Mumbai Court July 2008 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.
Sushma Sharad Vartak, Vs. Commissioner of Labour and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALLMR809; 2008(6)BomCR179; (2008)110BOMLR2506; [2008(118)FLR995]; (2008)IIILLJ790Bom; 2008(6)MhLj731
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. It is the case of the petitioners that Seth Industries Limited and Seth Textiles, involved in manufacture of woolen materials, spinning job work and other activities together with its 1200 employees, illegally stopped production without giving any notice or seeking permission in terms of Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, the company itself was declared sick by BIFR under the provisions of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 on 6th October, 1987 as no viable scheme could be worked out despite the repeated opportunities. On the recommendations of BIFR for winding up, finally, the company was ordered to be wound up by this court on 25th May, 1990. The validity of the orders passed by the BIFR was challenged by the company by filing writ petition being Writ Petition No. 3362 of 1992 before Delhi High Court where interim orders were passed on 23rd September, 1992. Since the properties of the company were being alienated...
Hotel Sahara Star, Sahara Hospitality Limited, Formerly Known as Batra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALLMR237; 2008(5)BomCR263
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. The Centaur Hotel is situated in close proximity to the air terminals where domestic flight operations are carried on at Mumbai Airport. The hotel is located on a plot of land bearing CTS 2085 (part), and originally belonged to the Hotel Corporation of India Ltd. (HCI). Pursuant to the policy of disinvestment of the Government of India, HCI entered into an agreement on 18th April 2002 by which the Hotel was acquired by the First Petitioner as a going concern together with its property, assets and obligations. On 4th June 2003, the Petitioners made an application to the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai under Section 342 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 and Section 44 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, for permission to carry out additions and alterations to the Hotel. The Municipal Corporation issued an Intimation of Disapproval on 15th January 2004 under Section 346. A commencement certificate was issued by the Municipal ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(133)ECC9; 2008(159)LC9(Bombay)
D.K. Deshmukh and V.C. Daga, JJ.1. The facts that are material and relevant for deciding this appeal are that the Respondent M/s. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. is holder of central excise registration and is engaged in the manufacture of paper and paper board falling under CSH 48 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Respondent submitted an application under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act for refund of Excise duty paid by it. The claim of the Respondent for refund was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs by Order, dated, 5th May, 1998. The Respondent submitted second application for refund of Excise Duty under Section 11B of the Act to the tune of Rs. 24,00,925. That application for refund was also rejected by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs by Order, dated, 23rd March, 2000. They made third claim for refund under Section 11(b) of the Act for refund of Excise Duty to the tune of Rs. 62,96,976. That app...
Vijay Baburao Thakar and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)MhLj344
V.M. Kanade, J.1. Both these petitions can be disposed of by a common order, since the petitioners in both these petitions are challenging the Government Resolution dated 20th April, 2007 and are also seeking appropriate writ, order and direction, directing the respondents not to merge Pune Municipal Transport Undertaking and Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.Brief facts in a nutshell are as under:The Pune Municipal Corporation and Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation are constituted under the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as BPMC Act). Pune and Pimpri Chinchwad are two cities, which are adjoining to each other and both the Pune Municipal Corporation and Pimpri Chinchwad Corporation have constituted transport undertakings under the BPMC Act for the purpose of regulating the road transport. In 1979, a Committee was constituted pursuant to the directions given by the Apex Court whi...
Asteroids Trading and Investments P. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of I ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2008
Reported in: (2009)223CTR(Bom)144; [2009]308ITR190(Bom)
1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.2. The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of trading and investments. The petitioner is regularly assessed to income-tax. This petition relates to the assessment year 2003-04. This petition is directed against the notice dated December 27, 2006, issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 2003-04. The petitioner raised an objection to the notice. That objection has been rejected by order dated May 14, 2008. Thus, by this petition the petitioner challenges the notice as also the order dated May 14, 2008, rejecting the objection.3. According to averments in the petition, in the assessment year 2003-04 the petitioner received dividends of Rs. 69,85,550 from other domestic companies and Rs. 14,094 from mutual funds. The petitioner distributed to its shareholders dividends of Rs. 31,00,000 on October 6, 2003, falling in the assessment year 2004-05...
Asian Paints Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2008
Reported in: (2009)223CTR(Bom)141; [2009]308ITR195(Bom)
1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.2. The petitioner by this petition challenges the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as also the order dated May 14, 2008, rejecting his objection to the notice issued under Section 148.3. The facts that are relevant are that the petitioner is a company duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of paints and related products. The petitioner is regularly assessed to income-tax. This petition relates to the assessment year 2003-04. The petitioner had on November 20, 2003, filed returns of income declaring income of Rs. 227,72,31,850, inter alia, disclosing a provision for estimated liability of arrears of wages payable to workmen at its Ankleshwar plant and contribution by way of reimbursement of capital loss incurred by provident fund, gratuity and superannuation funds. On December 7, 2005, a notice-cum-questionaire was issued to the ...
Stanlek Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-2008
Reported in: 2009[16]STR682
ORDER1. P.C. Heard.2. The facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that the Appellant had filed appeal before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.('the Tribunal' for short). While that appeal was pending, on 28th May, 2005, the Appellant filed written submissions. In the written submissions it was claimed that the Appeal of the Appellant is covered by two decisions of the Tribunal. The appeal was heard on 9-8-2006. Nobody had appeared on behalf of the Appellant. The Tribunal by referring to a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. Ramesh Food Products : 2004 (174) E.L.T. 310 (S.C.) disposed of the Appeal. No reference was made to the judgments of the Tribunal which were relied upon by the Appellant. The Appellant, therefore, filed an application for rectification pointing out that he had relied upon the two judgments of the Tribunal in his submissions. The Tribunal, however, disposed of his Appeal without considering those judgmen...
Kathalu S/O Maroti Hatagale Vs. the State of Maharashtra Through Tahsi ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALLMR579; 2008(5)BomCR657; (2008)110BOMLR2323
Naresh H. Patil, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. As in both these writ petitions identical questions of law are involved the petitions are decided by this common judgment.3. Rule. By consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties Rule is made returnable forthwith and taken up for final hearing.4. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2574 of 2008 challenges the judgment and order dated 14-3-2008 passed by the Divisional Commissioner Aurangabad in Appeal No. 2007/DB/Desk-2/ZPVP/Appeal-CR-143 while the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2743 of 2008 challenges the judgment and order dated 14-3-2008 passed by the Divisional Commissioner Aurangabad in Appeal No. 2007/DB/Desk-2/ ZPVP/ Appeal-CR-144.5. The petitioners contend that they issued two separate notices dated 18-10-2007 for carrying no confidence motion against respondents Nos. 4 and 5 -the Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch respectively of Village Gram Panchayat Sawargaon, Taluka Manwat, District Parbhani. In a special m...
Gulabbai W/O Gopaldas Gujrati Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the Sec ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)BomCR184; 2008(6)MhLj679
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule, heard forthwith.2. The petitioner is the widow of Gopaldas Kanhyalal Gujrati. The late Gopaldas Kanhyalal Gujrati had participated in the Indian Independence Movement and was sentenced for six months by Dharangaon Magistrate on 28-08-1942. He was released on 12-01-1943 unconditionally, as per the Government Resolution bearing Hd No. 6528/4(21156) dated 09-01-1943. The husband of the petitioner is receiving Freedom Fighters Pension from the Government of Maharashtra.3. It is the petitioner's case that the Government of India also grants a pension. Accordingly, the petitioner's late husband had applied for Freedom Fighters Pension from the Central Government. The same was rejected on 04-12-1974 on the ground that the actual imprisonment of the husband of the petitioner was less than six months. A fresh application was submitted on 31-12-1982 supported by required documents. In the meantime, the husband of the petitioner expired. After that, the petitioner pursuin...
Narayan Tukaram Kate Vs. Hirabai Ramchandra Godse (Deceased) and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)BomCR662; (2008)110BOMLR2364; 2008(6)MhLj64
J.H. Bhatia, J.1. This Second Appeal is preferred by the original defendant No. 4 after having failed in the Regular Civil Appeal No. 203 of 1986 filed against the judgment passed by the IInd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division in Regular Civil Suit No. 24 of 1975. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are the original plaintiffs while the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are original defendant Nos. 2 and 1 respectively. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be addressed by their original status in the suit.2. To state in brief, it is admitted position that one Tukaram Kate held the suit property consisting of agricultural lands and houses. The said Tukaram died sometimes in 1949-50 leaving behind widow Lalubai and 5 daughters. Plaintiffs and the defendant No. 1 and the deceased defendant No. 2 Gangubai were their daughters. In 1954 Lalubai widow of Tukaram adopted defendant No. 4 Madhav @ Narayan Kate, who is the natural son of her daughter Saraswatibai. The defendant No. 1 Lalubai died in 1961 leavi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »