheme of respondent No. 4-company.2. To deal with the challenge of the petitioner, it would be expedient to set out the provisions of Clause (10C) of Section 10 of the Act and Rule 2BA of the rules. Section 10 contains various clauses, income falling under which do not form part of the total income. Clause (10C) was inserted in that Section for the first time with effect from April 1, 1987, by the Finance Act, 1987, to extend the benefit of exemption to the employees of publi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rensult Investment and Finance P. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Bom)51; [1998]233ITR172(Bom)
B.P. Saraf, J. 1. By this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ('the 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 in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) holding that the assessee is entitled to investment allowance under Section 32A of the income-tax Act, 1961, even though the assessee is not engaged in the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing ?'2. The assessee-company, Rensult Investment and Finance Pvt. Ltd., is engaged in the business of financing and leasing. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1985-86, it purchased certain machinery which was leased out to various parties. The assessee claimed investment allowance under Section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), in respect of machinery lease...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »