Mumbai Court March 2007 Judgments

Magna Industries and Exports Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)108TTJ(Mum.)833

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order dt. 4th April, 2003, passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 for the asst. yr.1999-2000.2. The assessee has filed concise grounds of appeal which substitute the original grounds of appeal as set out in the memorandum of appeal.In fact, concise grounds of appeal do not raise any new grievance but merely rephrase the grievances originally raised in the memorandum of appeal. The concise grounds of appeal are, therefore, accepted. These are reproduced below for ready reference: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the loss incurred on sale of industrial building, (galas) of Rs. 66,65,600 as short-term capital loss, on applying the provisions of Section 50 as against business loss claimed by the appellant. 2. The learned CIT(A), before holding the loss as short-term capital loss, ought to have con...

Ulhas Savordekar, (Represented Through their Legal Heirs Smt. Jayashre ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR723

S.A. Bobde, J.1. The review petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) seeks a review of the Judgment dated 21st April, 2005 of this Court in First Appeals No. 48/1999 and 76/2000. 2. The petitioner is sued by the respondent, inter alia, for compensation and for recovery of possession of premises handed over to him by the respondent. The respondent is himself a tenant of the premises. So this is not a suit by the owner. The trial Court negatived the plea of the petitioner that he was a tenant or lessee, but recorded a finding that he is a licensee. In Appeal, this Court held that the petitioner is not even a licensee but is running the business under a contract of management. According to the petitioner, an important feature of this case is his contention that the respondent had transferred the excise license to him on payment of monthly compensation of Rs. 2500/-for running the liquor shop by which he was placed in possession. This transfer was contrary to the excise rules...

Dr. (Mrs.) Rajashri Subhash Kamble Vs. Dr. Subhash Babanrao Kamble and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR774; 2007(4)MhLj20

V.M. Kanade, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. 2. This is a criminal revision application filed by the original complainant against the respondent challenging the judgment and order passed by the JMFC, Solapur, whereby he acquitted the respondents herein of the offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC. It is an admitted position that the State has not preferred an appeal against the said order. 3. Brief facts are that the petitioner-original complainant having got married to respondent no.1 in December 1994 started residing with respondent no.1 at Solapur. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the in-laws of the petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 5 are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the petitioner. The prosecution case is that the petitioner resided at the matrimonial house from December 1994 to August 1995 and thereafter, left forcefully matrimonial house and thereafter, she started residing with her parents...

Sham Rajendra Agrawal Vs. Ghanshyam Hajarilal Sharma and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR545; 2007(4)BomCR330; 2007(4)MhLj691

Pangarkar C.L., J.1. This revision is directed against the order passed by the 8th Joint Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Nagpur, on an application under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whereby he rejected the application filed by the applicant.2. The facts giving rise to this revision are as follows-Non-applicant No. 1 Ghanshyam instituted a civil suit against the applicant/ defendant, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation as well as Dealers Selection Board. The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation had issued an advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates for dealership of kerosene at 20 different places in Vidarbh region. Katol was one of the places where the dealership was to be assigned and it was not in the reserved category. The non-applicant/plaintiff submitted an application complete in all respect with the defendant No. 1. It is the job of defendant No. 2. Board to select the candidates on consideration of various aspects. One of the members of such Board is a retired J...

Prakash Eknath Bhoge Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)9STJ207CESTAT(Mum.)bai

1. After allowing the stay petition unconditionally, I proceed to decide the appeal itself inasmuch as, the issue lies in a narrow compass and stands covered by the earlier order of the Tribunal.2. Appellant is engaged in providing 'Architect Service". During the period October 1998 to September 2002, service tax leviable was not paid by the appellant, the said tax was subsequently paid totally amount to Rs. 1,05,306/-(Rupees one lakh five thousand three hundred six only) along with interest of Rs. 60,232/- (Rupees sixty thousand two hundred thirty two only). Assistant Commissioner, while confirming the above demand, imposed personal penalty of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) under Section 76 and Rs. 1000/-(Rupees one thousand only) under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The said order was reviewed by the Commissioner, who enhanced the penalty under Section 76 equivalent to the amount of Service Tax. Hence the present appeal.3. The appellants have submitted that they were u...

Dy. Cit Vs. Ms. Aishwarya K. Rai

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This is revenues MA against order of Third Member passed on 30-6-M05 in IT(SS) No. 677/Mum./2003 in the case of Ms. Ais warya Rai v. Dy. CIT 2. At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee contends that issue about credit in State Bank of India account was not referred to for opinion of Third Member. Revenue while filing this MA has inadvertently referred to mistake in respect of credit in SBI Account, since the issue was not before 1hird Member, there can be no mistake in present order, therefore, MA on-this issue is not maintainable.4. I have heard rival submissions and perused record. Since issue about credit in SBI Account was not before the undersigned, as Third Member.There can be no mistake in the order passed consequently, issue about credit in SBI Account raised in this MA is dismissed accordingly.5. Issue of mistake as raised by the revenue contending it to be apparent from record and rectifiable under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, arising out of the Third Memb...

Bharti Tele-ventures Limited, a Company Incorporated Under the Compani ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(2)ALLMR841; 2007(2)BomCR925; (2007)109BOMLR585; 2007(4)MhLj105

R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates at length. Perused the records.2. By the present petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the Notification dated 4-7-2005 issued by the respondent No. 1 under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, hereinafter called as 'the MRTP Act' by which the respondent No. 1 has sought to amend its earlier order dated 9-10-1996 and thereby has authorised and/or required various Municipal Corporations in the State to charge retrospectively from 9-10-1996, the premium at the rate of the land value as per the ready reckoner for the area occupied by the cabin, the tower height premium at the rate of Rs. 10,000/-per running metre and a deposit of Rs. 50,000/-for granting permission under Section 45 of the MRTP Act to the petitioners and the other cellular operators for installing semi-permanent structures/cabins on the top of the building for housing Base Station/Telephone Connector to set-up a cellular mobile tele-...

Shri Mario Cotta Pereira Vs. Gorakshawadi Shantinagar Gram Vikas Samit ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR623; 2008(3)BomCR885

S.A. Bobde, J.1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the Judgment of the Administrative Tribunal, Goa dated 29.9.2006 holding that the Judgment of the Deputy Collector and S.D.O. South Goa, Margao one Shri Dipak S. Desai, is liable to be set aside on the ground of bias. 2. The matter arises this way. In a writ petition in the nature of a public interest litigation, there was a challenge by the Gorakshawadi Shantinagar Gram Vikas Samittee, the respondent No. 1 to the order of conversion of agricultural land bearing Survey Nos. 42/1 to 42/63, admeasuring 30,000 sq. metres, situated at Aquem Baixo Village of Salcete Taluka owned by the petitioner herein i.e. Mario Cotta Pereira. According to the petitioners, this conversion was part of a large scale collusion being practised in such conversions where the tenants collusively accept the position that they are not tenants and thus allow the lands to be converted to non-agric...

Divisional Controller Vs. Ramdas Gulab Goje

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(3)ALLMR777; 2007(3)BomCR688

Dharmadhikari B.P., J.1. Heard Shri Wankhede, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Khan, learned Counsel for the respondent.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner State Road Transport Corporation is challenging the order dated 17.4.1995 passed by the Industrial Court, Amravati, in Revision under Section 44 of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, (hereinafter referred to as MRTU & PULP Act). The Labour Court dismissed Complaint (ULP) No. 393 of 1989 filed by present respondent challenging the order of dismissal of his service after departmental enquiry on 16.8.1989. The Industrial Court has not disturbed that order but on humanitarian ground the petitioner has been directed to withdraw the dismissal and reinstate the respondent as fresh employee. This direction of Industrial Court is stayed by this Court on 12.3.1997.3. Shri Wankhede, learned Counsel for the petitioner, by placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble ...

Arun Shriram Bawaskar Vs. Ramdas Vishnupant Kakane

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR81; 2007(4)BomCR348

Pangarkar C.L., J.1. The applicant/original defendant has filed this revision against the judgment and decree passed by the 3rd (ad hoc) Additional District Judge, whereby she allowed the appeal and decreed the suit. 2. The facts giving rise to this revision are as follows -The plaintiff is a businessman and also works as a Collection agent in the small savings and for the Janata Commercial Co-operative Bank, Akola. The defendant runs a shop named and styled 'Arti Steel Home' in the old city of Akola. The defendant has a recurring account in the Janata Bank. As a result, the plaintiff knows the defendant since last fifteen years and their relations were very cordial. The plaintiff used to collect everyday an amount from the defendant for being deposited in the Bank. In 1997, the defendant approached the plaintiff and requested him to advance sum of Rs. 19995/-, as he had some financial difficulties. Considering the difficulty of the defendant, the plaintiff paid sum of Rs. 19995/-. The...