Mumbai Court January 2000 Judgments

V.R. Vishwanath Ramji Mandue Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(3)BomCR161; 2000(2)MhLj852

ORDERV.G. Daga, J.1. The petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the order of reversion dated 12th July 1988 bearing No. 345/ SB/88 passed by the Deputy General Manager (P & R), being Exhibit M-1 to the petition, based on the adverse remarks and also prayed for expunging the said adverse remarks from the confidential and special reports of the petitioner maintained by the respondents.2. The facts leading to this writ it petition in nutshell are that the petitionerwas initially appointed as typist and thereafter he was selected and appointed in direct sector to the post of Senior Clerk in the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'Corporation' for short.) He was thereafter promoted to the post of Divisional Accountant. He was continued in that post by an order dated 1-3-1985. The petitioner after passing Departmental Examination was promoted on probation under General Establishment Order No. 230(SB) of 1995 to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. Th...

Yashwant N. Shah Vs. Unit Trust of India Through Its C.A. Stock Holdin ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(3)BomCR486

ORDERF.I. Rebello, J.1. By the present petition the petitioner impugns award dated 14th May, 1999. By the said award the Arbitral Tribunal has partly allowed the claim of the respondent No. 1.It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the award is liable to be set aside on the following grounds :-2. That the Arbitral Tribunal was not constituted in terms of bye-laws 245/262 of the bye-laws in force. It is contended that in terms of the bye-laws before amendment the petitioner could appoint any member as an arbitrator on his behalf. It is contended that the petitioner was asked to restrict his choice amongst the 26 persons notified by the Stock Exchange. It is, therefore, contended that as the appointment was contrary to the aforesaid bye-laws the Arbitral Tribunal is illegally constituted and the award is liable to be set aside. In support of the contention that the arbitration proceedings have to be conducted strictly in terms of the agreement, reliance was placed on the judgme...

Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd. Vs. Pal Peugeot Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001]105CompCas274(Bom)

S.S. Nijjar, J.1. Heard counsel at length. Earlier today Company Petition No. 928 of 1999 and 19 other petitions have been admitted.2. The Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India (ICICI) had filed Suit No. 3636 of 1999. In that suit notice of motion was taken out for appointment of a receiver. It was mentioned therein that the ICICI are the debenture trustees of the company. The amount due under the debenture trusteeship is in the sum of Rs. 160 crores. Even at that stage it was submitted by Mr. Thakkar, appearing for the company, that the financial crisis faced by the company was due to sudden withdrawal of Peugeot from the joint venture. He had also submitted that the defendant company had no funds whatsoever to make any payment. It was submitted that the company employs about 800 workers. Their dues were said to be paid on a deferred basis. It was also submitted that if the receiver is appointed, it would amount to shutting down the plant as the company would not be ab...

Savitri and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2000]246ITR520(Bom)

1. The short point which arises for consideration in the present matter is whether the Department erred in treating the rental income as the income of the firm and not as the income of the partners (co-owners) in their individual capacity. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows : The assessee-firm was constituted in 1979. It consisted of five partners. It purchased certain premises in Poonam Chambers vide agreement of sale dated July 25, 1978. With effect from September 1, 1979, the partnership firm gave the said premises on lease to NABARD on a monthly rent of Rs. 29,580. This was subsequently increased to Rs. 1,23,350, per month with effect from October 1, 1992. Up to the assessment year 1992-93, the rental income derived from the premises was duly disclosed by the asses-see-firm in its hands. However, from the assessment year 1993-94, no such rental income was shown. The return for the assessment year 1993-94 was processed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(1...

Rashtriya Hatmag Yantramag Kamgar Sangh Vs. K.D. Kochargaonkar and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2000(85)FLR609]; (2000)ILLJ1564Bom

J.A. Patil, J.1. By this writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners Union has challenged the order dated July 27, 1993 passed in Complaint (ULP) No. 87 of 1988 by the learned member of the Industrial Court, Thane. The learned member dismissed the said complaint. The facts relevant for deciding this writ Petition are in brief as under:2. The Petitioner is a Trade Union registered under the Trade Unions Act. Respondent No. 2 is the proprietor of Ambika Silk Mills, Bhivandi, District Thane, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing cloth. The Petitioners Union filed a complaint dated February 26, 1989, alleging that respondent No. 2 Walchand Sheth and one Paras Seth were guilty of indulging in unfair labour practices under Item 1(a), (b) of Schedule II and Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The Petitioner which espouses the cause of 20 workmen, working in the said Mill, alleged that the respondent did not maintain any sta...

Dy. Cit Vs. Amforge Industries Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001]79ITD49(Mum)

ORDERS.C. Tiwari, A.M.The main issue in this appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the learned Commissioner (Appeals)s directions to the assessing officer to allow the assessee deduction of sales tax and excise duty amounting to Rs. 3,80,288 and Rs. 13,28,364 respectively.2. The facts of the case leading to this appeal, in brief, are that in the return of income the assessee claimed deduction of the above amounts though the same had not been debited to the Profit & Loss Account. The assessee argued that as per section 43B the deduction was allowable on cash basis unlike mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee. As the assessee had made the above mentioned payments by way of advance, he had claimed deduction on the ground of actual payment. The learned assessing officer did not accept this contention of the assessee-company because, according to him, no liability had accrued in the relevant previous year in respect of these amounts. He, therefore, disallowed th...

Cc Vs. J.K. Industries Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2000)(93)LC361Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The question for consideration in this appeal by the department is the value for assessing to duty of the secondhand moulds for tyres imported by the respondent. The moulds were supplied free of charge to the importer by the foreign supplier, to whom the importer was to export tyres made by using such moulds. Value for customs purpose had been declared to be US $ 5900.00. The appraiser of Customs opined that the value ought to be double of the amount and sent this recommendation to the appraising group. The appraising group did not accept this view.It arrived at the assessable value by depreciating 48% on the value equivalent to new moulds declared by the Chartered Engineer, who inspected the imported goods, to be US $ 49,000.00. The value so arrived at was US $ 25,480.00 CF. The importer questioned this value to the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) stated that the cost of new goods given by the Chartered Engineer was notional and that depreciation given to this "retros...

Mutal Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2000)(92)LC546Tri(Mum.)bai

1. These two applications are filed by the same applicant and have similar facts. These are, therefore, being disposed of by this common order.2. On hearing Shri J.J. Bhatt, Sr. Counsel appearing with Shri T.Gunasekharan, Advocates for the applicants and Shri K.L. Ramteke for the revenue, it appeared that the issue for consideration being specific, the appeal themselves could be taken up at this stage. This was done by granting waiver of the pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 94,08,257.38 in Appeal No. E-3190/V/99-Mum (E/Stay-2352-V/99-Mum) and penalty of equal amount as well as duty amounting to Rs. 9,89,504/- and penalties of Rs. 2,84,600/-, in Appeal No. E-3212-V-Mum (E/Stay-2384-V/99-Mum).3. The assessee manufactured plastic articles using moulds supplied by their buyers. In certain cases, such moulds were manufactured by them, where the cost was recovered from the buyers of the plastic articles.These moulds were periodically repaired and reconditioned.4. Show Cause Notices were...

Harakchand P. Vora Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These two appeals are filed at the instance of the assessee and they pertain to asst. yrs. 1985-86 and 1987-88.2. In the appeal for the asst. yr. 1985-86, the only issue raised before us pertains to the addition of Rs. 60,000 sustained by the CIT(A) referable to the undisclosed marriage expenses. On 9th September, 1986, a search and seizure operation was conducted at the residential as well as business premises of the assessee. Certain incriminating documents were seized by the search party which showed that there was a marriage at the residence of the assessee. The assessee's younger brother was married on 22nd March, 1984. The expenditure incurred by the assessee, as debited in the books of account, was only Rs. 10,000 apart from an expenditure of Rs. 5,000 towards gift to the couple at the time of marriage. Considering the standard of living of the assessee and his family, the AO was of the opinion that the assessee might have incurred expenditure of Rs. 1 lakh on the occasion o...

Premji Haridas and Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal dated 25th January, 1980, both the Revenue as well as the assessee sought reference of the following questions to the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's claim in respect of Rs. 1,16,000 on account of custom's penalty as a deduction ?" (2) "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in refusing relief under s. 35B to the assessee in respect of the following items :in respect of salary to staff for a part of it which is 5,615(ii) Bank charges under packing credit scheme 72,638(iii) Cash credit-Export credit guaranteecommission and interest to others 1,21,088(iv) Interest paid to others 3,55,734(v) Adat commission 74,903(vi) Commission and Brokerage 66,616(vii) Travelling expenses 7,934(viii) Insurance charges 4,819(ix) Laboratory analysis charges 4,000(x) Out of canalysing ch...