Mumbai Court September 2014 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.
Arvind Shamji Chheda Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai City - ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2014
Oral Order: (A.K. Menon, J.) 1. The present reference is filed under Section 256 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the I.T. Act) and it pertains to assessment year 1988-89. 2. The assesse, an individual who was partner in a partnership firm at the material time, had filed an application seeking reference of ten questions. The following two questions have been since referred to this Court:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the gains of Rs.16,55,508/- on sale of land as business income as against the assesses claim as long-term capital gains ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had any material to come to the conclusion that, land sold by the assesses was stock-in-trade of the dissolved firm, hence assessable business income? 3. Dr. Shivram, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee stated that the only question that really requires to be answered is the question No.2. Before ...
Deepak Natwarlal Parekh Vs. Tejas Natwarlal Parekh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2014
M.S. Sonak, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7 May 2014 made by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the appellant's (original defendant's) notice of motion no. 1532 of 2013 in Suit No. 5 of 2014 urging the dismissal of the suit for lack of pecuniary jurisdiction or the return of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 10 of the CPC for presentation to the appropriate court of competent jurisdiction. 2. For sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred by their position in Suit No. 5 of 2014. This means, appellant shall be referred as the defendant and the respondent as the plaintiff. 3. Dr. Birendra Saraf, learned counsel for the defendant made the following submissions:- (A) The suit as filed, was basically for recovery of the suit premises from the defendant, who according to the plaintiff, was nothing but a gratuitous licensee. In terms of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act, 1882 (PSCCA), exclusive jurisdiction in the matter of recovery ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2014
1. When this matter was called out for admission, Mr.Tejveer Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, stated that the Appeal is arising out of the order dated 30.09.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Income Tax Appeal No.1949/Mum/2010. The Assessment Year in question is 2002-2003. The Appeal raises the substantial questions of law and according to him, they are formulated at page 4 of the paper book. They read as under: "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in holding that interest under section 234D is not liable to be charged? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in holding that interest under section 244A(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is to be granted to the Assessee?" 2. After the Appeal was argued for sometime, Mr.Tejveer Singh and Mr.Murlidhar, conceded that insofar as the question (a) is concerned that is a substantial questi...
Sureshkumar G. Hundia Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Centra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-12-2014
1. This Appeal by the Assessee challenges the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 08.02.2012 where-under the Tribunal has confirmed the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) recorded in the order dated 13.02.2009. The Assessment Year in question is 2004-2005. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the Assessee, submits that this Appeal raises a substantial question of law inasmuch as the Revenue has sought to displace a transaction and which transaction by no stretch of imagination can be said to be collusive or not genuine. If the limited Company, to whom the payment was made, has shown the same in it's books of account, the amount was paid as commission by cheque and the identification of the parties was made, then, the Tribunal ought to have held that the Assessing Officer should have utilized his coercive powers and compelled the attendance of the persons, namely, Mr.Laxman Khemka. In not doing so and faulting the Assessee for not being able to produce...
Dattatraya Baburao Saindar Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
1. By an order dated 04-09-2007, this petition was admitted. No interim relief was granted to the petitioner. 2. The contention of the petitioner in brief is as follows:- a] The petitioner joined in 1975 as a driver. b] On 15-02-1981, the petitioner was manning the bus which collided with two cyclists riding one bicycle. c] One of the cyclist suffered serious injuries. d] The petitioner was initially convicted by the Criminal Court in Criminal Case No. 6675 of 1981, and was sentenced to suffer Simple Imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of which he was to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months. e] In Criminal Appeal No. 93/1987 filed by the petitioner against his conviction dated 24-09-1987, he was acquitted and his conviction was set aside by order dated 14-12-1990. f] A charge sheet cum show cause notice was issued on 02-05-1981 to the petitioner by the respondent. g] After concluding the disciplinary proceedings, the petitioner wa...
Anthony John Brito D' Costa Alias Brito D' Costa Vs. Anthony R. D' Cos ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act is filed by an injured victim of the accident seeking enhancement. 2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant fairly stated that though before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, total claim of Rs.8,00,000/- was made, this Court may after considering the facts, grant just compensation. 3. It is not in dispute that vide Judgment delivered on 29.09.2008, in Claim Petition No.104 of 2007, Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - III, South Goa, Margao, has awarded compensation of Rs.86,721.46 only to present Appellant with nine percent interest. The Appellant has accordingly received that amount from Respondent No.2-Insurance Company. 4. I have heard Advocate Shri S. S. Kakodkar for the Appellant and Advocate Shri Timble for the Respondent No.2. Nobody has appeared for Respondent No.1-owner/driver of offending vehicle. 5. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has framed following four issues and answered the same as re...
Sumanbai Bhaurao Shinde Vs. Marathwada Agricultural University, Parbha ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
A.M. Badar, J. 1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal. 2] The petitioner retrenched worker of the respondent by this petition is praying for directing the respondent to consider her claim for absorption as permanent employee on available ClassIV post with the respondent. 3] The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that land of the father of the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the respondent University i.e. for starting a research centre at Himayatbaug, Aurangabad. A certificate to the effect was issued which states that she is a project affected person. The petitioner was working as a daily rated employee with the respondent University from the year 1981 till she was retrenched by one months' notice dated 27.2.2001. The learned counsel further submitted that the said notice of retrenchment was challenged by the petitioner by f...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Budha Shrawan Zodge and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
1. Heard learned Counsel for parties. 2. All these four First Appeals can be disposed of by common Judgment, as they arise from the common judgment and award dated 02nd July, 1997 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal at Dhule in Motor Accident Claim Petitions filed by the original claimants U/sec. 166 of M.V. Act. These four First Appeals are preferred by Insurance Company on the ground that, original claimants were traveling in a goods vehicle and therefore, they are not liable to pay any compensation to the original claimants. 3. First appeal No.594/1997 is arising out of judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.200/1991, First appeal No 595/1997 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.202/1991, First Appeal No.596/1997 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.190/1191 and First Appeal No.597/1997 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.201/1191. In the First appeal No.594/1997 Bapu Balu Chougude, Age 22 years died, in the First Appeal No.595/1997 Mohan Lax...
Bajirao Vs. Sanjay Prakashchand Kothari and Others
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
A.P. Bhangale, J. 1. The petitioner prays to quash and set aside the Order dt.16.2.1999 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Buldana in Case No.348 of 1998 and Order dt.13.5.1999 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra State in Appeal No.700 of 1999. 2. The question that arises in this petition is as to whether the petitioner, who has an alternative, efficacious and cheaper statutory remedy of appeal available, can, without invoking such statutory remedy of appeal, approach the High Court directly under Article 226 of the Constitution of India Our answer to the said question is in the negative for the reasons given in the following paras. 3. Mr.R.L.Khapre, learned Counsel for the petitioner wants to submit that merely because the alternate statutory remedy is available, jurisdiction of the High Court is not affected under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, especially in a case where the Authority against whom the Writ is filed is sh...
Menino Mario Fernandes and Others Vs. Satyawan Guno Naik and Others
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Sep-11-2014
Oral Judgment: 1. By this Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants question the Judgment dated 24.09.2008 delivered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Goa, Margao, in Claim Petition no. 51 of 2008 dismissing the same. 2. The basic facts are not in dispute. The deceased Josepha Fernandes @ Josepha Da Silva, aged about 45 years, was the wife of appellants No. 1. The other appellants are the brothers and sisters of the deceased and their respective spouses, as they qualified to be heirs in view of the local law. The learned Counsel for claimants, particularly on behalf of appellants No. 1, has submitted that they may not qualify as dependents. The accident has taken place on 17.06.2007 when deceased was proceeding towards Pontemol on Curchorem market, Mirabag road, on a motorcycle bearing no. GA-02-Q-4957. She fell down from motorcycle near Kens Corner Bar and Restaurant at about 14.50 hours. The motorcycle was being driven by respondent no.1. Responde...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »