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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indusind Bank Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2014
1. We have heard Mr. Vimal Gupta, learned senior counsel, appearing for the Revenue in support of this appeal. We have heard Mr. Shah, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent. 2. With their assistance, we have gone through the concurrent findings on the point of deletion of penalty. In paragraph 5.2 of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), it has been held that there is disallowance of depreciation made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order for the assessment year in question, namely, 2001-02. That is with reference to the lease transactions entered by the assessee during the assessment year 1995-96. The claim that these are genuine transactions and made by the assessee was not accepted by the Revenue. However, the assessee persisted and claimed depreciation in the assessment year in question as well. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as also the Tribunal found that there is no concealment of particulars of income nor furnishing of inaccurate pa...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Page Point Service (P) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2014
A.K. Menon, J. 1. This reference arises pursuant to decision of the Sales Tax tribunal, Maharashtra at Mumbai in Reference Application No.92 of 2002 whereby the following question of law has been referred to this Court : "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case was Tribunal justified in holding that the "Airtime charges" and "License fees" charged under an contract of selling activated pager do not form a part of sale price within the meaning of Section 2(29) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959?" 2. Before dealing with the question at hand it would be convenient to enumerate few facts : The Respondent is a registered dealer under Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 having its registered office in the State of Karnataka, Bengaluru. It attended the office of the concerned Revenue Officer, in response to notice issued under section 33 of the Act. The Respondent is an importer and reseller of hardware in general and radio pagers in particular. After hearing the Respondent, its g...
Ultra Merchandise and Retails Limited Vs. In Entertainment India Limit ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2014
1. This case is a needlessly large storm in a very small teacup. In its Chamber Summons, the Defendant seeks to amend its written statement. No new facts are proposed to be added. The Defendant only seeks leave to add a legal submission based on facts already exhaustively pleaded. Mr. Khandeparkar, learned counsel for the Defendant, submits that the Chamber Summons is entirely unobjectionable. Mr. Khandekar, learned counsel for the Plaintiff, disagrees. He opposes the chamber summons saying that the amendment sought is one that is barred by law and wholly impermissible. 2. Having heard both counsel at some length, and having, with their assistance, considered the very many authorities that they have placed before me, I propose to make an order allowing the Chamber Summons. 3. It is not necessary to set out the facts in any great detail. This much will suffice: The suit is an action in copyright infringement in respect of certain allegedly unauthorised telecasts of the Plaintiff's telev...
Mina Srinivasan Krishnan and Another Vs. Arun Bhaskar Adarkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-2014
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. This Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge on an Interim Application/Notice of Motion No.1548 of 2011 in the above suit. By the impugned order dated 20th January, 2014, the learned Single Judge has allowed this Notice of Motion and made it absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) thereof. Prayer clause (a) of the Notice of Motion reads as under:- "(a) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the Suit, the Defendants, their servants and agents be restrained by temporary order and injunction of this Court from entering upon or remaining on the Suit Flat viz. Flat No.5, Second Floor, Goolestan, 37, (East) Wing, Cuffe Parade, Bombay 400 005, or any part thereof without the permission of the Plaintiff." 2. That was a Notice of Motion which was moved by the Respondent-original Plaintiff in the above suit. The Appellants before us are the original Defendants and they are restrained by the tem...
Samadhan Damodhar Morey Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Sep-24-2014
P.C. 1. These three applications seeking anticipatory bail arise out of the same crime being Crime No.71/2014 registered by Police Station, Deulgaon Raja for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 against in all nine accused persons. 2. The offences have been registered on the basis of complaint lodged by one Digambar Kolhe, who has stated that he is an investor of the Company namely PSPS India Multi Trade Services Pvt. Ltd. According to the complainant, this Company, which appears to be a finance Company, had floated a scheme of giving attractive returns on the investments made with it. Allured by the promise of quick returns of huge money on making small investment, the complainant invested certain amount with the Company by paying the amount through cheque dated 21/5/2014. Other investors also followed suit. As a ...
Dr. Ranjeet Suryakant Mohite and Others Vs. The Union of India and Ano ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
A.S. Oka, J. 1. Notice for final disposal at the admission stage was issued on 12th March 2014. A very interesting issue is raised by the Petitioners. The contention of the Petitioners is that the State cannot compel any citizen to disclose his religion while submitting forms and/or declarations. The contention is that a citizen has a right to claim that he does not believe in the philosophy of any religion and therefore, he does not practice or profess any religion. The contention in short is that a citizen can always claim that he belongs to No Religion. 2. The Petitioners claim to be the members of a registered organization by the name Full Gospel Church of God which is stated to have more than 4,000 members. The Union of India and the State of Maharashtra are the Respondents. The case made out in the Petition is that the said organization does believe in the existence of Lord Jesus Christ, but does not believe in any religion much less Christianity. The contention of the Petitioner...
Subhash Laxmanrao Kadam Vs. Dr. Vasudevan Sankara Nair and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
Oral Order: 1. Heard Mr.Kocheta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard Mr.Sakhare Dande, learned counsel for the respondent no.1. Heard Ms.Malhotra, learned A.P.P. for the State of Maharashtra. 2. Rule. 3. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally forthwith. 4. The petitioner is the accused no.7 in the complaint case No.2337 of 2009, pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune. The respondent no.1 herein is the original complainant. The respondent Nos.2 to 7 herein are the other accused in the said case i.e. accused Nos.1 to 6. On the complaint of the respondent no.1 (hereinafter referred to as "the complainant" for the sake of convenience and clarity), the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class issued process against all the accused persons - including the petitioner - in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 406 IPC, 420 IPC, 467 IPC, 468 IPC, 469 IPC, 471 IPC read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Being aggrieved by t...
Vansada Agricultures Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Nashik Municipal Corpora ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
Oral Judgment: (G.S. Kulkarni, J.) 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Respondents waives service. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties and at their request taken up for final hearing. 2. By this Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners seek a Writ of mandamus against the respondents that the reservation of land for public purpose namely for "a high school and play ground" situated at Nashik is deemed to have lapsed and that the petitioners are entitled to develop the said property otherwise permissible in case of adjacent land under the development plan. Briefly the facts are: 3. It is the petitioner's case that they are owners of a plot of land bearing Survey No.42/1+2/2/5 (the 'said land') admeasuring 7652 sq.meters situated at Nashik. 4. The petitioners land earlier fell in the area of Nasik RoadDeolali Municipality and was reserved for a public the purpose of a primary school in the sanctioned development plan for Nashik Road Deolal...
Ravindra Dashrath More Vs. Rangrao Vitoba Pawar and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
1. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant states that all the respondents are served. Affidavit of service has been already filed in this court. Respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 are absent. 2. By consent of parties, matter is heard finally. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 27th July, 2007 passed by the MACT, Thane allowing part of the claim made by the appellant. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award dated 27th July, 2007 the appellant has filed this appeal in so far as refusal of the tribunal to award the amount as computed in paragraph (19) of the judgment is concerned. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this appeal are as under :- 3. On 29th December, 1998, the appellant was going towards Wada on M-80 vehicle of which he was a pillion rider. The vehicle was on Wada-Bhiwandi road. When the M-80 vehicle came near village Kudus, the motor lorry came in high and excessive speeds and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed behind t...
Ambaji Narsing Mali since deceased through LHs. and Others Vs. State o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-2014
Oral Judgment: (A.S. Chandurkar, J.) 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 12-7-2006 passed by respondent No.1 under Section 34 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). By aforesaid order the allotment of surplus land in favour of respondent No.6 has been maintained and the request made by the petitioners for undertaking a housing scheme under Section 20 of the said Act has been refused. By amending the petition on 7-2-2014, the petitioners have also challenged notice dated 25-11-1983 issued under Section 10(5) of the said Act in respect of the land in question and have further sought a declaration that all proceedings initiated under the said Act stand abated. 2. It would be necessary to refer to certain facts that have bearing on the adjudication of this writ petition. Survey No.241/3 Part admeasuring 3461.50 square meters and Survey No.241/4...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »