Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-05-1984
Reported in : [1986]17ITD263(Mum)
ORDER1. This appeal has been filed by the department against the order dated 24-5-1983 of the AAC relating to the assessment year 1980-81, the previous year which ended on 31-3-1980.2. The assessee is a trust assessed through its trustees in the status of an AOP. The income of the assessee is assessable under section 164(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and that is why the status has been taken by the ITO as an AOP.3. The assessee claimed before the ITO that it should be allowed relief under section 80L of the Act because it came under section 80L (1) (c). The ITO did not allow the relief on the ground that the AOP stated under section 80L (1) (c) refers only to an AOP of Dadra, Nagar Haveli, Goa, Daman and Diu only. As the assessee apparently did not belong to those territories, the ITO declined to give relief under section 80L to the assessee.4. The assessee appealed to the AAC and contended that its status should have been individual because the word individual is wide enoug...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-09-1984
Reported in : [1984]8ITD806(Mum)
ORDERPer Shri K. S. Viswanathan, Accountant Member - We find it convenient to dispose of this batch of 14 appeals together. Both the assessee and the department have come on appeal against the consolidated order of the AAC in respect of the assessments for the years 1961-62 to 1967-68.2. The assessments have been made in respect of the assets of a trust. The settlor of the trust was the late V. S. Apte. He made a declaration on trust on 15-5-1945 settling certain land and building in trust for the benefit of his grandsons Madhav and Arvind for their life. The settlor himself was a trustee. He reserved for himself absolute discretion of the amount payable to the beneficiaries. Nothing was stated in the trust deed as to know the corpus of the trust was to be divided later. Madhav and Arvind, the grandsons, were only entitled to the income. In 1949, a declaration was made that the beneficiaries would be entitled to equal shares in the income. In this declaration also, nothing was stated a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-11-1984
Reported in : 1984(2)BomCR137
V.V. Vaze, J.1. A wooden partition with an upper-half of glass would be the least expected fixture in small shack looking like a godown. Gala No. 9 on the ground floor of Tardeo Mansion, Tulsiwadi Road, Tardeo was no doubt a godown but its original tenant P.W. 6 Kulwantsingh Chopra alias Mohan Punjabi ('Minoo') had let out the same to P.W. 14 Minoo Meherjibhow Mistry ('Minoo'). As this Gala had no electricity, Minoo approached a neighbour for supplying electrical connection. P.W. 15 Pandurang Raigude ('Pandurang'), the friendly neighbour obliged on payment of Rs. 25/- per month and gave a temporary connection. The modus operandi of the makeshift arrangement was that everyday Pandurang would carry a connecting wire from his power supply up to the rear side of Gala No. 9, provide light from 6.30 P.M. 10.00 P.M. or sometimes till midnight, and then disconnect and coil back the wire every night after use.2. The elaborate lighting arrangements for the shack were necessitated by the fact tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-12-1984
Reported in : AIR1984Bom357; 1984MhLJ356
1. The facts leading to this petition have been set cut in great details and with sufficient accuracy in the judgments of the two Courts below and hence it is not necessary for me to narrate the same. However, for the disposal of this petition a brief restatement of the facts is warranted.2. The suit premises in so far as the petition is concerned, consist of the first floor of a building bearing No. 10-A and situate on Shankarsheth Road, Bombay 400 007. Original respondents 1 and 2 were, according to the petitioners, the legal representatives of the original licensee.3. The petitioners filed a suit being L.E. Suit No. 145/407 of 1976 in the Small Cause Court at Bombay against respondents 1 and 2 under Section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882, as amended by Maharashtra Act No. 19 of 1976. Prior to this amendment, Section 41 of the Act provided for proceedings which could be initiated by a licenser against a licensee through an application. After the amendment, in effec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-12-1984
Reported in : (1984)86BOMLR356
D.B. Deshpande, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, filed by the petitioner challenging the concurrent orders of the courts below and it arises out of the following facts;2. 58th Akhil Bhartiya Marathi Sahitya Sammelan is to be held at Jalagaon. For holding this Sahitya Sammelan, a President has got to be elected and the present dispute relates to the election of the President for this Sahitya Sammelan. It is an undisputed fact that till recently the petitioner was the President of the Marathi Sahitya Mahamandal. Now before turning to the merits, it will be necessary to state about the Marathi Sahitya Mahamandal and also about its constituents.3. It may be stated at the outset that the Marathi Sahitya Mahamandal has its own constitution, bye-laws and rules regarding Marathi Sahitya Mahamandal. It is further not disputed that there were some amendments in all these constitution, bye-laws etc.; and the amended constitution, bye-laws etc. came in force ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-14-1984
Reported in : (1984)86BOMLR681
Ginwala, J.1. The petitioner, by this writ petition, assails his exclusion from consideration by the departmental promotion committee for promotion to the post of Aerodrome Officer in September 1976 and February 1978, when, according to him, he had become eligible for promotion to the said post. 2. In order to understand the grievance of the petitioner, we may take a brief survey of the hierarchy of posts in Civil Aviation Department. Upto 1968, Aerodrome Operators (Grade I) and Aerodrome Operators Grade I (Selection Grade) used to be promoted as Assistant Aerodrome Officers as there was no intermediate step. In July 1968, 48 posts of Aerodrome Assistants were created by abolition of 41 temporary posts of Aerodrome Officers Grade I (Selection Grade). Pending finalisation of the recruitment rules, it was proposed that 75 per cent posts of Aerodrome Assistants would be filled by promotion from the cadre of Aerodrome Operators Grade I (Selection Grade) on the basis of seniority-cum-fitnes...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-19-1984
Reported in : 1985(1)BomCR495
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. This petition impugns an order dated 29th June, 1980 of dismissal from service.The petitioner was absorbed as an income tax Officer, Class II in the service of the Union of India, the 1st respondent. In April 1961 he was promoted to Class 1. In May 1972 he was promoted to the post of Assistant Commissioner of income tax.On 6th May, 1975 a raid was made at the residence of the petitioner by the C.B.I. A search was conducted and several account books, bank pass books and the key of the safe deposit locker standing in the name of the petitioner and his wife in premises of the United Bank of India, Peddar Road Branch Bombay were seized. On 14th May, 1975 the safe deposit locker was opened and the amount of Rs. 1,14,690/- lying therein was seized by the C.B.I. On 16th June, 1975 the petitioner wrote to the Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay, informing him of the raid and the seizure and gave details of the ownership of the amount found therein. On 2nd July, 1976 the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-20-1984
Reported in : 1984(1)BomCR449; 1985MhLJ243
H.H. Kantharia, J.1. The State of Maharashtra by this criminal revision application challenges an order dated September 27, 1982 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 32nd Court, Esplanade, Bombay in Case No. 37/w of 1981, discharging respondents Nos. 1 and 2 under section 245 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code').2. The facts giving rise to this revision application are that the officers of the Enforcement Directorate, Bombay, on certain information, took house search of room No. 32, 2nd floor, Phataka Manzil, Bhendi Bazar, Bombay- 400003 on April 30, 1975. Shaikh Sayyed Ahmad Haji Basir Ahmed (P.W. 3) and his wife Shanaz Fatima Sayyed (P.W. 2) resided in the said room. During the search officers recovered U.S.A. Dollars 16, 400. Australian dollars 7,000 and Canadian dollars 6,100 in the form of currency notes equivalent to about rupees two lakhs from a steel cup-board. At that time statement of Shanaz Fatima was recorde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-20-1984
Reported in : 1984(1)BomCR561
S.N. Khatri, J.1. This Revision Petition by the original accused No. 1 challenges the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 45th Court, Kurla (Shri P.V. Tekade), convicting him for offences punishable under sections 341 and 448 read with section 114, I.P.C. and sentencing him to 7 days' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default 7 days' R.I.2. The material facts are these : The present petitioner along with two others was prosecuted under sections 341 and 448 read with section 114, I.P.C. upon a private complaint filed by the present respondent No. 2 in November, 1979. The matter was originally before another Magistrate, Shri C.T. Patil. On 17th August, 1981, the petitioner was present in Court in person. The other two accused Rajan and Pradip were represented by their Advocate, Miss Mhatre. She represented the petitioner also. The record shows that on 17th August, 1981, the petitioner pleaded guilty (recorded in the proceedings as 'P.G.'). The other two, through their Advocate p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-23-1984
Reported in : 1984(1)BomCR453
1. This is a jail appeal preferred by the appellant-accused No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'appellant') challenging the judgment and order dated 22-1-1982 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 438 of 1980 convicting and sentencing him for an offence of rape punishable under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'Penal Code') to rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 3 1/2 years.2. The appellant was charged along with three others for committing various offences. The allegations were that he and one more, on or about 30-5-1980 at about 11.00 a.m. at B.D.D. Chawl No. 8, N. M. Joshi Marg, Bombay, kidnapped Kum. Alka Vasudeo Rana, a minor girl under 18 years of age, from lawful guardianship of her mother Smt. Pramila Vasudeo Rana, an offence punishable under Section 363 r/w. Section 34 of the Penal Code, and two other ac...
Tag this Judgment!