Mumbai Court December 2000 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.
Killick Nixson Limited Vs. the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)165CTR(Bom)280; [2001]248ITR17(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The short question which arises for consideration by this Court in this Writ Petition is : Whether the A. O. was authorised and empowered to proceed under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act in respect of assessment year 1992-1993 after the Designated Authority passed an Order on 19th January, 1999 under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme (hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, referred to as 'K.V.S.S.') introduced by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 determining the total income of the assessee - petitioner at Rs. 33, 65, 298 = 00.? In short, in this Petition we are required to consider the scope of K. V. S. S.2. The facts giving rise to this Petition, briefly, are as follows.3. On 26th February, 1993, the petitioner-assessee filed its return of income. During the pendency of the assessment proceedings, the petitioner filed a revised return. The assessment order was passed under Section 143(3) on 27th March, 1995. Briefly, it may be mentioned that the petitioner had claimed dedu...
Mohamed Rashid Mohamedi Vs. V.M. Dosi, I.O., Ncb, Mumbai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-2000
Reported in: 2002(144)ELT279(Bom)
S.S. Parkar, J. 1. The appellant has impugned in this appeal his conviction and sentence under the provisions of the NDPS Act recorded by the Special Judge in NDPS Special Case No. 94 of 1994 by judgment and order dated 7th January, 1997.2. The brief facts leading to the prosecution of the appellant under the provisions of the NDPS are as follows :The Customs Authorities had received information that some passengers going to leave Bombay by Ethiopian Flight scheduled at 4.45 hrs. On8th March, 1994 were suspected to be carrying contraband with them. The Customs Officers, therefore, collected the copy of manifest and found that names of nine suspect persons were found on the manifest. The appellant was one of those nine persons. All the nine suspect persons were intercepted by the Customs Authorities between 2 a.m. and 3 a.m. They were intercepted after they had completed their immigration and their identity was confirmed from passport, air-ticket and boarding card. Their search was take...
M/S. Shree Steel Centre and ors. Vs. Union Bank of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-2000
Reported in: 2001Vol.103(3)Bom.L.R.139
D. G. Deshpande, J.In all the notices of motion common question of law is involved, therefore they were heard together with the consent of the Advocates and I am passing a common order, copy of which should be separately kept in each matter.1. Judgment debtors to the suit, filed by the Union Bank of India, have taken out this notice of motion for setting aside the Insolvency Notice being Notice No. N/10 of 2000, dated 16.2.2000 and served on the judgment debtor on 15.3.2000. Obviously, the notice of motion is opposed strongly by the judgment creditors i.e. Union Bank of India 2. Main bone of the contention of the Judgment debtors is that Union Bank of India filed a suit against them in respect of a Bill of Exchange accepted by the judgment debtors some time on 25.11.1992 and 27.11.1992. The Bank obtained an exparte decree against the judgment debtors on 5.2.1996. The judgment debtors engaged advocates to defend them in the said suit, however, their advocates did not inform them about t...
Vinod B. Chabriya Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)270; 2001(3)BomCR541; [2001(91)FLR795]; (2002)ILLJ731Bom
S.S. Parkar, J. 1. By this petition the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay passed on January 17, 1995 confirming the order of Metropolitan Magistrate's 29th Court, Dadar, Bombay and dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 223 of 1994 filed by the petitioner is challenged. The petitioner was found by the Inspector of Factories carrying on manufacturing process with the aid of power in the form of electricity and 18 labourers manufacturing playing cards on September 5, 1992 when the petitioner's factory was inspected by the Inspector of Factories. The petitioner was, therefore, prosecuted for offence under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 read with Rule 4(4) of the Maharashtra Factories Rules, 1963. The accused pleaded guilty and prayed for leniency before the Magistrate. It seems that the learned Magistrate accepted the plea of guilt of the petitioner and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- in default to suffer RI for eight months by order dated August 24, 19...
R.S.R. Mohta Spinning and Weaving Mills Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Chintam ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-2000
Reported in: (2002)IVLLJ826Bom
Ranjana Desai, J.1. The Presiding Officer of the Second Labour Court, Nagpur, by a common Award dated September 15, 1989 disposed of two industrial dispute cases being IDA No. 120 of 1981 and IDA No. 121 of 1981. IDA No. 120 of 1981 was filed by one set of workers of R.S.R. Mohta Ginning & Pressing Factory, Hinganghat. IDANo. 121 of 1981 was flied by another set of employees of the same factory. Writ Petition No. 2393 of 1990 is filed by employees/applicants in IDA No. 120 of 1981 and Writ Petition No. 2397 of 1990 is flied by the employees/applicants in IDA No. 121 of 1981 impugning the same award. The same award is also impugned by R.S.R. Mohta Spinning & Weaving Mills Pvt. Ltd. in Writ Petition No. 3042 of 1989 and Writ Petition No. 3043 of 1989.2. Since all these petitions arise out of the same award, it will be convenient to dispose them of by a common Judgment and hence this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment the parties are referred to as per their st...
Khandu Madhu Kadbhane Vs. Sitabai D/O Tukaram Sakharam Patekar and anr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)273; 2001CriLJ4339
S.S. Parkar, J.1. The above two petitions are filed against the judgment and order dated 22nd October, 1993 delivered by the Sessions Judge, Nasik in Criminal Revision Application No. 252 of 1992 whereby husband's revision application was partly allowed and the amount of monthly maintenance of Rs. 500/- granted by the JMFC, Igatpuri in favour of the wife was reduced to Rs. 200/- per month.2. These petitions arise in the following circumstances:The petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 1375/93 is the husband who had obtained a decree of divorce against Respondent No. 1 wife - Sitabai in the year 1963. Before obtaining the decree of divorce the husband had obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against the wife. Since the wife had not complied with the said decree, the husband obtained a decree of divorce. Wife filed application for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr. P.C. in the year 1991 by filing Misc. Petition No. 138 of 1991 in the Court of JMFC, Igatpuri. The defe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›