Mumbai Court June 2003 Judgments

Tivoli Investment and Trading Co. Vs. Acit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)84TTJ(Mum.)198

1. These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-V, Bombay and relate to the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92.2. The main issue pressed before us pertains to the question that whether the revenue authorities were correct in ascertaining the Annual letting Value (hereinafter called ALV) for the assessment year 1990-91 at Rs. 22,00,000/- and for the assessment year 1991-92 at Rs. 22,69,000/-.3. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us and precedents relied upon. The assessee owned premised No.72 on the 7th floor of Sakhar Bahvan Nariman Point, Mumbai. On 29.11.1988, the assessee entered into an agreement with Citibank and agreed to grant to the Citibank licence to use and occupy the said premised for a period of 10 years on leave and licence basis : Clause 04 and 05 of the said agreement read as under : - "04. During the entire period of the Licence, the Licensee shall pay to the Licenso...

Arvind S/O Yeshwantrao Deshpande Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)BomCR331; 2003(3)MhLj1039

ORDERD.D. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Deshpande, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Killor, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.2. Shri Deshpande, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that petitioner, his brother and father were jointly owning the property. The father of the petitioner, who was Karta of the joint Hindu family, partitioned the property on 1-4-1995. The partition was oral, which was reduced to writing on 12-6-1996. The petitioner got property of Mouza Anjankhed. The petitioner moved an application to the Talathi to take mutation entry of Gat No. 2 in his name as per oral partition. However, Talathi has not passed any order on the said application. The learned Counsel further states that Talathi is raising an objection that the document, i.e. deed dated 12-6-1996, which demonstrates oral partition is not a registered document and, therefore, is not allowing the application of petitioner for mutation.3. Learned Counsel Shri Deshpande further...

Bhenoy G. Dembla Vs. Prem Kutir (P) Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(4)ALLMR575; 2004(2)BomCR280; [2003]117CompCas643(Bom); 2003(4)MhLj883; [2003]47SCL372(Bom)

D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. On 14th February, 2003 Justice D.K. Deshmukh allowed an appeal filed by the Respondent under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 against an order of the Company Law Board. The maintainability of a Letters Patent Appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge has been questioned having regard to the amendment to Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.2. The Appellants filed an application under Section 111 of the Companies Act, 1956 against the refusal of the respondent to register the transfer of certain shares in their names. The Appellants had entered into an agreement for the sale of Flat 6C in a building known as Premkutir, at Backbay Reclamation in Mumbai on 2nd October, 1993. The respondent having refused to accede to the transfer of 55 equity shares and in view of the provisions of Article 40A of the articles of association of the company which stipulate that the ownership of shares of the respondent is essential for the occupation of a...

Air India Limited Vs. Libio Francisco Colaco and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(2)BomCR318; [2004(101)FLR249]; 2004(2)MhLj130

A.P. Shah, J.1. The question which arises for determination in these Appeals is whether a dismissed employee against whom an application is filed by the employer under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', seeking approval to the imposition of penalty of dismissal from service, is entitled to subsistence allowance pending the final disposal of the said application.2. As the question raised before us is a pure question of law, it is not necessary to state the facts of each case in detail. Suffice it to point out that in all the above mentioned cases, the services of the employees had been terminated by the employers whereafter applications have been filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act. In these applications, prayers had been made for grant of subsistence allowance which had been allowed by the Tribunal relying upon the decision of Kochar, J. in Standard Chartered Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. Govind Phopale and Anr. : (2002)IIILLJ1036B...

Asstt. Cit Vs. Mahesh J. Patel

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2004)91TTJ(Mumbai)339

ORDERG.C. Gupta, J.M.These appeals by the revenue for the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 are directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Since identical issues are involved in both the appeals, these are being disposed of with this common order.2. The only issue in these appeals is regarding the allowability of set off of carry forward losses to the extent of speculation profit during the relevant year. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the assessee has filed the return of income for the earlier assessment year 1993-94 on 19-8-1994, declaring a taxable positive income therein at Rs. 59,55,970. This return was late, i.e., after the time-limit specified under section 139(l) of the Act. He argued that the assessing officer in the assessment order for the assessment year 1993-94 treated a sum of Rs. 7,03,400 as speculation losses and added the same to the total income of the assessee. During the assessment years under appeal the assessing off...

Adani Exports Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The facts involved in this group of appeals can be divided into two situations. The first set of facts relates to import of goods made against specially impressed licences issued to Vikram Projects Ltd. These licences were for import of plastic granules. Pet Plastics Ltd., a unit in the Kandla Free Trade Zone, had placed orders on Vikram Projects Ltd. for supply of articles of plastics which were to be utilised by the former towards fulfilment of its export. In accordance with the terms of the policy, therefore, the licence that was issued to Vikram Projects Ltd. permitted to import without payment of duty in terms of the relevant notification. Vikram Projects Ltd., it is stated, imported quantities of plastic raw material. It is alleged that it sold these goods in the market utilising these raw materials in the manufacture of the plastic articles which it had supplied to Pet Plastics Ltd. Investigations by the department led to the conclusion that a part of this quantity was sold ...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Detco Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and 13

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The above appeals arise out of the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay who has confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 28,860.30 only against M/s. Detco Textiles, holding that there was a manipulation of gate passes No. 317 and 318 both dated 3.8.1991 as well as gate pass No. 75 dated 31.5.1991. The finding regarding manipulation is based on the admission of Mr. R.B. Ranka, M.D. of M/s. Detco Textiles which is a processor of grey fabrics, supplied by its customers. The Collector has not confirmed the duty demand on the remaining 52 gate passes amounting to Rs. 7,68,637.60 and dropped this amount out of total demand of Rs. 7,97498.40 raised in the show cause notice on the ground that there was no evidence to show that these gate passes had been manipulated. The Revenue is on appeal against dropping of part of the duty demand raised against M/s. Detco Textiles as well as against dropping of the proceedings for confiscation and penalty on the processor, grey fabric supplier and th...

Bureau Veritas, Pride Foramer and Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Pride Foramer, the appellant in appeal 1348/02, was the owner of oil well drilling rigs and drill ships which it leased out to parties engaged in oil exploration or exploitation. It entered into a contract with the Oil & Natural Gas Commission in January 1999 for lease to the latter of a jack-up rig of 300 ft depth to be utilised for oil exploration and exploitation off the coast of India. The appellant was not in ownership of such a rig, and in order to comply with the terms of the contract, purchased in March 1999 the rig Pride Pennsylvania from Pride Global Limited, a company registered in the British Virgin Islands at a price of U.S. $ 17 million. The rig was being deployed for off sea exploration in accordance with the directions of the hirer, Oil & Natural Gas Commission, and did not initially enter either Indian territorial waters or any areas of the exclusive economic zone designated under the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other ...

Thomas Baker (Chemical) Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Customs, (Prev)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(150)ELT1041Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Mumbai passed order on 9.2.94 confirming the duty payable by Chemical de Universe Ltd. of 79,934/- and imposed penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs. In the stay application filed by the party on an appeal that it filed against this order it was asked to deposit Rs. 60 lakhs. The company approached the Bombay High Court by way of writ petition. The court while issuing directions to the Tribunal not to dismiss the appeal pending deposit of duty and penalty, said "it would be open to the respondent competent authority to execute the order and recover the amount from the petitioner and other persons in accordance with law." By another order passed on 27.11.92, the Commissioner demanded duty of Rs. 52,28,424/- from Chemical de Universe and imposed penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs. Disposing of the appeal against this order, the Tribunal imposed penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs. The notices were issued to these companies by the officers of the Commissioner to demand duty and pe...

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT508Tri(Mum.)bai

1. We are required in this appeal to determine at what stage in the various processes that it undergoes the crude oil that the appellant mines in its wells in Gujarat becomes crude oil as defined in Section 2(e) of the Oil Industries (Development) Act, 1974, on which cess as specified in Section 15 of the Act is liable to be paid.2. The facts which are not in dispute are these. The appellant pumps the crude oil from various wells that it operates situated in south and north Gujrat. The oil is pumped through pipelines to group gathering stations. We are told that there is a group gathering station in the vicinity of very field. The oil, is stored in these stations for a day or so, during which period sediment of some part of water which form part along with oil settled to the bottom and is drained off, There are however still contents of water to some extent. This oil is taken through pipelines to a central tank farm present at each field. There once again the water and sediment that s...