Mumbai Court October 2007 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.
President, Damini Bahuddeshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha and anr. Vs. Dnyanoba ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR110; 2008(2)BomCR291; 2008(2)MhLj610
V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.2. By this petition, petitioners challenge order dated 18-7-2007, rendered by learned Presiding Officer of University and College Tribunal in Appeal No. BAMU-03/07, whereby oral termination of respondent No. 1 was set aside and they were directed to reinstate him as peon and further to pay arrears of salary during relevant period.3. The respondent - Dnyanoba Dhawate, was appointed as peon in College run by the petitioners. He asserted that though he was attending the duty yet, since October, 2005, he was not being allowed to sign the Muster Roll. He further asserted that the petitioners did not pay salary though requested for. He contended that he was assured payment of salary after receiving Government grants. He believed the assurance and continued to work with the petitioners. He was wrongly informed that he was absent from duty. He was called upon to join the duty and when he, in ...
Sheth Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (import)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: (2008)(124)ECC24
1. This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No.470/2006/MCH/DC/Gr.III 06 dt. 5.10.06.2. The issue pertains to collection of Anti-dumping duty on vitrified/porcelain tiles during the period 2.11.2002 to 30.04.2003.Provisional of Anti-dumping duty was levied on vitrified/porcelain tiles by Notification No. 50/2002-Cus. and subsequently definitive Anti-dumping duty was imposed by Notification No. 73/2003-Cus dt.1.5.2003. During the period 2.11.2002 to 30.4.2003, the appellants imported consignments of vitrified/porcelain tiles and no Anti-dumping duty was levied on them in provisional assessment of Bills of Entry.Subsequently, the said provisional assessments were confirmed and Anti-dumping duty was sought to be recovered from the appellant. The appellant disputed the imposition of Anti-dumping duty during the interregnum period. The lower authorities confirmed demand of the Anti-dumping duty during the relevant period.3. The Ld Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submit...
Hiten Rashmikant Mehta and Swati Hiten Mehta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR2567; (2008)214CTR(Bom)303; [2009]311ITR212(Bom)
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. This petition is filed to challenge the order dated 15th February, 1993 passed by the Appropriate Authority under Section 269UD(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short), as well as constitutional validity of Rule 48L of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('1962 Rules' for short).2. The challenge to the impugned order dated 15th February, 1993 is two-fold. Firstly, the transaction relating to transfer of Flat No. 21 in Belle View Co-operative Housing Society situated at 85, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Bombay ('flat in question' for short) in favour of the petitioners as per agreement dated 30th August, 1986 is governed by Chapter XX-A of the Act and not Chapter XX-C and, therefore, the impugned order passed under Chapter XX-C is without jurisdiction. Secondly, even on merits the impugned order passed under Section 269UD(1) of the Act suffers from serious infirmities and hence the said order is liable to quashed and set aside. According to the revenue, actual transfer of th...
Sitaram Maruti Nagpure Vs. Fakirchand Purushottam Dhase
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)BomCR687; 2008(3)MhLj610
S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Both the above Petitions have been referred to us by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, pursuant to an order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 935 of 1994 dated 26th February, 2001.2. The short issue involved in the above is that there are two conflicting judgments of two learned Single Judges of this Court. In view thereof, the learned Single Judge had expressed the difficulty and requested the Hon'ble the Chief Justice to constitute a larger bench to resolve the conflict.3. The basic issue raised in the above is with regard to the readiness and willingness of the tenant to pay rent and whether the rent should be paid only after the notice of termination under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') or whether the tenant can show the readiness and willingness even prior to termination of tenancy under Section 12(3)(a) of the said Act. To appreciate the con...
Shri Ramesh Tukaram Gadhwe, Vs. Sou. Sumanbai Wamanrao Gondkar and
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR351; 2008(1)BomCR634; 2008(2)MhLj347
V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. This appeal arises out of Judgment rendered by learned District Judge, Kopargaon, in proceedings under the Guardian and Wards Act. By the impugned Judgment, application filed by respondent No. 1 - Sou. Sumanbai for custody of minor - Sudarshan was granted with further direction to submit quarterly reports about his health to the Court.2. The factual matrix depicts pathetic social aberrations of which the minor (Sudarshan) is the unfortunate victim. Subhash and Jyoti entered wedlock on 5.12.1996. They were blessed with the male child (Sudarshan) on 9.2.1998. The minor - Sudarshan @ Chhotu was hardly three years old when Subhash met with untimely death. He was afflicted with HIV and died of AIDS. The minor was admitted in an English medium school at Shirdi by his uncle and the grandmother i.e. applicant - Sumanbai. Unfortunately, Jyoti was also suffering from AIDS. She too died of AIDS during pendency of the application. She went to reside with her parents alongwith...
Rakesh N. Dutt Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Bom)462; [2009]311ITR247(Bom)
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. These two petitions are filed to challenge two notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act for short) both dated 20th December, 2006 relating to the assessment year 1997-98 and 1998-99. 2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of distribution of Indian made foreign liquor. The petitioner (assessee for short) carried on business in the name of his proprietary concern M/s. Avadh Liquors. On 12/8/1998 a search action under Section 132 of the Act was carried out at the business premises of the assessee. During the course of search statement of the assessee was recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act to the effect that the assessee has admitted undisclosed income of Rs. 1.25 crores for the block assessment year 1-4-1988 to 12/8/1998. The assessee retracted the said statement recorded on 12/8/1998 by filing an affidavit on 13/8/1998. However, on the basis of the above statement and other documents found during the course of search, block assessm...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Akshya Textiles Trading and Agencies (P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Bom)468; [2008]304ITR409(Bom)
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The Revenue has preferred this appeal on the following question:In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the rent and deposits received by the intermediary tenant from the ultimate user of the premises or the rent and deposit received by the assessee from the intermediary tenant, who never occupied the premises is to be taken for the computation of net wealth of the assessee for valuation under Rule 3 of Part B of Schedule III of the WT Act, 1957?2. For the asst. yr. 1998-99 the AO noted that the assessee had given premises on licence to the licensee for a consideration. The licencee thereafter had sub-licensed the premises to Reliance for higher consideration. The learned AO held that the transaction between the licensee and licensor was a colourable device and therefore the amount receivable by the assessee company was the amount which M/s Reliance Industries Ltd. sub-licensee has paid to the licensee. The assessee being aggrieved preferred an...
Gram Panchayat and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR533; 2008(3)BomCR794; 2008(1)MhLj603
R.C. Chavan, J.1. Gram Panchayat Bamni, District Nagpur, takes exception by this petition to Notifications dated 4-9-1987 (10-9-1987?) issued under the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'Maharashtra Municipalities Act') and the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, whereby the Government of Maharashtra sought to include certain lands from Village Bamni in the Kalmeshwar Municipal Council and exclude the same from the limits of Gram Panchayat Bamni. The Government issued a Notification on 1-1-1988 rectifying earlier notification under Section 4 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, excluding only selected survey numbers from the area of Gram Panchayat, Bamni, since the earlier notification erroneously referred to the entire village.2. The petition filed on 28-10-1987 was admitted on 22-6-1988 and status quo as regards recovery of taxes was ordered to be maintained. By an order dated 16-10-2000, the petitioner Gram Pa...
Indian Bank and anr. Vs. Baha and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-2007
Reported in: (2008)ILLJ910Bom
A.B. Chaudhari, J.1. By order dated July 6, 2006 the Controlling Authority directed the payment of gratuity to the respondent No. 1. The petitioner preferred appeal against that Order. The appeal was preferred beyond 120 days. The appellate authority found and rightly so in my opinion that it had no jurisdiction or power to condone the delay beyond 120 days from the date of receipt of the Order made by the Controlling Authority. Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act prescribes this period of limitation. The said legislation being a welfare legislation for the Benefit of employees, employees are entitled to receive gratuity from the employer. The said rider has been provided in the said provision that the authority will have no power of jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond 120 days. This Court has taken similar view in the case of Metal Box India Ltd. v. B.R. Rangari : (2006)IIILLJ686Bom in relation to the provisions of Section 7(7) of the Act.2. Lahiri invited my attention to...
Teracom Private Limited and Shri Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-2007
Reported in: (2008)(124)ECC31
1. The above appeals involve common issues and are hence heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. Appeal No. E/536/07 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise confirming excise duty demand of Rs. 36,08,86,597/- on CDMA WLL telephones manufactured and cleared by the appellants and imposing penalty of equal amount under the provisions of 11AC on the manufacturer and penalty of amount equal to duty upon its General Manager - Operations, in terms of Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules 2002, by denying the benefit of exemption as per Sr. No. 264 of the table to Notification No. 6/2002-CE dated 1.3.02 on the ground that the two models of phone in question viz. TI-ETS 2288 and TERA DX -22B are not Cellular phones. The Customs appeals arise against the confirmation of duty of Customs of Rs. 43,84,68,532/- on the following components and parts: Imported by the appellants herein for the manufacture of the two models of CDMA WLL phones, on the ground that the b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »