Mumbai Court July 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.
Shri Mahesh J. Patel Vs. the Asstt. Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)109ITD35(Mum.)
1. There being a difference of opinion between the Members constituting the Division Bench, the Hon'ble President has referred, under Section 255(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following point of difference to me as a Third Member to resolve the controversy: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Accountant Member is justified that profits or gains arising to the assessee from the transaction with Shri R.M. Venkatachalam are chargeable to tax as long term capital gain or the Judicial Member is justified that the same are assessable as the short term capital profits? 2. The assessee is an individual and is a member of the Bombay Stock Exchange. He is a share broker. With a view to expand his business he wanted to acquire the membership of Bangalore Stock Exchange Limited.The membership of Bangalore Stock Exchange Limited can only be obtained by being a shareholder of that stock exchange, which was incorporated as a company. Therefore, he acquired the business of...
The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporatio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR1; 2007(5)BomCR591; 2007(5)MhLj691
A.B. Chaudhari, J.1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation has challenged the judgment and order dated 30.4.1993, passed by the Industrial Court, Maharashtra (Nagpur Bench) Nagpur, by which the Industrial Court allowed the complaints filed by the respondents/original complainants and declared the complainants/respondents successful in the departmental examination and further directed the petitioner to promote them to the post of traffic controllers.FACTS:2. The respondents/original complainants had filed their complaints before the Industrial Court, Nagpur claiming that the departmental examination held on 26.10.1986 for promotion to the post of traffic controller and its result declared on 31.3.1987 was the result of manipulation and, hence, there was unfair labour practice. Further prayer that was made in the complaints was to declare them as having passed in the said examination and to quash and set aside reversion of the responde...
Deepak Shriram Kale Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretar ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR102; 2007(5)BomCR651; 2008(1)MhLj314
R.C. Chavan, J.1. Rule. By consent made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties.2. The petitioner, an employee of Bank of India, takes exception to the letters issued by the Bank requiring the petitioner to have his claim of belonging to 'Kharia' (Scheduled Tribe) verified. 3. The petitioner claimed to belong to Kharia, Scheduled Tribe, and had secured employment with the respondent Bank on the basis of a certificate granted to him on 04.01.1982. The Collector had initiated an inquiry to ascertain the correctness of petitioner's claim and came to cancel the said certificate vide order dated 19.11.1984. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing Writ Petition No. 3504 of 1995, wherein, by judgment dated 18th December, 1997, this Court had directed Collector, Akola to decide 'genuineness and correctness' of the caste certificate issued by Executive Magistrate, Akola on 04.01.1982. In pursuance of this order the Collector, Akola examined the matter once again and refused...
Sanjaykumar S/O Amrutlal Shah and ors. Vs. Uttamlal Ratilal Shah (Died ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALLMR195; 2007(5)BomCR694; (2007)109BOMLR1701; 2008(1)MhLj205
M.G. Gaikwad, J.1. Heard learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of respective parties.2. Letters patent appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned Counsel for respective parties, this matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal.3. This letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 13-03-2007 in Writ Petition No. 755/2007, whereby the learned Single Judge of this High Court summarily dismissed the writ petition by confirming the Judgment of learned Member, Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court, Mumbai in Appeal No. 350/1994 as well as the Judgment of the Cooperative Court, Jalgaon in Dispute No. 134/1989 directing present appellants to surrender peaceful possession of the suit property to the respondent No. 1 and payment of past mesne profits to the extent of Rs. 18,000/-.4. The subject matter in dispute is plot No. 8-B (bungalow No. 48), situated in respondent No. 2 Society at Nandurbar. Present respondent No. 1 is the Chairman of respondent No. 2 Societ...
Yashpal Sahni Vs. Rekha Hajarnavis, Assistant Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)109BOMLR1537; (2007)211CTR(Bom)1; [2007]293ITR539(Bom); 2007(4)MhLj208
J.P. Devadhar, J.1. A short but interesting question raised in this petition is, where a company deducts tax at source ('TDS' for short) from the salary payable to an employee, but fails to deposit the said amount into the Government treasury, whether, the revenue can recover the TDS amount with interest from the concerned employee in spite of the express bar contained in Section 205 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?2. The relevant facts are that on 28th March, 1996 the respondent No. 6 Company appointed the petitioner as 'Managing Director-Information Technology' with effect from 1/4/1996 on a basic salary of Rs. 1,20,000/- plus other permissible benefits. 3. During the period from April to December, 1996 the respondent No. 6 paid salary to the petitioner after deducting TDS totalling to Rs. 6,66,000/-. Thereafter, disputes arose between the parties and ultimately the respondent No. 6 terminated the services of the petitioner in March, 1997. 4. On 30th September, 1997 the petitioner filed ...
Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)211CTR(Bom)548
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the communication dt. 7th June, 2007 whereby the objection raised by the petitioners for reopening the assessment had been rejected.3. A few relevant facts may be set out which are as under:The petitioners were involved in supplying goods; to the State of Iraq. The petitioners had the requisite permission. The petitioners filed the return of income for the asst. yr. 2000-01 on which an assessment order came to be passed. It is not necessary to refer to the various otter facts.The Asstt. CIT issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) setting out therein that the income chargeable to the tax for the asst. yr. 2000-01 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act and, therefore, the authority proposed to reassess the income for the said assessment year and calling upon the assessee to file a return in the prescribed form within 30 days. It w...
Malti Venkatrao Kulkarni Vs. G. Yoganand and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALLMR123; 2007(6)BomCR272; 2007(6)MhLj101
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The claimant/appellant being dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 7th September, 1994 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bombay (the Tribunal) has preferred the present appeal for enhancement of the compensation.2. On 9-11-1990 accident took place and that resulted into death of Vijay (deceased) who was aged about 14 years and was studying in the school.3. The appellant, therefore, preferred this appeal being mother of the deceased and claimed compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- on account of the fatal injuries caused to the deceased.4. After considering the evidence and material on record, the Tribunal has held that the Bus No. MMP-6600 caused death to the deceased on 19th November, 1990 because of fast, rash and negligent driving. The vehicle was owned by opponent-respondent No. 1 herein. The vehicle was insured with respondent No. 2-New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Bombay. However, the Tribunal has restricted the claim to Rs. 59,000/- and awarded int...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Iqubal Ahemad Shaikh and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ571
Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The appellant United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (insurer) has challenged the grant of interim award of Rs. 50,000 under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The accident took place on 12.11.1994. At that time as per the then existing provision, the 'no fault liability' amount was Rs. 25,000 as contemplated under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. By amendment dated 14.11.1994, the said amount has been replaced by Rs. 50,000.2. The deceased succumbed to the said injury on 18.12.1994. Therefore, the contention that learned Tribunal ought not to have awarded Rs. 50,000 as the entitlement of interim award in such circumstances should have been the date of accident and not the date of death. Learned Judge, after considering the rival contentions as raised by the parties, came to a conclusion that for the original claimants entitlement of any award or compensation comes after the death and not before that. Even otherwise, considering the scheme and the provisio...
Akay Organics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: (2007)(120)ECC513
1. This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No. BR(67)/Th-II/06 dt. 27.3.2006.2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are appellants are manufacturers of Sodium Carboxy Methyl Cellulose (SCMC) of different grades falling under Chapter Sub-Heading No. 3912.31 of CETA, 1985.Appellants cleared on payment of appropriate duty quantity of 9000 kgs.of SCMC (Akaylose TM) Grade to their purchasers. The purchasers of this SCMC grade Akaylose rejected the same on the grounds of not confirming to the standards. The appellant filed D-3 declaration showing the receipt of this 9000 kgs of rejected SCMC Akaylose TM Grade. After the verification of the said goods by the authorities, the appellants consumed these 9000 kgs of rejected SCMC by blending it with another grade of SCMC AKAYLOSE SD. Subsequently the appellants cleared 27000 kgs of SCMC AKAYLOSE SD Grade but paid duty only on 18000 kgs of SCMC and claimed benefit of provisions of Rule 173H for the 9000 kgs of SCMC AKAYLOSE TM...
Noble Drugs Ltd., D.D. Oke and D.J. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: (2007)(121)ECC43
1. We have heard both sides on the question referred, namely, "Whether an assessee during the period of forfeiture of facility for payment of duty on fortnightly basis, is required to pay duty out of the PLA and whether failure on his part to do so would attract interest and penal provisions or not." 2. We find that the above issue stands answered in the negative, and in favour of the assessees, by the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Thanikkudam Bhagawati Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Calicut in Central Excise Appeal No. 22 of 2005 by the judgment dated 26.10.2005, holding that an assessee is eligible to avail the benefit of Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules for discharging duty on consignment basis after default and consequent forfeiture of facility of payment of duty on fortnightly basis, under Rule 173G(e). The relevant extracts from the judgment are reproduced herein below: 11. The point in controversy is as to whether the assessee who avails the benefit of a deferre...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »