Mumbai Court August 1999 Judgments

Vikas Developers Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)86TTJ(Mum.)273

The assessee is a partnership firm, engaged in the business of construction and developers. In this appeal, we are concerned with the block period relevant to the assessment years 1986-87 to 1996-97.On 8-2-1996, there was a search of the business premises of the assessee as well as the residence of the partners. On the basis of the documents and the materials collected during the search, a notice under section 158BD was served on the assessee calling upon it to file a block return. In response thereto, the assessee filed a return declaring Nil income for the block period. Thereafter the assessment proceedings were set in motion and the income for the block period up to the date of the search was determined at Rs. 21,19,883. This was considered as the undisclosed income of the assessee and charged at the rate of 60 per cent.In ground Nos. 4 to 6 the assessee challenges the entire addition of Rs. 21,19,883. The addition has been made on the basis of the following facts. The assessing of...

Shri Narendra Ramdas Borase and Another Vs. the State of Maharashtra a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(5)BomCR329; 2000BomCR(Cri)329

ORDERN.J. Pandya, J.1. Appeal No. 575 of 1995 and Appeal No. 576 of 1995 have been filed by the State. Appeal No. 434 of 1995 has been filed by the convicted accused.2. The State has chosen to file the aforesaid two Appeals respectively for challenging the order of acquittal and the order of sentence.3. The facts leading to the lodging of the Sessions Case No. 62 of 1995 in the Court of Sessions Judge at Dhule, were relating to the incident that had occurred on 15th September, 1994 at about 10.00 a.m. The wife of accused No. 1 Vidya received burn injuries and at that time she was tried to be rescued by accused/respondent No. 1 along with his mother accused No. 3. After dousing fire, accused No. 1 took her to a hospital known as 'Bohra's Hospital'.4. In the course of treatment, the statements were recorded on 15th September, 1994 itself where the said wife Vidya had come out with a story of having accidental burn. The story for receiving accidental burn was to the effect that she was co...

Gopal Vs. Nandakishore and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: I(2000)DMC505

Acts/Rules/Orders: Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973 - Sections 125 and 127Disposition: Revision allowedJ.N. Patel, J. 1. The applicant is a minor son of the non-applicant No. 1 born out of the wedlock between his mother Geetabai and the non-applicant No. 1.2. The applicant through his mother, filed an application for maintenance before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 3rd Court at Akola, vide Misc. Criminal Case No. 121 of 1993, on the ground that though his mother Smt. Geetabai has relinquished her right of maintenance in consideration of having received a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, it does not disentitle the applicant from claiming the maintenance. It was also contended that the said deed of relinquishment was got executed by Geetabai under coercion and undue influence, but the said contention is not under examination of this Court. Admittedly, the learned Magistrate found that the non-applicant No. 1 has neglected and refused to maintain the applicant who was at the relevant time...

Bharat Textiled P. Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC70

1. The Commissioner of Customs, in his Order dated 5.8.1997/16.9.1997, confirmed duty amounting to Rs. 10,75,081. He adjusted a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs already deposited against this amount and also confirmed interest at the rate of 24%. He imposed a penalty on the importer. The importers filed an appeal and an application for stay. The Tribunal in the Order passed on 16.1.1998 directed the appellants to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 lakh towards penalty and directed to pre-deposit the remainder of the duty before 31st March, 1998. Subject to the pre-deposit being made the recovery of the remainder of the penalty on the firm and the penalty imposed on Rajendra F. Doshi was dispensed with. The compliance was reported and accepted by the Tribunal on 28.7.1998. Thereafter on 24.11.1998, a letter was received by the appellants from the Assistant Director, DRI to the effect that in terms of the adjudication Order, interest was calculated at Rs. 2,39,368. The appellants then filed the present applicati...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Precision Dies and Punching

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. This application for stay of operation of the impugned order was argued by Shri Deepak Kumar. The respondents were presented by Shri M.R. Nadkarni Consultant. On hearing both sides it appeared that at this stage itself the main appeal could be taken up for disposal. With the consent of both sides, this was done.2. The respondents filed a declaration under Rule 173 B on 1.4.98 declaring their intention to take benefit of Notification No.38/97 CE dt. 27.6.97. The notification requires the assessee to file an option to avail of the benefit of the notification and cautions that the benefit of the notification would be available from the date of exercising such option. This formal option was given by the assessees later i.e. on 37.7.98. The show cause notice was issued seeking to deny the benefit of this notification during the period 1.4.98 to 3.7.98.The Assistant Commissioner after hearing the assessee confirmed the denial and resultant differential duty of Rs. 56,006.55. Against this...

Naresh Kumar Kapoor Chand JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC72

1. After hearing both sides, the main appeal itself was taken up for disposal.2. Against an order-in-original dated 6.3.1995, the present appellants filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) on 19.7.1995. They also filed a stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty and desired to be heard in person. On 19.1.1999 the following order was passed by the learned Commissioner of Customs (Appeals):- This is an appeal filed by Shri Naresh Kumar K. Jain (hereinafter referred to as appellant) against Order-in-Original No. S/14-5-3/93 dated 6.3.95 passed by Additional Commissioner of Customs, R & I Division, New Customs House, Mumbai. I find that the appellant has not made pre-deposit of penalty amounting to Rs. 2,50,000 before filing the appeal as required under Section 129F of Customs Act, 1962. There is also no evidence to show that such pre-deposit would cause undue hardship to the appellant. I, therefore, find no ground to dispense with the requirement of maki...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Mukund Iron and Steel Works Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2000)(67)ECC73

1. This appeal form the Revenue was argued by Shri A.K. Chatterjee, the Id. SDR. The respondents were represented by Shri S.S. Shroff, Asstt.Purchase Officer.2. The respondents purchased on high seas basis scrap from canalising agency M/s. Metal & Scrap Trading Corpon. The examination of the goods showed that part of the scrap did not conform to the specification of scrap that was eligible for import. The value of this part of the scrap was calculated at Rs. 1,23,670. The canalising agency clarified that there was always possibility of inadvertent contravention of the criterion of shapes and sizes. It was further submitted that ultimately the buyer importer would melt this scrap in arc furnace and thus the size contravention was of no material effect. The Dy. Collector confiscated the goods but permitted redemption thereof on payment of fine of Rs. 40,000. No penalty was imposed on the buyer importer but a caution was administered to the canalising agency in the adjudication order...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United Computers Services P. Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1999]240ITR597(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 at the instance of the Revenue :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that extra-shift allowance of depreciation is allowable on data processing computer system ?'2. The relevant facts are as under ;3. The assessee is a company carrying on business of setting up a data processing centre using computer systems. The relevant assessment year is 1980-81. The assessee claimed extra-shift allowance, in addition to allowance of normal depreciation, on the data processing computer system. The Income-tax Officer held that depreciation at the rate of 20 per cent. is allowed on computer system. However, ho extra-shift allowance is allowable. He, therefore, disallowed the said claim.4. The appeal carried to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals...

Kachara Vahatuk Shramik Sangh Vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2000(84)FLR223]; (1999)IILLJ1370Bom

B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. Despite the provisions of the Constitution of India in Part IV which must inform the State in its governance, can the Bombay Municipal Corporation which is undisputedly 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, continue to employ a large number of workmen on contract basis and that too in blatant disregard of the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970? This is the question posed for our consideration by this Writ Petition.2. This Petition is filed by a registered Trade Union which claims to represent about 2000 workmen doing the work of lifting, transporting and dumping of debris, garbage, silt, house gully materials, etc. at the various dumping grounds of the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC). The Respondent No. 1 is: a statutory Corporation established under the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, hereinafter referred to as the 'BMC Act'. Respondent Nos. 2 to 33 are different Contractors who have been entr...

Bhabutmal Sumermal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(66)ECC810

1. This stay application was converted into final disposal of the appeal with the consent of both sides. The impugned order is an ex-parte order. The appellants were not called for a personal hearing.Shri A.S. Sahota, the Ld. consultant submits that alongwith the appeal, the appellants had also filed an application for waiver of pre-deposit.The learned Commissioner has not granted a personal hearing to hear their submissions on the stay application.2. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that the appellants' submissions have merit. The impugned order is therefore passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained.We therefore set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) with the direction that he will first hear the appellants on their stay application and make a reasoned order thereupon. He shall then permit time for compliance of his order and then shall pass appropriate orders on the merits of th...