Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 1968 section 28 amendment of section 280zb Court: mumbai Year: 1996 Page 1 of about 16 results (0.190 seconds)

Dec 09 1996 (TRI)

Rendezvous Estates (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-09-1996

Reported in : (1997)61ITD268(Mum.)

..... rules of schedule iii, on the basis of an estimate which the assessing officer considers it would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation date. under section 40 of the finance act, 1983 also, the assessing officer has to adopt the value of property which, in his opinion, it would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation ..... not in respect of the vacant land is not open for our consideration. the question before us is as to whether under rule 20 to schedule iii or under section 40 of the finance act, 1983 the valuation adopted by the assessing officer is reasonable and in accordance with law. as has been rightly held by the cwt(a), the assessing officer ..... price of the land which it would fetch in his opinion on the valuation date, as provided under rule 20 to scheduled iii. making a reference to section 40(3)(v) of the finance act, 1983 and rule 20 of schedule iii, the cwt(a) held that the method adopted by the assessing officer for determination of the market value of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1996 (HC)

Assistant Commissioner Wealth Tax Vs. Sultan Brothers (P) Ltd. (Also S ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-03-1996

Reported in : (1997)58TTJ(Mumbai)562

..... 1991 are by the assessee, wherein the assessee has taken five grounds of appeal in which the assessee has disputed the applicability of provisions of s. 40 of the finance act, 1983 itself.2. we have heard the learned departmental representative as well as assessees counsel. the facts of the case are that the assessee owned a building commonly ..... assessees holding company for hotel business; is deemed to have been used by the assessee for business purpose and therefore, was outside the scope of s. 40 of the finance act, 1983. at the time of hearing, the assessees counsel submitted that in case the revenues appeals fail then he would not like to press these appeals, otherwise, ..... for hotel business was deemed to have been used by the company for its business and consequently the same was outside the purview of the s. 40 of the finance act, 1983.11. as we have dismissed the revenues appeals for both these years, we do not consider it necessary to decide this issue and consequently, the appeals .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 1996 (TRI)

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Johnson and Johnson Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-20-1996

Reported in : (1996)(88)ELT274Tri(Mum.)bai

..... under the said notification, and amongst others they are (i) the duty of excise under the central excises and salt act, 1944, (ii) the special duty of excise under the finance act, and (iii) the additional duty under section 3 of the customs tariff act, 1975 and after due listing them, it is mentioned that "hereinafter referred to as specified duty".7. it thus appears ..... to rs. 800/- per m.t. only so far as it related to duty under central excises and salt act, 1944 and special duty of excise under finance act, 1988, but did not include additional duty of customs imposed under section 3 of the customs tariff act, 1975, and so far as such additional duty of customs was concerned, they were eligible to avail of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1996 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner Wealth Vs. Sultan Brothers (P) Ltd. (Also

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-03-1996

..... 1991 are by the assessee, wherein the assessee has taken five grounds of appeal in which the assessee has disputed the applicability of provisions of s. 40 of the finance act, 1983 itself.2. we have heard the learned departmental representative as well as assessee's counsel. the facts of the case are that the assessee owned a building commonly ..... 's holding company for hotel business; is deemed to have been used by the assessee for business purpose and therefore, was outside the scope of s. 40 of the finance act, 1983. at the time of hearing, the assessee's counsel submitted that in case the revenue's appeals fail then he would not like to press these appeals, otherwise ..... for hotel business was deemed to have been used by the company for its business and consequently the same was outside the purview of the s. 40 of the finance act, 1983.11. as we have dismissed the revenue's appeals for both these years, we do not consider it necessary to decide this issue and consequently, the appeals .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 06 1996 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. MexIn Medicaments (P.) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-06-1996

Reported in : (1997)61ITD209(Mum.)

..... of flats given on rent to m/s. ipca laboratories p. ltd. from the total wealth of the assessee, holding that it is not a specified asset under section 40(3) of the finance act, 1983." 2. the assessee-company owns certain flats which were let out to a sister concern, m/s. ipca laboratories p. ltd. the value of these ..... flats was not disclosed in the return of wealth on the ground that the assets have to be excluded from the category of specified assets as defined in section 40(3)(vi) of the finance act, 1983, which revived wealth-tax on closely held companies with effect from 1-4-1984. the relevant provision reads as under :- "40(3). the ..... assets referred to in sub-section (2) shall be the following, namely :- (vi) building or land appurtenant thereto, other than building or part thereof used by the assessee as factory, godown .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1996 (HC)

Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank Limited and anr. Vs. the State of ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-19-1996

Reported in : 1997(3)BomCR4

..... area of activities extended would not be bound by such a declaration and that, moreover, the provisions of the bk. reg. act, especially section 18 read with section 56(j), and section 24 read with section 56(q)(2)(c), specifically refer to 'state co-operative bank of the state concerned'. thus according to him, the combined ..... with definitions and it starts with 'in this act, unless the context otherwise requires.....' and then sub-section (u) states that the state co-operative bank means the principal co-operative society in the state the primary object of which is financing all other co-operative societies in the state. the proviso however provides that ..... the said act, unless the context otherwise requires, certain words would have the meanings given to them under the said section.sub-section (d) defines 'central co-operative bank' as follows :'central co-operative bank' means the principal co-operative society in a district in a state, the primary object of which is the financing of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1996 (HC)

Dr. Deepak Muchala Vs. Income Tax Officer.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-26-1996

Reported in : (1997)58TTJ(Mumbai)524

..... year. in such a case, the genuineness of the loans is never in question.5. the provisions of s. 271d have been introduced by the finance act, 1984. in the budget speech, the honble finance minister made the following reference :'with the reduction in rates and expeditious disposal of assessments, i believe there can now be no excuse for any ..... the assessee took bona fide loans for the purpose of payment of instalments for the flat and for the business, it will not be justified to apply the above section. as pointed out earlier, there is no doubt about the genuineness of the loans and the ao has fully accepted these loans in the assessment made for the ..... to make payments for various purchases of instruments for the clinic. since the loans were genuinely taken, it was submitted that no penalty should be imposed under the above section. the ao rejected the claim and imposed penalty of rs. 83,000. on appeal, the assessee reiterated the same explanations as given before the ao. the learned cit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 1996 (HC)

Radhika Lining Limited Vs. Economic Development Corporation

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-24-1996

Reported in : 1997(3)ALLMR308; 1998(2)BomCR190; (1996)98BOMLR891

..... in time. in this respect, it has been held by punjab and haryana high court in industrial finance corporation of india and another v. m/s. sehgal papers ltd., and others, as under :-'in a proceeding under section 30 of the i.f.c. act initiated by the corporation for the recovery of the loan it is not open to the respondent-industrial ..... by the state government which has for its object the financing of industrial concerns;now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 46 of the state financial corporations act, 1951 (63 of 1951), the central government hereby directs that the provisions of sections 29, 30 and 31 of the said act shall apply to the economic development corporation of goa .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 1996 (HC)

Deepesh Mahesh Zaveri Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-24-1996

Reported in : 1996CriLJ4112

..... ) on 2nd january, 1996 and on the same day, the said secretary submitted the proposal to the finance minister, who approved it immediately on the following day viz. 3rd january, 1996 as required under section 8(f) of the cofeposa act. mr. agrawal for respondents no. 3 and 4 has made available to us the xerox copies of the ..... to the government of india, ministry of finance, department of revenue, in exercise of his powers under section 3(1) of the conservation of foreign exchange and prevention of smuggling activities act, 1974 (for short, cofeposa act). under the said order, mahesh kantilal zaveri has been detained under section 3(1) of the cofeposa act with a view to preventing him in ..... notings in the file, which showed the movement of the file date-wise, including the approval of the then finance minister shri manmohan singh on 3-1- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1996 (TRI)

Dr. Deepak Muchala Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-26-1996

..... year. in such a case, the genuineness of the loans is never in question.5. the provisions of s. 271d have been introduced by the finance act, 1984. in the budget speech, the hon'ble finance minister made the following reference : "with the reduction in rates and expeditious disposal of assessments, i believe there can now be no excuse for any ..... the assessee took bona fide loans for the purpose of payment of instalments for the flat and for the business, it will not be justified to apply the above section. as pointed out earlier, there is no doubt about the genuineness of the loans and the ao has fully accepted these loans in the assessment made for the ..... to make payments for various purchases of instruments for the clinic. since the loans were genuinely taken, it was submitted that no penalty should be imposed under the above section. the ao rejected the claim and imposed penalty of rs. 83,000.on appeal, the assessee reiterated the same explanations as given before the ao. the learned cit( .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //