Mumbai Court October 2006 Judgments

Emar Hotels and Investments P. Ltd. Vs. Tax Recovery Officer and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)210CTR(Bom)482; [2007]288ITR308(Bom)

1. Heard Mr. Andhyarujina in support of this petition. Mr. Sharma appears for the respondents.2. The premises being office Nos. 101 and 106 situated in Persepolis Premises at Vashi, Navi Mumbai are the subject matter of this petition. One Mr. K. N. Marathe who was earlier director of Emar Hotels is in tax arrears. This hotel is stated to be owning the aforesaid premises which are attached for the tax dues of Mr. K.N. Marathe by issuing an order under Section 220(2) of the Income-tax Act. Thereafter, a garnishee notice is issued under Section 226(3) of the Act to M/s. Bajaj Allianz to whom these flats have been let out and they are directed to pay the rent payable to the Tax Recovery Officer.3. This order dated January 7, 2005, was objected to by the petitioner, which objections have been considered and an order has been passed under Rule 11(5) of Schedule II of the Income-tax Act on April 15, 2005. The objections lodged by the petitioner have been rejected by that order and it is this ...

Jagannath S/O Yeshwant Kumbhar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)MhLj715

R.M. Savant, J.1. Rule. Rule with the consent of the parties made returnable forthwith and heard. The above petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India raises an issue as regards promotion to the post of Headmaster in the school run by respondent institution. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 14-2-2005 passed by the Education Officer Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon rejecting the approval to the petitioner's appointment on the grounds mentioned in the said letter. The said letter is sought to be challenged on grounds which we would advert to later on in this order.2. Brief facts giving rise to the filing of the above petition are:- The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher sometime in the year 1980 in one of the Schools run by the respondent No. 2 institution. The petitioner rendered service as Assistant Teacher between 1980-2004. On 1-2-2004 the petitioner was promoted to the post of Deputy Headmaster at Sharda Madhyamik Vidyalaya Kalamsare. The said appoi...

Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Sukhdeo Tardeja and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)SLJ292(Bombay)

R.C. Chavan, J.1. Employees State Insurance Corporation has preferred this appeal to challenge the acquittal of respondents for offence punishable under Section 85(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short, 'the ESI Act') by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 3, Amravati, in Summary Criminal Case No. 269 of 1999.2. The Manager of Employees' State Insurance Corporation had caused an inspection of the establishment of the respondents to be made on 12.1.1998 and 18.2.1998 after prior appointment. Record of the establishment for the months from April, 1992 to September, 1993 was sought. Record was not produced, as required under the provisions of Section 45(2) of the ESI Act. Therefore, after obtaining necessary sanction for prosecution under Section 86(1) of the ESI Act, the Manager of the Employees State Insurance Corporation filed a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amravati, on 25.5.1999.3. After the process was issued, th...

Kotak Mahindra Primus Ltd. Vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)105TTJ(Mum.)578

1. The short issue that we are required to adjudicate in this appeal is whether or not the CIT(A) was justified in holding that the assessee before us, i.e., Kotak Mahindra Primus Limited, was required to withhold tax @ 15 per cent from payment of Australian Dollars (A$) 3,25,000 made to M/s Ford Credit Australia Limited, Australia (Australian company, in short).2. The developments leading to this litigation before us are as follows. The appellant tax deductor is an Indian company jointly formed by Kotak Mahindra Finance Limited, India, (KMFL, in short) and Ford Credit International Inc., USA (FCII, in short). The appellant is a non-banking finance company and is mainly engaged in the business of providing finance for purchase of cars. On 4th April, 2000, the appellant moved an application to the AO for permission to remit A$ 3,25,000 to Australian company without any deduction of withholding taxes. The above payments were made under an agreement dt. 30th April.1997 between appellant ...

State of Goa and anr. Vs. Devendra Rajaram Sinai Kelekar

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR490

Kakade P.V., J.1. The appellant State has preferred this appeal against the award passed by the Additional District Judge, Panaji partly allowing the reference of the claimant under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.2. The claimant filed reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement made by the Dy. Collector and SDO Ponda on the application of the applicant. By notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 16-8-1991, the claimant's land came to be acquired for the purpose of realignment of Mardol bye-pass on National Highway 4A. The Land Acquisition Officer by his award dated 20-12-1994 fixed the compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 25/- and Rs. 30/- per sq. metre respectively for the areas of 2100 sq. metres from Survey No. 309/5 and 4950 sq. metres from Survey No. 311/6. Being dissatisfied by the said award, the reference came to be filed submitting that the market price of the impugned land was Rs. 250/- per sq. metre. ...

Employees State Insurance Corporation and anr. Vs. Goa Bottling Co. Pv ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(6)BomCR524

Kakade P.V., J.1. Heard both sides. By consent, Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.2. This is an appeal filed by the Employees State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter called as the 'appellant Corporation') against the order passed by District Judge, South Goa, Margao, who is designated Judge for the Employees State Insurance Court.3. The respondents are engaged in bottling and sale of aerated waters as well as soft drinks and have their bottling unit at Arlem, Raia, Selected Goa and they are covered under the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act. By order dated 8-3-1994, passed under Section 45A, the Corporation assessed the contribution payable by the respondent at Rs. 2,00,863/- for the period from July 1983 to 1990 plus interest amounting to Rs. 93,115/-up to 31-12-1993. The said order came to be set aside on the ground that it was not a speaking or reasoned order and that there was nothing on record to show that determination of amount made by the Corporation was base...

Jamotibai Satyanarayan Bajaj and ors. Vs. Abdul Razzak S/O Usman and o ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(1)ALLMR668; 2007(1)BomCR108; 2007(3)MhLj125

B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Heard Shri Gilda, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri Nemade, learned Counsel for the respondents finally by consent.2. The petitions are filed by the decree holders challenging the common order dated 28-4-2005 passed below Exh. 23 in Special Execution Case No. 175 of 2004 and Exh. 16 in Special Execution Case No. 176 of 2004. The Executing Court has by said order accepted the contention of respondents/judgment debtors that after effecting balance payment of Rs. 1,800/- each towards above mentioned execution cases, the decrees obtained against them would be satisfied if balance amount of Rs. 900/- and Rs. 1,800/- were paid to decree holders.3. It appears that the respondents moved these applications at Exh. 23 and 16 before the lower Court for recording satisfaction of decrees passed against them in Special Civil Suit Nos. 125 of 1995 and 124 of 1995. The Suits were amicably settled before Lok Adalat. In one suit giving rise to Special Execution No. 17...

New Sion Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(2)ALLMR265; 2007(4)BomCR421

Chandrachud D.Y., J.1. The Petitioner was registered as a Co-operative Housing Society under the Bombay Co-operative Societies' Act, 1925 and is now deemed to have been registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The society is registered as a plot owners' Housing Society, the main object whereof is to constitute a body of persons who would be allotted residential flats on land leased out by the Municipal Corporation. The immovable property of the Society consists of a Housing Complex known as Sindhi Colony situated at Sion (West) in the F-North Ward of the Municipal Corporation. There are about 279 Row Houses in the Housing Complex, the owners whereof are allottees of plots and members of the Petitioner. Row House 10-B/6 in the complex belonged to (i) Nanik Kishanchand Ahuja, (ii) Gopal Kishanchand Ahuja and (iii) Sajan Kishanchand Ahuja, who were members of the Co-operative Society. In token of their membership, they were allotted five shares. It has been stated...

Abee Info-consumables Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The issue for determination in the present appeal is whether the process of repacking of duty paid ink in a syringe for the purpose of dispensing ink at the time of use on printing ribbons and cartridges for computers, is a process of manufacture resulting in a product classifiable under Chapter Headings 96.12 or 32.15 of the schedule to the CETA, 1985. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that such process amounts to manufacture and classified the product under CET sub-heading 3215.90, rejecting the department's contention that the product falls for classification under Chapter Heading 96.12.3. The process carried out by the appellants is of purchase of printing ink in bulk and repacking it into two syringes so as to result in formation of a packet in which two separate items, viz. paste or liquid and the syringe, are put. The items are packed and sold as InkJet Refill Kit under the brand "Abee Fill". Repacking is in syringes which facilitates the dispensation of the ink at the poi...

Western Ministil Ltd. Vs. Bank of Rajasthan and ors.

Court: DRAT Mumbai

Reported in: 2(2007)BC13

1. The only point which is required to be considered in these two appeals is whether in view of the terms and conditions of the letters of credit dated 5th August, 1991, the bills of exchange dated 5th August, 1991 drawn by the appellants, Western Ministil Limited and discounted by the respondent No. 1-the Bank of Rajasthan Limited can be said to be "without recourse" to the drawers. The said point is required to be considered in the following facts and circumstances.2. The respondent No. 3 Virgo Steels had placed orders on the appellants, Western Ministil Limited for supply of R.C.S. billets some time in the months of July and August, 1991. The payment was to be made under the letters of credit against the bills of exchange which were accepted by the buyers. The respondent No. 3 who were constituents of the respondent No. 2 the U.Co. Bank had got irrevocable letters of credit issued from the U.Co. Bank on 5th August, 1991 in favour of the appellants. The said letters of credit were w...