Mumbai Court November 1999 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.
Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1999
Reported in: (2000)75ITD394(Mum.)
1. We find it convenient to dispose of these two appeals of the assessee, one against the block assessment and another against the regular assessment by this consolidated order. Rival contentions have been heard and records perused.We first take up the appeal for the block assessment, i.e. IT(SS)A No.65/Mum/1998.The relevant facts, in this case, are that the assessee is a leading producer of Hindi films. There was a search and seizure operation on 18th December, 1996, during the course of which a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs was found and seized. Some documents described as incriminating were found and seized. A notice under s. 158BC was issued to the assessee on 11th April, 1997 calling for the return of undisclosed income. The assessee had filed the return for the block period on 16th July, 1996 declaring undisclosed income of Rs. 2,33,000 for the block period. The AO made an assessment vide order, dt. 29th January, 1998. The dispute before us in the present appeal is relating to the deductio...
Rajmal Khushalchand Bora Vs. Joint Secretary (Technical) M.S.E.B. and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR454; 2000(2)BomCR181; 2000(1)MhLj393
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. The petitioner is a degree holder in Electrical Engineering and he came to be appointed as Sub-Engineer on work charge in November 1969. He was subsequently appointed as Junior Engineer on 5th October 1971 and continued to work under respondent No. 2 till 1977. On 12th January 1977, he was promoted as Assistant Engineer. His case for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer was considered by the competent Selection Committee in its meeting held on 22nd January, 1982 alongwith other employees and the Committee concluded that the petitioner was not fit to be promoted alongwith others. The petitioner, therefore, submitted a representation on 12th July, 1982 and the same was replied by the Establishment Officer of the respondent Board on 10th September, 1982 informing him that his case for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer (E & M) was considered alongwith other similarly placed employees and the Committee did not find the petitioner fit...
Shayam Dwarkadas Chabria Vs. the Regional Passport Officer and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)BomCR609; 2000CriLJ2942
ORDERMrs. Ranjana Desai, J.1. This petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, seeks quashing of the order dated 5th January 1993 passed by respondent No. 1, the Regional Passport Officer, Mumbai asking the petitioner to furnish Court order stating that he has been granted permission to go abroad and an undertaking that no case is pending against him in India to enable respondent No. 1 to issue/renew his passport.2. In this petition there is some dispute as to whether this petition would lie on the Original Side or on the Appellate Side of the High Court. However, since Rule is issued in this matter as far back as on 23rd April 1993 and the facts in this case are admittedly covered by a decision of this Court, I do not wish to got into that aspect of the matter.3. The petitioner was original accused No. 6 in Special Case No. 4 of 1986 pending on the file of the Special Court of Pune. The petitioner's brother...
Bhausaheb Savalgonda Patil and Another Vs. Sou. Shamim Sultan Fakir an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR569; 2000BomCR(Cri)569; 2000CriLJ1235
ORDERMrs. Ranjana Desai, J.1. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeks quashing of Criminal Proceedings instituted by respondent No. 1 by filing a complaint (C.R. No. 36/1991) with the Shivajinagar Police Station, Ichalkaranji, District Kolhapur. The petitioners are original accused Nos. 1 and 2.2. Briefly stated the facts, which gave rise to this petition are as under : Respondent No. 1 filed a complaint with Shivajinagar Police Station at Ichalkaranji, District Kolhapur, which is registered at C.R. No. 36/ 1991 contending that her husband is serving as Jail Superintendent at Kolhapur. In the year 1984-85, he was posted at Ichalkaranji. At that time, respondent No. 1 and her husband were residing at Ichalkaranji. Respondent No. 1 decided to do the business of saree printing. In the year 1985 she took on rent a shed from one Shri Kalawant. The shed was situated in Ichalkaranji Industrial Estat...
Rajendra Vasantrao Khode Vs. Laxmikant Shantilal Choudhari and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR559; 2000BomCR(Cri)559; 2000CriLJ1195; 2000(1)MhLj401
ORDERSmt. Ranjana Desai, J.1. This petition, filed under Article 227 of tht Constitution of India, seeks quashing and setting aside of the judgment and order dated 10th March, 1993 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nashik in Criminal Revision Application No. 334 of 1992. By the impugned order, the learned Judge has quashed the order issuing process against respondent No. 1 for the offences punishable under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the complaint.2. The petitioner has filed a complaint being Criminal Case No. 84 of 1992 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Pimpalgaon Baswant. Nashik against respondent No. 1 alleging that he has committed offences punishable under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is stated in the complaint that the petitioner is a farmer. Respondent No. 1 purchased grapes grown by the p...
Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1999
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ417Bom
ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1. The petitioner, a statutory corporation established under the Bombay Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950, engaged, inter alia, in the activity of transporting passengers from one destination to another has filed this petition, being aggrieved by the award and order dated July 6, 1992 passed by the Labour Court, Solapur directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent No. 1 workman with 50% back wages. The facts of the petition are as follows:2. The respondent workman was employed by the petitioner corporation in 1975 as a Driver. He was charge sheeted and dismissed from employment after holding a domestic enquiry in accordance with the rules framed by the petitioner. The show cause notice which was issued to the respondent workman was for absence from duty with effect from November 28, 1984 to November 30, 1984; December 28, 1984 to December 6, 1984 and December 11, 1984 to January 16, 1985 without prior notice, information and permission. He did not take pa...
Abdulgafar A. Nadiadwala Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1999
Reported in: [2001]75ITD394(Mum)
ORDERM. A. Bakshi, J.M.We find it convenient to dispose of these two appeals of the assessee, one against the block assessment and another against the regular assessment by this consolidated order. Rival contentions have been heard and records perused.2. We first take up the appeal for the block assessment, i.e., IT(SS) A No. 65/Mum/1998.3. The relevant facts, in this case, are that the assessee is a leading producer of Hindi films. There was a search and seizure operation on 18-12-1996, during the course of which a sum of Rs. 5.00 lakhs was found and seized. Some documents described as incriminating were found and seized. A notice under section 158BC was issued to the assessee on 11-4-1997 calling for the return of undisclosed income. The assessee had filed the return for the block period on 16-7-1996 declaring undisclosed income of Rs. 2,33,000 for the block period. The assessing officer made an assessment vide order dated 29-1-1998. The dispute before us in the present appeal is rel...
Shree Banarsi Marble Stones P. Vs. Commr. of Cus.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-12-1999
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT708Tri(Mum.)bai
1. When these three applications, taken up for hearing, the Bench felt that the main appeals themselves could be taken up for disposal. Both sides agreeing, this was done.2. These appeals involve the quantum of redemption fine prescribed for used/second hand diesel engines imported by the three appellants.Before the Addl. Commissioner a specific citation was made of the CEGAT order dated 22-9-1999 of M/s. Siddhi Foods and Drinks P. Ltd. citations were also made of the earlier two orders of the Tribunal. It was submitted before the Addl. Commissioner that judicial discipline required that the lower authority should follow the decision of the higher authority. The Addl. Commissioner, however, side stepped these decisions by observing that the need to follow the case law applies only when there is question of law involved and that to determine the quantum of fine, there was no question of law.3. We are surprised by this observation of the ld. Addl. Commissioner.In the cited order in the ...
Narang Latex and Dispersions Pvt. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-12-1999
Reported in: (2001)(134)ELT482Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the decision of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Adjudication), Mumbai who by the impugned order dated 7-1-1998 confirmed the duty amounting to Rs. 28,62,494/- and imposed penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/-.2. The appellant is a manufacturer of rubber nipples falling under Chapter 4014.90. They were filing classification list with Assistant Collector from time to time. The said CLs were approved and their final product being rubber nipples. There was a point raised in audit in 1990 and therefore the appellant submits that the activities of the appellant were known to the Department. A show cause notice was issued on March, 1993 charging the appellant that they had suppressed the fact that some of the rubber nipples manufactured and cleared on payment of duty on rubber nipples only were actually cleared after attaching them with boughtout plastic or glass bottles and packing them in printed corrugated boxes indicating details of manufacture,...
Collector of Cus. Vs. Merzario Shipping Agencies Pvt.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1999
Reported in: (2000)LC18Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is the department's appeal against the above captioned impugned order dated 16-1-1995 of the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai, praying for setting aside the same.1. The facts of the case are that the respondents, shipping agent, had filed IGM No. 614 dated 7-7-1981 and that the B.P.T. indicated shortlanding against item No. 4,9 and UB-1 of the above said IGM in out turn report and the appellant was called upon to explain the same under show cause notice for action under Section 116 of the Customs Act. On adjudication the Assistant Collector by his order dated 12-8-1994 imposed penalty of Rs. 86,885/- for shortlanding of the goods under items 9 and UB-1 of the IGM, accepting No. 4. The appeal was preferred by the respondents on the ground that the penalty has been levied ten years after issue of show cause notice and they did not possess any documents in support of their case at the distant point of time, the impugned order was passed allowing the appeal and setting aside...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »