Mumbai Court January 2003 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.
Lathia Rubber Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)81TTJ(Mum.)779
1. The first and the main ground of appeal relates to treatment by the AO of a sum of Rs. 15,99,006 as income assessable to tax under Section 41(1) of the IT. Act. At the time of hearing it was pointed out that the ground may be treated as confined to Rs. 14,81,944, i.e., the assessment of Rs. 1,17,062 is no longer contested.2. The assessee-company is in the business of relining and recoating rubber rollers which are used in the textile, paper and other industries. It follows the mercantile system of accounting. There was a dispute between the assessee-company and the Central excise authorities regarding the liability of the assessee for payment of excise duty.Ultimately, the first appellate authority decided the matter in favour of the assessee. As the excise department had carried the matter further by way of appeal, the assessee continued to collect the excise duty. However, each invoice had printed thereon an undertaking to return the duty collected in the event of final success. ...
Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Bom)256; [2003]260ITR102(Bom); [2003]41SCL430(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The above six appeals have come before this Court under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act. Income-tax Appeal Nos. 88 of 2001, 89 of 2001 and 90 of 2001 are filed by the assessee whereas, Income-tax Appeal Nos. 155 of 2001, 180 of 2001 and 181 of 2001 are filed by the Department. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the facts in Income-tax Appeal No. 89 of 2001 are hereinafter mentioned.Facts2. During the assessment year 1996-97, the assessee issued Non-convertible debentures aggregating to Rs. 6,00,00,000 on a private placement basis. The face value of the debenture was Rs. 100 each. As regards payment of interest on debentures, the debenture-holders were at their option either periodically receiving interest on half-yearly basis at 18 per cent per annum for five years or one year upfront payment of Rs. 55 per debenture. The option in respect of payment of interest was to be exercised within 30 days of the date of allotment. Under the terms of the issue, the deb...
Suresh Kabra Vs. Trusted Shares and Investments Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: I(2005)BC160; 2003(2)BomCR480; [2004]118CompCas99(Bom); (2003)2CompLJ234(Bom); [2003]42SCL945(Bom)
D.Y. ChandraChud, J. 1. Admit. Learned Counsel for the contesting Respondents waive service. By consent taken up for hearing and final disposal.2. These are proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Petitioners are the original claimants in arbitration proceedings that were held before the Arbitral Tribunal of the Stock Exchange, Mumbai. The Petitioners challenge the award dated 31st January, 2002 of the Appellate Forum constituted by the Stock Exchange. The appellate proceedings in turn, arose out of an award dated 21st March, 2001 of the Arbitral Tribunal constituted by the Stock Exchange. The case of the Petitioners in the claim in arbitration is that on or about 2nd August, 1996, they delivered to the First Respondent, 5 lakh shares of a company known by the name of Rhutu Bearing and Estates (I) Limited ('the company') together with duly executed transfer documents under two delivery memos bearing Nos. 451 and 452. The case of the Petitioners w...
Godrej Properties and Investments Ltd. Vs. Tripura Construction and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR166; 2003(2)ARBLR195(Bom); 2003(2)BomCR1; (2003)2CompLJ245(Bom); 2003(2)MhLj306
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Heard forthwith.2. By the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioners have impugned the award - dated I6th July, 2002 of the Arbitral Tribunal. The petitioners herein had awarded in favour of the respondents a civil contract for construction of two buildings. Disputes anddifferences arose between the parties. There being an arbitral clause the matter was referred to arbitration. Parties have filed their claims and counter claims, which have been disposed by the common award. The Arbitral Tribunal has awarded in favour of the respondents a sum of Rs. 22,33,619/- after reducing the counter claim awarded in favour of the petitioners. The Arbitral Tribunal has also awarded in favour of the Respondents pendente lite interest in the sum of Rs. 11,76,447/- which has been calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from 12th August, 1999 till 6th July, 2002, the date of the Award. Future interest is awarded from the date of th...
Vijay JaIn Vs. Investnet Securities India Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR818; 2003(2)BomCR488; [2003]116CompCas164(Bom); [2003]43SCL177(Bom)
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned Counsel for the Respondent waives service. By consent, taken up for hearing and final disposal forthwith.2. In these proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Petitioner seeks to challenge an award of an Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the Bye-laws, rules and Regulations of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. By its award dated 19th April, 2002, the Arbitral Tribunal has directed the Petitioner to pay to the Respondent, an amount of Rs. 31,62,159 together with interest thereon at the rate of 10% p.a. from 1st April, 2001 till the date of the award and at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of the award till payment.3. The claim of the Respondent in the arbitral proceedings is that the petitioner was a constituent of the Respondent and that commencing from the year 1999 the Respondent executed for and at the instance of the Petitioner transactions in shares of the Companies listed o...
Rangnath Dashrath Vadar Since Deceased Through Heirs Kalavati Rangnath ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR1142; 2003(3)BomCR18; 2003(2)MhLj381
S.A. Bobde, J.1. The petitioner, who is a tenant of agricultural lands, challenges the order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 1-1-1987 by which that Tribunal has confirmed the order of the two Courts below. In effect, the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal has confirmed the orders by which the purchase of the land in question by the petitioner-tenant has been declared ineffective and the land has been directed to be disposed of under the provisions of Section 32P of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bombay Tenancy Act'). 2. The petitioners are heirs of the original tenant and the respondent wasthe landlord. The land in question is survey No. 30, situate at village Karkamb inPandharpur taluka. 3. The land in question is an inam land governed by the Bombay Inferior Village Watans Abolition Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Watans Abolition Act'). The respondent is a Watandar. On 5-2-1969, proceedings for purchase of the land ...
Ratan S/O Ganpat Durge Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: 2003BomCR(Cri)473; 2003CriLJ2639
R.S. Mohite, J.1. Rule, By consent of parties, it is made returnable forthwith.2. The applicant has been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 66(I)(b) of Bombay Prohibition Act, for carrying 19 bottles (nips) of country liquor on 4-10-1996. He was tried in Summary Case No. 1170 of 1996 and convicted for the offence punishable under Section 66(i)(b) of Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 6 months and to pay fine of Rs. 500A. The order was challenged by the present appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 1998. However, after considering the evidence, the Sessions Court, Gadchiroli, dismissed the appeal and up-held conviction of the Judicial Magistrate First Class. The present revision has been filed against two concurrent judgments.3. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the Chemical Analyser was not examined. I am of the opinion that Chemical Analyser is not required to be examined in view of the provision under Section 293 of Code ...
Mukund Ltd. Vs. Mukund Kamgar Union
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALLMR830; 2003(3)BomCR30; [2003(97)FLR189]; (2003)IILLJ410Bom
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. This Writ Petition is directed against the Award dated December 19, 2000, passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (IT) No. 6 of 1998. By the impugned Award, the Tribunal has partly allowed the reference holding that the respondent-union was justified in demanding grant of bonus/ex-gratia to the extent of Rs. 6000/- only as against the demand of bonus at the rate of 20% in accordance with the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 plus Rs. 10,000/- each for the year 1995-96 in accordance with the attendance.2. The petitioner is a public limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office and a factory at L.B.S. Marg, Kurla, Mumbai and another factory at Kalwa, District-Thane. The petitioner employed about 530 workmen at its Kurla factory and 1300 workmen at its Kalwa factory. The workmen at both the places consist of monthly rated and daily rated workmen. In the present writ petition we are concerned with daily rated workmen working at Kur...
Rajaram S. Kanerkar and ors. Vs. Morarjee Gokuldas Spinning and Weavin ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)IILLJ1134Bom
1. Heard Mr. Ganguli for the Appellants. Mr. Naik appears for the Respondents.2. This appeal is seeking to challenge the order dated June 20, 2001 dismissing the writ petition filed by the Appellants-employees. The Appellants along with many other employees totalling to 159 had filed a Reference before the Industrial Court praying that they be reinstated with the consequential reliefs. These employees made a grievance that they had not been taken back on duty after a general strike in the Cotton Textile Industry commenced from January 18, 1982. In the Reference, a settlement was arrived at and all the employees from amongst these employees except 19, accepted 51% back wages in full settlement of their claim. The other 19 employees chose to proceed with the Reference. The present Appeal is filed by the 13 employees from amongst these 19 employees. It was their case that the settlement should not be for 51%, but it should be for 65%. It is not disputed that they have also received 51% am...
Thomas Varghis and ors. Vs. State of Goa and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR333; 2003(6)BomCR307
P.V. Hardas, J.1. This Court, after hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents had allowed the petition and rule was made absolute in terms of prayer Clauses (a) and (b) with no order as to costs. The reasons are now being dictated separately.2. The petitioners after undergoing the regular process of selection were offered temporary posts of Junior Technician at the Goa Medical College in the pay scale of Rs. 330-560. In pursuance to the selection of the petitions, the petitioners were appointed as Junior Technicians on ad hoc basis at the Goa Medical College from the date of their joining. Ultimately, with effect from 20th February 1990, the ad hoc appointment of the petitioners came to be regularised. Along with the petitioners, some persons had been appointed as Senior Technicians, who like the petitioners had also been appointed on ad hoc basis and with effect from 20th February, 1990, their services a...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »