Mumbai Court May 2001 Judgments

Ship Scrap Traders, Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001]251ITR806(Bom)

V.C. Daga , J.INTRODUCTION 1. The issue in the present batch of cases is one of some potential general significance relating to interpretation of the words 'manufactures or produces any article or thing' in relation to the deduction under Sections 80HHA and 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short).BACKGROUND FACTS 2. The lucid and comprehensive judgments delivered in various appeals by various Benches of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, delivered on different dates and the statement of case drawn up in various cases while making reference give full account of the facts giving rise to the various references and batch of appeals. We give only the barest summary needed to understand the issue framed hereinafter. The petitioners and appellants are hereinafter referred to as assessees for the sake of clarity and brevity.3. The assessees are engaged in the business of ship breaking. They purchase ships which are not seaworthy for the purpose of dismantling and sell th...

Jaybharat Credit Ltd. Vs. Aps Star Industries Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001]106CompCas593(Bom)

P.V. Kakade, J. 1. Respondent No. 2 has taken out this chamber summons praying for raising of attachment of the right, title and interest of respondent No. 2 in the premises known as Yuchit Bungalow, Juhu Tara Road, Juhu, Santacruz(West), Mumbai, levied pursuant to the warrant of attachment dated 31-1-2000. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the affidavits filed by the parties in support of their respective contentions. Perused the entire record relevant to the issue at hand. 3. The petitioner-creditors had filed a claim before the arbitrator in respect of the amount claimed to be due by the respondent No. 1-company under the lease agreement dated 27-7-1994, entered into between the petitioners and respondent No. 1-company. The repayment of the lease amount due from respondent No. 1-company under the lease agreement was guaranteed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 by a guarantee deed dated 27-7-1994, executed in favour of the petitioner-company, guaranteeing payment of the ...

Ashok Yeshvantrao Kharade and ors. Vs. Keshavrao Santoshrao Dehankar a ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(3)ALLMR360; 2002(1)BomCR236

B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the appointment of the 1st respondent as Chairman of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Katol, District Nagpur. The petitioners are agriculturists by occupation at Katol. The 1st respondent is carrying on the occupation as a trader at Katol. The 2nd respondent is the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Katol, District Nagpur (for short 'APMC').2. In order to regulate marketing of agricultural and certain other produce in market areas and for establishing markets therefore, the State Legislature enacted the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The aim of the Act is to eliminate exploitation of agriculturists by middlemen and to eliminate unfair trading/marketing practices employed by such middlemen. Pursuant to section 11 of the Act, an APMC was established for the revenue area comprising Tahsil Katol, District...

St. Francis De Sales Education Society and anr. Vs. State of Maharasht ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(3)ALLMR384; 2002(1)BomCR650

B.N. Srikrishna, J.1. This writ petition has been placed before this Full Bench because of the view expressed by the Division Bench of Justice V.A. Mohta and Dr. B.P. Saraf, JJ. by their order dated 17th October, 1992 doubting the correctness of the view taken by another Division Bench of this Court in Khan Abdul Hamid Abdul Razak v. Mohamed Haji Saboo Siddik Polytechnic, 1985 M.L.J. 400 in the light of subsequent Supreme Court pronouncements and suggesting its reconsideration by a larger Bench.2. The facts of this writ petition, in so far as material to the controversy, are as under :The petitioner is a society run by the Clergy of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Nagpur, which is governed by the Code of Canon Law. It is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and conducts the St. Francis de Sales Higher Secondary School in Nagpur since 1873. The Head Master of the petitioner School is Rev. Fr. Maurice Fernandes, a Roman Catholic Priest. The petitioner is a mi...

Marcus D'Costa Vs. Anand Bhissi Gaonkar and Anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001(4)BomCR825

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Notice was issued on 26th April, 2001 to the respondents indicating that the matter will be finally disposed of at the admission stage. Shri N. K. Sawaikar, learned Advocate appears for the respondent No. 2. Inspite of service, none appeared for the respondent No. 1. 2. This revision takes exception to the order dated 13th February, 2001 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Sanguem in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 2/2001 in Regular Civil Suit No. 23/87. By this order, the trial Court has allowed the application for amendment preferred by the respondent No. 1/original defendant. By the said amendment, the respondent No. 1 prayed for insertion of prayer Clause (b-b) after prayer Clause (b) in the counter-claim which reads as under:--- '(b-b) for a declaration that the inventory proceedings exhibit P.W. 1/B as far as enlisting the property 'ZORIVADDO' bearing Land Registration No. 2957 and Matriz No. 137 and allotting the same to the plaintiff is concern...

Ashok Ananda Hange Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)1319; II(2001)DMC267

Pratibha Upasani, J.1. This is an application for bail made by the applicant/original accused Ashok Ananda Hange, who is charged for offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, vide C.R. No. 168 of 2000 registered by Miraj Rural Police Station, Miraj, District Sangli.2. Applicant's application for bail came to be rejected by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli by his order dated 22nd February, 2001. Charge-sheet is already filed by the police.3. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant's marriage took place with deceased Kalpana in the year 1996 and she was residing with the applicant/accused at Village Bedag. The prosecution case further is that the applicant used to ill-treat her and was demanding suitcase, clothes and gold. The deceased Kalpana had gone to her parents place because of this persistent illegal demand made by the applicant, and she lived with her parents for about two years. However, some relatives of deceased Kalpana someho...

Onkar Dhansingh Rathod Vs. Ambadas Namdeorao Bhende and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2001ALLMR(Cri)1675; 2001CriLJ3411

ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP for non-applicant No. 2/State.2. The applicant, along with co-accused, was tried for offences under Sections 426, 448, 500 read with Sections 34 and 120-B of IPC. The appellant and the co-accused were convicted for the offence under Section 426 read with Section 34, IPC and were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to suffer S.I. for one month. They were acquitted of the other charge. The appellant and the co-accused filed appeal before the Sessions Court. The co-accused died during the pendency of the appeal and as such the appeal filed by the said accused abated on account of his death. The appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed. The conviction and sentence under Section 426, IPC against him was maintained. The appellant challenges the order dated 15-4-1998 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in this revision.3. The only ground on which the revision has been argued is that sanction u...

Praveen Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2002BomCR(Cri)300; 2001CriLJ3417

ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The applicants have been charge-sheeted along with other co-accused for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 read with Section 34 of IPC. An application for discharge was filed by the applicants on two grounds namely, (i) the Court has no jurisdiction to try the applicants since offence of rape alleged against them took place at Jabalpur that is to say outside the jurisdiction of Sessions Judge, Nagpur, where charge-sheet was filed; and (ii) the conduct of the prosecutrix shows that she was consenting party throughout and since her radiological age is shown as 16 years at the time of incident, no offence of rape can be said to have been made out by the applicants. This application was rejected by the learned Extra Joint District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur vide order dated 17-7-1997, which is subject-matter of challenge in these revisions.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, on or about 24-10-1995, one Alankar, who is reported to be abscond...

Ship Scrap Traders and ors. Vs. Cit and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2001)168CTR(Bom)489

V.C. Daga, J.IntroductionThe issue in the present batch of cases is one of some potential general significance relating to interpretation of the words 'manufactures or produces any articles or thing' in relation to the deduction under section 80HHA and 80-I of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').Background facts2. The lucid and comprehensive judgments delivered in various appeals by various Benches of the Tribunal, Mumbai, delivered on different dates and the statement of case drawn in various cases while making reference give full account of the facts giving rise to the various references and batch of appeals. We give only the barest summary needed to understand the issue framed hereinafter. The petitioners and appellants are hereinafter referred to as assessees for the sake of clarity and brevity.3. The assessees are engaged in the business of ship-breaking. They purchase ships which are not sea-worthy for the purpose of dismantling and sell the product de...

Vinyroyal Plasticoates Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Acc,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. On hearing both sides on the stay petition, it appeared that the main appeal could be taken up for disposal. We do so.2. The appellants availed of the facility of input stage credit in the manufacture of some goods which were later exported in fulfillment of the obligation undertaken under the DEEC scheme. At the time of export, the proportionate quantum of credit was reversed by them. In certain cases, where the reversal was not made at the time of export, it was subsequtnly done. This was prior to the declaration of the amnesty scheme whereby similar violations committed by other exporters were condoned on their depositing alongwith the interest the involved quantum of modvat credit. A show cause notice was issued to them demanding Customs duty leviable on the goods imported free in terms of Notfn.No203/92 Cus. The importers submitted all the doucments indicating reversal before the Commissioner. The Commissioner subjected the documents to arithmetical scrutiny. One of the instan...