Mumbai Court August 2007 Judgments

Parag Milk and Milk Products Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through Di ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(5)BomCR544; (2007)109BOMLR1774; 2007BusLR148(Bom); 2007(216)ELT664(Bom)

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. Rule. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. By consent, Rule made returnable and heard forthwith. 2. The petitioner, a private limited company, is engaged in the business of manufacturing and distributing Milk and other milk products including Skimmed Milk Powder, etc. It has its own manufacturing unit. The petitioner was granted Import Export Code (for short 'IEC') No. 3197031814 on 3rd February, 1998 and was also registered with the Agricultural & Processed Food Products Export Development Authority. The petitioner was supplying only liquid milk in the domestic market since 1992 but started exporting Skimmed Milk Product (for short 'SMP') since 2004. They expanded the business to the extent that they were accounting for about 12% of the total export of the products. The petitioner had regular dealing with various countries, Dairy Farms in particular, and they entered into agreements with M/s. Unicare International, Bangkok and France Int...

Shri Mansinh Hansraj Khatau Vs. Union of India (Uoi),

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(229)ELT344(Bom); [2008]303ITR147(Bom)

Anoop V. Mohta, J.1. The plaintiff was an income tax practitioner, now retired.2. In the first week of November, 1964 defendant No. 1 through its officer Mr. J.P. Singh, the Chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi made an announcement in a press conference which was published in various news papers on 8th November, 1964 to the effect that 'the persons who discloses their concealed income voluntarily would be treated leniently and further; that the rate of reward to those furnishing information about concealed income has been stepped up from 2.5% to a minimum of 7.5% of the extra tax which would be generated as a result of such information and in suitable cases the reward might go upto 10%'.3. On 23/03/1973, first petition filed by the plaintiff providing information related to Pittie Family.4. On 27/02/1974, second petition filed by the plaintiff providing information relating to Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd.5. On 11/03/1973, third petition filed by the plaintiff providin...

Vilas S/O Supdaji Shelke Vs. Commissioner, Akola Municipal Corporation ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)MhLj775

A.H. Joshi, J.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and is called for final disposal by consent.2. Heard.3. The petitioner is a contender for the seat of Leader of Opposition under Section 19-IAA of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 in the respondent No. 1-Municipal Corporation.4. Case proceeds on certain admitted background, namely:------------------------------------------------------------------------(a) Names of parties. Party Pre-poll alliance.strength. ------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Indian National Congress [INC] 19 [INC and NCP]2. Nationalist Party [NCP] 11 [INC and NCP]3. Bhartiya Janata Party [BJP] 11 [BJP and Shivsena]4. Bharip-Bahujan Mahasangh 10 No alliance5. Shiv Sena 07 [BJP and Shivsena]6. Samajwadi Party 027. Lokrajya Janata Party 028. Maharashtra Navninnan Sena 019. Muslim League 01 No alliance10. Azad Hinda Congress 0111. Democratic Secular Front 0112. Independent 01--------------------------------...

Kini Karyat Shikshan Mandal and anr. Vs. Pramod Satuppa Oulkar and ors ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(6)ALLMR301; 2007(6)BomCR96; 2007(6)MhLj847

Nishita Mhatre, J.1. The petitioners challenge the order of the School Tribunal dated 9-10-1997. By this order, the School Tribunal has declared that the oral termination of service of respondent No. 1, effected from 29-6-1996 was illegal, ineffective and void ab initio. The petitioners were directed to reinstate respondent No. 1 with continuity of service and backwages.2. The petitioner No. 1 is an educational institution and governs the functioning of the petitioner No. 2 school. An advertisement was issued by the petitioners on 16-7-1992 inviting applications for the post of Assistant Teacher. The post was reserved for a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category. The advertisement also stipulated that in the event a candidate from this category was not available, a non-backward class candidate would be appointed for a temporary period of a year. Respondent No. 1 applied for the post pursuant to the advertisement. According to the petitioner, no other application was receiv...

Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Vishesh Dhatu Industries

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009[15]STR757

ORDER1. This is an appeal by Revenue. The questions of law are been framed at page 7 of the appeal memo. We have heard the parties and considered the impugned order.2. We take judicial notice of the fact that several orders have come before, us in which there is absolutely no discussion as to why the Tribunal has arrived at the conclusion it has arrived. Findings of facts have been recorded by the, lower authority. The said findings have not been disturbed by any reasons and orders are being passed. In the instant case the question is whether there is discretion in the Tribunal to impose the penalty, that has not been answered. In our opinion, once the order of the Tribunal is the subject matter of the appeal before us, this Court must have the benefit of the reasons as to how the Tribunal has arrived at the decision of allowing or dismissing the appeal.3. If is unfortunate that the Tribunal whose orders are subject to appeal, and over which this Court exercises supervisory jurisdictio...

Rajesh Vasantlal Shah Vs. Jay Prakash P. Sheth and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: IV(2008)BC228

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. Heard Mr. Kocharekar, the learned Counsel for the applicant who is seeking leave to appeal under Section 378(4) of Crl.P.C. against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate, 50th Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai on 24.4.2007 in C.C. No. 60/SS/2006 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.2. As per the complainant the present applicant had filed the said complaint on behalf of his wife-Kavita who sold some shares through the accused and in discharge of that liability or debt the accused Shri Jay Prakash P. Shelh, proprietor of M/s. M.P. Investments Shares and Stock Consultants had issued the dishonoured cheque and in spite of legal notice given by the wife, the accused did not pay the cheque amount and even after receiving the summons from the Court, no steps were taken to clear the said amount.3. The defence of the accused was two-fold viz. he never received the shares from the wife of the complainant and he had no...

M.R. Bharat and Associates Vs. Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The application for restoration of the above appeal which was dismissed vide order No. A/333/C-IV/SMB/WZB/MUM/2007 dated 29.1.2007, is allowed, as the explanation given by the appellants for non-appearance of their counsel on the date fixed for hearing, viz.that the counsel's mother-in-law expired and the appellants could not make alternative arrangement to appear before the Tribunal, is found to be satisfactory. The dismissal order is set aside and the appeal is restored to its original number and fixed for hearing on 27.8.2007....

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Manjara Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkha ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Bom)662; [2008]301ITR191(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.1. In these group of 47 appeals filed under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act for short), the CIT has challenged various orders passed by the Tribunal in the case of different assessees. Counsel on both sides agree that the following substantial questions of law arise in all these appeals, namely:1. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that provisions of Section 40A(2)(a) are not applicable to a co-operative society?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the additional payment over and above the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) was cane price and not diversion of profit and as such allowable as business expenditure under Section 37(1) of the IT Act, 1961?3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case cane price/Khodki charges paid by the assessee was not bonus within the meaning of 2(4) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and it was allowable as business expend...

Kara Bhima Vs. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR910; AIR2007Guj198(FB); 2008AIHC33(Guj)(FB)

Mehta D.A., J.1. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Gujarat State has referred the following two questions under Section 56 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 (the Act):S(1) Whether the said instrument Titled as Deed of Simple Mortgage executed on dt. 7.12.1985 and presented for Registration with Sub-Registrar, Manavdar on dt. 7.12.85 bearing Serial No. 317 is liable to stamp duty under Article 36 of Schedule-I to the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958, read with Government Notification dt. 2.7.1970. (Annexure 'E')OR(2) Whether the said instrument falls within the scope full remission granted inter-alia to the instruments of Mortgage under Government R.D. Notification No. GHM-79/108/-M-STP-1479/2288-Hdt. 23.3.1979 (Annexure-'B').2. The applicant, an individual, had applied to Bank of India, Dungarpur Branch, Taluka District Junagadh for a loan of Rs. 9,80,000/- for the purchase of Air Compressors, Drilling Rods and other Accessories under Agricultural Finance Scheme. Upon being granted the said f...

Shri Pranab Kumar Chakraborty Vs. the Dy. Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This is an appeal filed by the Assessee. The assessment year is 1997-98. The appeal is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-XXVIII at Mumbai, dated 21.10.2004 and arises out of the order passed Under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 1. The learned Cy. CIT was not justified in failing to appreciate and in not complying with the directions given by the learned CIT (Appeals) in his appellate order dated 12.02.2001. The learned CIT(Appeals) has also erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in this regard. 2. The appellant specifically challenges the following statements, findings, conclusions of the learned CIT (Appeals) in para 2.5 of his order dated 21.10.2004: (a) No evidence has been filed by the appellant regarding T.D.S. deducted. (b) Credit for T.D.S. cannot be given in the absence of statutory certificate. 3. The learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in holding that the Assessing Officer was justified in not allowing the credit of tax claimed by the appellant. 4. The...