Mumbai Court March 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Abrar Alvi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: (2001)166CTR(Bom)283; [2001]247ITR312(Bom)
1. By a sale deed dated May 2, 1992, between the appellant, on the one hand, and Sameer Mehta (HUF), on the other hand, property bearing plot No. 22, 'Janki Kutir', came to be sold. The dispute is regarding the cost of acquisition of the said property. The Assessing Officer took the value as on April 1, 1981, at Rs. 750 per sq. ft. After applying the cost index, the acquisition value was worked out at Rs. 36,03,680. The appellate authority overruled the decision of the Assessing Officer. The appellate authority came to the conclusion that the assessee was a tenant. Accordingly, the appellate authority valued the cost of acquisition at a nominal amount of Rs. 2,500. Being aggrieved, the matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal, which came to the conclusion that what was transferred, vide sale deed dated May 2, 1992, was not the tenancy rights but the building 'Janki Kutir' itself and, therefore, what was to be allowed as deduction for working out the capital gains was not the cost o...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.K.E. Memon
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: [2001]248ITR310(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. On March 13, 2000, the appeal filed by the Department was dismissed for the reasons to be given subsequently.2. Accordingly, we now give reasons.3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated May 4, 1999, for the block period April 1, 1986, to December 11, 1996, under Chapter XIV-B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.4. The assessee is a doctor by profession. His main source of income has been by way of medical examination fees charged for issuing medical fitness certificates for candidates going to Gulf countries. On December 11, 1996, there was a search under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act at the clinic and at the residence of the assessee. During the search, registration books were seized for the period November, 1993, onwards. On a perusal it was noticed that the fees recorded in the registration books exceeded the fees reflected in the cash book. During the course of search operations, he made a declaration...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sudhirkumar Chottubhai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: [2001]250ITR528(Bom)
1. The Department has come in appeal against the decision of the Tribunal ordering deletion of the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The facts of the case are as follows :3. The assessee was a partner in the firm, VIP Enterprises. He retired from the firm as it was incurring heavy losses. The firm was carrying on business of distributing films. On his retirement, all the assets were valued including unexpired rights of distribution of films. At the time of retirement, the assessee got distribution rights of two films for 20 years. This was in lieu of his retirement from the firm. The assessee has no organisation for distribution of films. He, therefore, received cash amount from the firm in lieu of his retirement. The Assessing Officer directed the assessee to revise the returns filed by him on the ground that the amount received from the firm in lieu of his rights constituted income. On the above facts, the Assessing Officer imposed a penalty on the ground...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prudential Management and Services Pvt. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: [2001]250ITR136(Bom)
1. Admit. The respondent waives service. By consent, the appeal taken up for final hearing.2. Whether the assessee was entitled to avail of investment allowance and additional depreciation on data processing machines is the short question which arises for consideration in this appeal.3. The facts giving rise to this appeal briefly are as follows :The assessee is carrying on the business of data processing with the help of computers. The assessee derived income for the assessment year 1985-86 from computer hire. The assessee claimed investment allowance on the computers installed during the year. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's claim on the ground that there was no manufacture or production of an article in the case of data processing. Being aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal to the appellate authority. However, the appellate authority allowed the claim for investment allowance on computers on the ground that the print cuts were things produced by the assessee. The app...
Uday Ramesh Chavan and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)324; 2000(5)BomCR594
ORDERDr. Pratibha Upasani, J.1. This criminal appeal is filed by the appellants original accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 21st September, 1999, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted all the three accused for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, or in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year.2. The learned Sessions Judge also convicted the appellants for offence punishable under section 376(g) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, or in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year.3. The learned Sessions Judge also convicted all the three accused/appellants for offence punisha...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dr. M.K.E. Memon
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: [2000]112TAXMAN96(Bom)
Kapadia, J.On 13-3-2000, the appeal filed by the department was dismissed for reasons to be given subsequently.2. Accordingly we now give reasons.3. This appeal is directed against judgment and order passed by the Tribunal dated 4-5-1999 for the block period 1-4-1986 to 11-12-1996 under Chapter XIV-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').4. The assessee is a doctor by profession. His main source of income has been by way of medical examination and fees charged for issuing medical fitness certificates for candidates going to Gulf countries. On 11-12-1996, there was a search under section 132 of the Act at the clinic and in the residence of the assessee. During the search, registration books were seized for the period November 1993, onwards. On perusal it was noticed that the fees recorded in the registration books exceeded the fees reflected in the cash book. During the course of search operations, he made a declaration of undisclosed income of Rs. 60 lakhs....
Saiprasad Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. Vs. S.L.A.O. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-13-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR412; (2000)102BOMLR193
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Respondents waive service. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioners a proposed society through its Chief Promoter has filed the present petition to challenge the decision of the S.L.A.O. dated 15th December, 1998 whereby the proposal for acquisition of the property under the provisions of the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Act, 1976 has been rejected. At the hearing of the petition on behalf of the petitioners it is contended that the findings of the S.L.A.O. on the number of occupants who have applied is perverse, in as much as it has not taken into consideration the definition of an occupant as set out under Section 2(25) of the Act. In so far as the finding as to whether the building requires structural repairs in terms of Section 2(36) it is contended that the report submitted by their Engineer has not been considered and apart from that the report of the Executive Engineer was not made available to them for the purpose of giving their say in the matter,3...
Arjun Lama Vs. Commr. of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2000
Reported in: (2001)(127)ELT764Tri(Mum.)bai
1. When the stay application came up for hearing, the applicant was not present. On the last occasion also he had asked for adjournment. In the appeal memorandum and in the stay application, the prayer made is that the matter be decided on the records available. I proceed to do so.2. The appellant received one Yamaha Multi Track Cassette recorder and 2 Gitar Signal Processors by courier from his sister working in Dubai.The value initially declared was US $ 100 but later corrected to DHS 2810. The assessable value thus was redetermined from Rs. 4,380/- to Rs. 31,798/-The goods were confiscated being consumer goods in Negative list and also on the ground of misdeclaration. Option for redemption for home consumption was given on payment of fine of Rs. 31,000/-.Penalty of Rs. 1,000/- was imposed on the appellant. In the Order-in-Appeal the fine was reduced to Rs. 12,000/-. Additional facility was given to re-export the goods on payment of equivalent amount of fine. The appeal is against t...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Mardia Chemicals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT72Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The respondents, M/s. Mardia Chemicals Ltd., filed 18 price lists during the period February, 1991 to July, 1993.13 of the price lists were in Part-II. The Assistant Collector vide order, dated 18-8-1993 observed that in the case of Part-II price lists, the assessees had not filed necessary documents and information nor had they submitted copies of the contracts, or the conversion rate for foreign currency. As regards the Part-I price list, he felt that further inquiry was necessary which was likely to take time. In terms of Rules 173C(2) and (5) read with Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, he directed the provisional assessment to be made and directed the assessees to file the requisite bond. Instead of complying with this order, the assessees filed an appeal. The Collector (Appeals) set aside the order directing the Assistant Collector to take action in view of the amended provisions of the said Rule, even in respect of the disputed price list. In making this order he observed ...
D.P. Exports Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Cus. (imports)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-2000
Reported in: (2000)(69)ECC540
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the toys imported by the appellant are freely importable or require licence. The import policy permitted free import of construction sets and constructional toys under Heading 9503.30 of the schedule to it. The appellant claimed these toys to be such constructional toys. The Dy.Commissioner whose order has been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) held that they are not such toys and represent animals and non-human creatures under 9503.41.00 and hence their import required a licence.2. We are not able to accept the contention on behalf of the importer that these toys are constructional toys. The Heading 9503.30 is for constructional sets and constructional toys. It is not anybody's case that the imported goods are constructional sets. Constructional toys are evidently toys which can be put together so as to construct something. The representative of the appellant showed us examples of the toys named "cuddly activity bear, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »