Mumbai Court March 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Roche Products Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR506(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The respondent-company purchased the property in question situated at Plot No. 18 of 'Gamadia Estate' admeasuring 2,820.40 sq. yards with buildings standing thereon situated at 24/26, Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya Road, Bombay. This was by an indenture dated February 9, 1984, entered into between Anglo-French Drug Company (Eastern) Limited (hereinafter referred to, for the sake of brevity, as 'the vendors'), on the one hand, and the respondent-company, on the other hand. The said indenture was registered with the Sub-register of Bombay on April 18, 1984, and Section 37-C form was also filed by the parties to the said indenture. Thereafter, the competent authority initiated proceedings by issue of a notice under Section 269D(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (as it then stood). This notice was issued on April 12, 1985. The reasons given for initiation of the proceedings were that the building had ground plus three upper floors, each of which had an area of 13,910 square feet. ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Roche Products Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: (1999)155CTR(Bom)185
S.H. KAPAM, J.:The respondent- company purchased the property in question situate at Plot No. 18 of 'Gamadia Estate' admeasuring 2,820.40 sq. yds. with buildings standing thereon situate at 24/26, Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya Road, Bombay. This was by an indenture dt. 9th Feb., 1984, entered into between M/s Anglo-French Drug Company (Eastern) Limited (hereinafter referred to, for the sake of brevity, as 'the vendors') on the one hand, and the respondent- company on the other hand. The said indenture was registered with the sub-registrar of Bombay on 18th April, 1984 and s. 37C Form was also filed by the parties to the said indenture. Thereafter, the competent authority initiated proceedings by issue of a notice under s. 269D(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (as it then stood). This notice was issued on 12th April, 1985. The reasons given for initiation of the proceedings were that the building had ground plus three upper floors, each of which had an area of 13,910 square feet. That, the fourth floor...
The Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd. Vs. the Director of E ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR466
ORDERShafi Parkar, J. 1. The appellants have taken exception to the penalty imposed by the two authorities below, imposing penalty of Rs. 2,500/- on the appellants for the alleged contravention of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 8 of the Foreign Exchange and Regulation Act, 1973. 2. The facts leading to the present controversy, briefly stated, are as follows. The appellants held Import Licence dated 9-8-72 for a c.i.f. value of Rs. 120 lakhs covering the import of spare parts required for their plant/ machineries. The said Licence was issued under the Import Policy No. AM-73. The appellants had, pursuant to the said import licence, imported spare parts i.e. jolt valves, vibrator valves, squeeze valves and lift valves from Germany on 23rd March 1974 for their moulding machines installed at Jamshedpur. The total value of the goods imported was c.i.f. Rs. 56,389/- for which they had opened letter of credit with the Bank of Baroda who are, admittedly, authorised agents under the provis...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Smt. Subhadra Domari Bhele
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)BomCR64
ORDERA.A. Halbe, President.1. This appeal by the Life Insurance Corporation of India is directed against the order of the District Forum, Wardha in Complaint No. 17/96, requiring the appellant-Insurance Corporation to pay the amount arising out of Policy No. 971957930 commencing from 28-3-1992 for Rs. 50,000/- in respect of the deceased Bhimrao Domari Bhele. The mother who was the nominee of this policy, preferred the complaint on account of the death of her son Bhimrao on 11-11-94. The claim of the complainant is that the complainant was nominated by her son, who was entitled to this policy amount on account of the death of her son. The order has been challenged by the L.I.C. on the ground that the insured had concealed the important fact that the insurer was suffering from Pulmonary T.B. in the proposal form and this was the material suppression. The District Forum found that the death and suffering of T.B. has no nexus and was therefore pleased to award the claim in favour of the no...
Vidya Lachhmandas Khanchandani and Another Vs. Shri VishIn N. Khanchan ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)BomCR297; (1999)2BOMLR607; 1999(3)MhLj120
ORDERShafi Parkar, J.1. The short question which arises in this appeal is, whether a nominee of a National Saving Certificate is entitled for beneficial interest in the amount due thereon on the death of the holder of the certificate or said amount would ensure for the benefit of the heirs of the deceased-owner.2. The facts leading to the present controversy, briefly stated, are as follow:The appellants are the mother and daughter, who are respectively the widow and the daughter of the deceased Lachhmandas Khanchandani. Appellant No. 1 filed Misc. Civil Application in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane on 18th January 1980 for grant of succession certificate in respect of the securities left by the deceased. The said securities in respect of which the succession certificate was claimed were listed in Annexure 'A' and Annexure 'B' of Exhibit 'A' to the application. The said application was later on converted into Special Civil Suit No. 72 of 1980 in which appellant No....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1999
Reported in: [1999]238ITR983(Bom); 2000(4)MhLj65
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 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 is justified in upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the assessee was entitled to exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the income of Rs. 5,51,651 from the Lift Irrigation Scheme ?'2. The assessee is a co-operative society engaged in the manufacture and sale of sugar. It is also engaged in supplying lift irrigation water to its members cultivating sugarcane in that area to supply to the assessee-society's sugar factory. The assessee-society executed 45 Lift Irrigation Schemes in the area of its operation. The members of each of the Lift Irrigation Schemes were the members of the assessee-society. Each scheme was a separa...
Telco Ltd. Vs. Dir. of Enforcement of the Fera Board
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1999
Reported in: 2000(68)ECC253; 2000(115)ELT618(Bom)
Shafi Parkar, J.1. The Appellants have taken exception to the penalty imposed by the two authorities below, imposing penalty of Rs. 2,500/- on the appellants for the alleged contravention of Sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 8 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.2. The facts leading to the present controversy, briefly stated, are as follows :The appellants held Import Licence dated 9-8-1972 for a c.i.f. value of Rs. 20 lakhs covering the import of spare parts required for their plant /machineries. The said Licence was issued under the Import Policy No. AM-73. The appellants had, pursuant to the said import licence, imported spare parts i.e. jolt valves, vibrator valves, squeeze valves and lift valves from Germany on 23rd March 1974 for their moulding machines installed at Jamshedpur. The total value of the goods imported was c.i.f. Rs. 56,389/- for which they had opened letter of credit with the Bank of Baroda who are, admittedly, authorised agents under the provisions of th...
Britco Foods Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: (1999)(108)ELT641Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 9.07 crores, demanded on the ground that the bases or concentrates manufactured by the applicant, which are used to beverages, classifiable under Heading 2108.10 and not under Heading 3302.10 as claimed by the assessee.2. Advocate for the applicant says that notice issued to the applicant was primarily on the footing that the goods were not mixtures of odoriferous substances but they are a compounded preparation, and nothing other than edible preparations specially prepared for production of aerated waters. He says that the Commissioner dropped the proceedings, holding that the goods are nothing other than mixtures. On appeal from this order by the department the Commissioner has held these to be unique compounded formulations or preparations which could not be covered by the words of Heading 3302.10. He contends that in reply to the notice and two letters dated 1-3-1996 and 29-2-19-96 which the department relies on, the assessee ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ajit Products
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: (1999)(110)ELT793Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Notice was issued to the assessee for removing a consignment of copper wire for redrawing into thinner wire to M/s. Amar Wire without obtaining permission under Rule 57F and therefore demanding duty on the goods. It appears that the assessee did not reply. At the hearing before the Assistant Collector, the assessee contended that the goods were sent not to Amar Wire Industries (Amar for short) but to Ajit Wire Industries (Ajit for short) and that the permission was granted by the department by its letter dated 15-8-1987 for sending the goods to Ajit.The Assistant Collector noted that the assessee had in December, 1990, sought permission from the department for removing copper wire to Ajit for redrawing and after replies to some queries were given, such permission was granted on 4th September, 1991. He therefore found that the goods were removed before the permission was granted and confirmed the demand for duty. He also imposed penalty of Rs. 1000/- 2. The assessee appealed against...
Cce Vs. Pant Engg. Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: (1999)(83)LC478Tri(Mum.)bai
1. In the impugned order, the Collector (Appeals) held that "The appellants have exceeded the clearance value of Rs. 40 lac upto 28.2.1986 for their TI 68. In view of the Notfn. No. 213/86, during the disputed period i.e. 25.3.1986 to 31.3.1986 as the duty for TI 68 was 12% Adv. prior to 1.3.1986 i.e. before the commencement of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Notfn. No. 213/86-CE is not covered under Central Excise Duties of Excise (Retrospective Exemption) Act, 1986. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 5.4.1990 passed by the Asst. Collector is not correct and the same is set aside." Being aggrieved by this order, the Collector has filed the captioned appeal.2. The facts briefly stated are that the respondents are manufacturers of part of machinery. During the period from 1.3.1986 to 31.3.1986, the appellants cleared parts of air compressors, parts of electric motors and generators and other parts of the goods at concessional rate of duty under Notfn. No. 175/86-CE dt. 1.3...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »