Mumbai Court July 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. Melauto Industries P. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR74(Bom)
Ranjana Desai, 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 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the commission of Rs. 1,24,969 paid by the assessee to Parekh and Co., would fall to be considered under Section 40A(5), or Section 40(c), as the case may be ?'2. The controversy in this case pertains to the assessment year 1978-79. The material facts giving rise to the present reference is as under ;3. The assessee is a private limited company. It is manufacturing various types of forgings, industrial fasteners and automobile spare parts including general engineering goods. Shri Pradeep H. Shah is the managing director of the assessee. He is paid a salary of Rs. 5,400 per annum and perquisites, viz., leave travel allowance of Rs. 540 and medical expenses of Rs. 1,500. He is also the proprietor of a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chemet
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR624(Bom)
Ranjana Desai, 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 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law the Tribunal was right in directing the Income tax Officer to exclude the miscellaneous expenses and local and other conveyance expenses from the computation of the disallowance under Rule 6D of the Income tax Rules ?'2. The facts relevant for the purposes of this reference are as under : The controversy in this case,pertains to the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. The assessee-firm is engaged in the business as commission agents and brokers for chemicals and dyes. In its assessment for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82, the assesses claimed deduction on account of miscellaneous expenses and local and other conveyance expenses from the computation of disallowance under Rule 6D of the Income tax Rules, 1962 ('the Ru...
Vaijanath S/O Trimbak Patre Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR718; 2000(2)MhLj35
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Rule. Taken up for final hearing forthwith.2. Crime bearing No. 0065/98 came to be registered against the applicant for the offences punishable under sections 302, 452, 504, 506 r/w 34 of I.P.C. at Ardhapur Police Station, tq. and dist. Nanded. It was alleged that the applicant committed the murder of one Gajanan s/o Basappa Patre on 22-5-98. The applicant came to be arrested on 30-5-98 and Police Custody was obtained upto 4-6-98, on which date, he was ordered to be taken in Magisterial Custody Remand. His bail applications were rejected and on completion of investigation, the charge-sheet came to be filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Nanded on 19-8-1998. By an order dt. 28-9-98, the learned Magistrate committed R.C.C. No. 596/98 u/s 209 of Cr.P.C. to the Court of Sessions for the trial of an offence punishable under section 302, 452, 406 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and at present the case is pending in the Court of Sessions for trial. The bail ap...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Henly Farm
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)101BOMLR316
Ranjana Desai, 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 :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Bldg. used by the assessee in the business of poultry farming should be treated as 'factory Bldg.' within the meaning of that expression in Col. 3 of the 'Table of rates for which depreciation is admissible' given In Part I of Appendix 1 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962?2. The facts which are relevant for the purposes of this reference are as under:-(a) The assessee is running a poultry farm on modern lines. For the assessment year 1980-81 the assessee claimed depreciation at 10% in respect of the building used for the purposes of its business. The Income Tax Officer disallowed the assessee's claim. He allowed depreciation at 5%.(b) In the appeal carried by the assessee the Appellate Assistant Commi...
Adarsh Education Society and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALLMR174; 2000(2)BomCR799; [2000(85)FLR703]; 2000(1)MhLj179
ORDERR.G. Deshpande, J.1. The judgment and order dated 17-2-1983 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the School Tribunal in Appeal No. TR/4/EN/144/1982 is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition. By this judgment and order, the learned Presiding Officer of the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the respondent No. 4, permitting him to resume the duties by reinstating him in service on the post of a teacher and also directing the petitioner management to pay arrears of salary and allowances due and payable to the respondent No. 4. The order dated 12-1-1981 passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Nasik Division, Nasik, is set-aside.2. In nutshell, the facts of the case are:On 12-6-1973 the respondent No. 4 was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the High School run by the petitioner society, in a clear vacancy, where he worked from June, 1973 to August, 1976. The respondent No. 4 after having served for about three years was permitted to proceed for his B.Ed,...
Shaikh Babbu S/O. Sk. KhutbuddIn Vs. Sayeda Masarat Begum and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR118; 1999CriLJ4822
ORDERB.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Petitioner - the revision applicant was married to respondent No. 1 Sayeda Masarat Begum as per Muslim religion on 2nd July 1994. Out of the said wedlock, the respondent No. 2 son was born on 1st July 1995. The applicant husband gave divorce to respondent No. 1 on 24-10-1996 in the presence of two witnesses and the Head Kazi at Aurangabad. It is contended by the applicant husband that the wife refused to take the document of divorce entered in the register. The wife filed an application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the Family Court on 27-9-1996 and claimed maintenance for herself and for her son (Petition No. E-319/96). The husband opposed the said claim both on merits as well as on the point of jurisdiction. After hearing both the parties, the learned Judge of the Family Court on relying on a judgment of this Court (D.B.) in the case of Allabuksh Karim Shaikh v. Noorjahan Allabuksh Shaikh, 1994(11) M.L.J. 1376 allowed the claim of t...
Vikram Ispat and ors. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)(88)LC327Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These are 16 appeals filed by the assessees against the orders.These appeals are against the adjudication orders made against 5 show cause notices which were confirmed by the Collector of Central Excise, Mumbai-III. The following are the show cause notices:______________________________________________________________Date Demand penalty______________________________________________________________ On Company On Managers15.4.1996 Rs. 32.26 Rs. 15 Rs. 11.2528.5.1996 Rs. 89.58 Rs. 100 2. The facts of the case are that the Appellants are manufacturer of HP Sponge Iron 72.03 wherein the Appellants has one of the inputs required is Iron Ore Pellets falling under heading 26.01. The inputs are either imported, procured from domestic manufacturers, or procured from 100% EOUs (Export Oriented Units).3. When they are imported they bear customs duty as well as Additional Duty of Customs. The Appellant avails modvat credit of Additional Duty.When such inputs are received from domestic manufactu...
Vishram Prabat-h.U.F. by the Karta and Manager Shankar Vishram Patil V ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR209
ORDERF.I. REBELLO, J.1. The applicant-defendant No. 1 has moved this Court to revoke the leave granted to the plaintiff under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. There is a Notice of Motion for interim relief pending in the suit. In that light of the matter, and in view of the order dated 17th June 1999 of the Appellate Bench of this Court passed in Appeal No. 336 of 1999 in Chamber Summons No. 1167 of 1998 in Suit No. 4060 of 1998, the revocation of leave is being decided as a preliminary issue as to the jurisdiction of this Court to hear and decide the suit. The application for leave to revoke has been moved on the ground that the suit is a suit for land and no part of the cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court as the land is situated outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and consequently, no leave could have been granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. Parties are agreed that the said issue be decided as a preliminary issue by virtue of sec...
Goa Urban Co-operative Bank Limited Vs. Merces English High School, Me ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Bom424; 2000(4)BomCR685
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The petitioner society had granted a loan of an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to respondent No. 1, who is member of the said society. Respondents Nos. 2 to 7 who are also the members of the said society, stood as sureties for the due repayment of the said loan. Respondent No. 1 failed to pay the loan amount and the matter was referred to Registrar's Nominee. The Nominee, by his judgment dated 18-1-1984 passed an order against respondents Nos. 1 to 7 for the repayment of Rs. 41,792.61 paise as on 18-1-1984, together with interest at the rate of 20% per annum from 1-10-1983, till final payment of the amount, besides costs of Rs. 170/-. The petitioner thereafter had to seek execution and in this process, salaries of respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 7 were sought to be attached. The orders for attachment of salary of the said respondents were passed by respondent No. 8. Respondent No. 4, by letter dated 10-7-1990, addressed to respondent No. 8 submitted that 28 monthly instalments ...
Smt. Meena Deepak Sonde Vs. Shri B.S. Mohite and Another
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1999
Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR156; 1999(3)MhLj541
ORDERVishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who has described herself as wife of the detenu Deepak Virappa Sonde has impugned the detention order dated 17-10-1998 passed by the First Respondent Mr. B.S. Mohite, Commissioner of Police, Thane, detaining the detenu under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (Mah. Act No. LV of 1981). The detention order along with the grounds of detention also dated 17-10-1998 was served on the detenu on 17-10-1998 itself. True copies of the detention order and the grounds of detention are annexed as Annexures A and C respectively to this writ petition.The prejudicial activities of the detenu necessitating the issuance of the impugned detention order are contained in the grounds of detention but, since in our view, a reference to them is not necessary for dec...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »