Mumbai Court April 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.
Vidya V. Kulkarni, a Citizen of India Vs. Bombay Khadi and Village Ind ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR14; 2007(4)BomCR637; [2007(114)FLR810]; 2007(4)MhLj881
V.M. Kanade, J.1. Both these Writ Petitions can be disposed of by a common judgment. FACTS: 2. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2354 of 2005 joined services of the Respondent as a clerk-cum-Salesgirl in the Furniture Department on 29/09/1981. She was a member of the Mumbai Mazdoor Sabha which is a recognized Union, functioning for the Respondent's Establishment. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1996 of 2005 joined the services of the Respondent as a peon in the Silk Centre of the Khadi Bhavan on 15/04/1982 and he was also an active member of the Mumbai Mazdoor Sabha. The Respondent is an institution registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960 and under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 and has employed about 400 workmen in its various establishments in Mumbai. 3. Both these Petitioners were issued memo in May 1989 in which certain allegations of misconduct were made. Both of them gave reply to the said show cause memo, denying and disputing the allegations which were ma...
Suresh Kumar Khurana Vs. Dy. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: (2007)112TTJ(Mum.)55
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order dated 11-2-2002 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1996-97.2. By way of this appeal, assessee has raised the following grievances : 1. The grounds mentioned hereunder are without prejudice to one another. 2. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in facts and law by not going into the evidence about the assessee having asked for the reasons for issuing notice under Section 148 and the completing the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147. 3. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in facts and law in not considering that the learned assessing officer has made fishing inquiries and has made additions by travelling beyond the reasons originally recorded by him for taking recourse to Section 147. 4. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in retaining the add...
Deputy Director of Income-tax, Vs. Set Sattellite (Singapore)
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: (2007)106ITD175(Mum.)
1. These cross appeals are directed against the order dated 15-10-2003 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1999-2000. As both of these appeals pertain to the same assessee, involve interconnected issues and were heard together, we are disposing of both of these appeals by way of this consolidated order.2. We will first take up the ITA No. 535/Mum/04, i.e., the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer.3. The grievances of the Assessing Officer were articulated by way of following grounds of appeal set out in the memorandum of appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that since the agent i.e., SET India Pvt. Ltd. has a good profitability record, it can be said that the assessee has remunerated the agent on an arms length basis, and based on the provisions of Article 7(2), the OECD Commentary on the subject, and the other contenti...
indana International Ltd. Vs. Smt. Santana Miguel Fernandes and Miss A ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR660; 2007(5)BomCR804; (2007)109BOMLR901
S.A. Bobde, J. 1. Admit. The decision in this revision application must necessarily be ex-parte since there are no living respondents and the petitioner/plaintiff has been denied permission to withdraw the suit filed by him against dead persons, who are arrayed as Respondents here. The matter is therefore dealt with in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court in addition to the revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. This Civil Revision Application is directed against the Order dated 5.10.2006 refusing permission to the petitioner to withdraw Civil Suit No. 29/05/B. By the impugned order the learned trial Court has refused permission to the plaintiff to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit against the legal representatives. 3. The petitioner had sought permission to withdraw the suit against the defendants Smt. Santana Miguel Fernandes and Miss Apolonia Miguel Fernandes i.e. Respondents No. 1 and 2 here, on the ground ...
Nagpur Vehicle Hire Purchase Association, a Society Duly Registered Un ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)BomCR246
A.H. Joshi, J.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the learned Advocates for the parties. 2. The petitioners herein have challenged circular Annexure-P2, wherein respondent No. 1 -the Transport Commissioner, Maharashtra State, Mumbai, communicated to all officers under his control certain instructions. Apart from recital-part contained in the said circular, the direction-part reads as follows:(A) In your office a list be prepared containing the Financial Institutions/Banks/Finance Corporations, who are providing loans for vehicle purchase and are recognized by the Reserve Bank of India, along with their branches. (B) Whenever these financial institutions/banks/finance corporations approach for registering the hire purchase/mortgage charge, they should make it compulsory to seek trade certificate for every category of vehicle. Branches should be asked to seek separate trade certificate. Fees and necessary taxes be accepted. (C) If there is no financial institution in...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jamnalal Sons Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: (2007)210CTR(Bom)203; [2007]291ITR436(Bom)
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.2. All these applications filed by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 were admitted on the following questions of law:(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee is an industrial company ?(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there has been no violation of the mandate of Section 104 of the IT Act, 1961 either in letter or spirit ?(4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that the capital gains realised by the company is not includible in the gross total income for the purpose of working out distributable income within the meaning of Section 104 of the IT Act...
Faruka Begum W/O Samdali Khan Vs. Dnyaneshwar S/O Uttamrao Patil and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR34; 2007(5)BomCR403; 2007(4)MhLj256
ORDERV.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The second appeal arises out of concurrent findings of the two Courts. The appellant is original defendant No. 1. The respondent No. 1 was the plaintiff of suit (Regular Civil Suit No. 474/2000). He claimed declaration of ownership in respect of agricultural land and relief for setting aside sale deed executed by his father in favour of defendant No. 1. Original defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are the parents of the plaintiff i.e. present respondent No. 1.3. The suit was decreed and the appeal preferred by defendant No. 1 (purchaser) also came to be dismissed. The plaintiff's case before the trial Court was that the suit land was allotted to his share during course of partition between himself, his brothers and the father. He relied upon a mutation entry which was effected and disclosed their partition. He contended that there was a family partition between his father and uncle and at the same time, in February 1984, the share ...
All India Animal Welfare Association and ors. Vs. Brihanmumbai Municip ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)BomCR1
1. After hearing the learned Solicitor General of India, learned Advocate General for the State of Goa and various other Counsel on behalf of various parties, and after perusal of the provisions in the Constitution of India, the Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules, 2001, Action Plan for control of stray Animal Menace (Monkeys, stray Dogs, stray Cattle and Pigs) formulated by the Ministry of Environment and Forests of Government of India, we are clearly of the view to tackle the serious menace of stray dogs, we have to adopt a multi-pronged approach.2. Mr. Goolam Vahanvati, the learned Solicitor General of India, pointed out that the Constitution of India under Article 51-A(g) exhorts all citizens of this Country to have compassion for living creatures. Mr. Vahanvati also pointed out the preamble of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, which emphasises,to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on animals and for that purpose to amend the law relating to the prev...
Ram S.S. Parihar Vs. Suniti Bhadauria and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: II(2007)DMC567
ORDERN.A. Britto, J.1. This petition, invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the complainant against order dated 15.1.2006 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge by which the order dated 5.1.2005 of the learned J.M.F.C, Ponda issuing process against the accused under Sections 499/500 has been set aside.2. The parties hereto shall be referred to in the names as they appear in the cause title of the said complaint.3. The complainant is the father-in-law of A1/Smt. Suniti Bhadauria. A2/Ravi Shankar Singh Bhadauria and A3/Mrs. Reena Singh Bhadauria are the parents of the said daughter-in-law who met the complainant's son Sushil for the first time on 8.6.2002 and thereafter they got civilly married on 23.4.2003 which marriage was registered before the Civil Registrar, Ponda, Goa and subsequently on 26.5.2003 by Vedic rights but unfortunately to live together in the same house only for a period of five months, one day...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Arvind Nilkanth Kedar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: (2007)213TTJ(Mumbai)445
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for applicant. None for the respondents.2. In all these cases the tax effect in each assessment year is admittedly less than Rs; 30,000 and, therefore, the Tribunal relying upon the decision of this Court in the cases of CWT v. Executors of Late Shri D.T. Udeshi : [1991]189ITR319(Bom) and CTT v. Bhimji Bhanjee & Co. : [1984]146ITR145(Bom) declined to refer the questions of law raised by the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961.3. It is contended by the Revenue that even though the tax effect in each assessment year is less than Rs. 30,000, as per the Board's clarificatory Circular dt. 29th June, 2000, where the order of the Tribunal is for more than one assessment year, then cumulative tax effect should be taken into consideration. Accordingly it is submitted by the Revenue that in the present case, the Tribunal in the case of Shri Arvind Kedar has passed a combined order for asst. yrs. 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88 and a combine...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »