Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance no 2 act 2009 chapter iii direct taxes Sorted by: recent Court: mumbai aurangabad Page 14 of about 157 results (0.839 seconds)

Jul 25 2012 (HC)

Shiva Sahakari Up Jal Sinchan Sanstha Ltd. Vs. the Nanded District Cen ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... itself has gone to the stage of liquidation and some dispute arose about the repayment of loan. the respondent nos. 1 and 2 then filed dispute no. cc/156/2005 under section 91 of the maharashtra co-operative societies act, 1960, for recovery of the loan amount. in the said dispute, the bank has claimed that, the ..... act and indian stamp act, and came to the conclusion that, the act does not provide that, the promissory notes are required to be duly stamped ..... the proper stamp. it is submitted that, there is power under section 34 of the bombay stamp act to impound the document, however, the co-operative court has wrongly rejected the application of the original respondent nos. 1 and 2. it is submitted that, co-operative appellate court has rightly considered the provisions of bombay stamp .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 17 2012 (HC)

Santosh Govind Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... of the aforesaid states." apart from above, the provisions of section 189 of the bombay provincial municipal corporations act, 1949, cast duty upon the state and in particular, in the present case, respondent no.2, to supply potable water to the citizens of aurangabad. apart from this, there are other provisions in ..... problems are recurring with expansion and development of city and also because of increased population. it is further stated that instead of spending energy and finance for maintenance and repairing a new big project for water supply namely "samantar jalwahini" project is undertaken covering entire city taking into consideration the population ..... reply of the respondents, this court will think whether to initiate contempt proceedings or not against the respondents and in particular, respondent no.2. the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has assured this court that details in respect of "samantar jalwahini" will be placed on record. as already observed, further affidavit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 17 2012 (HC)

Santosh Govind Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... of the aforesaid states." apart from above, the provisions of section 189 of the bombay provincial municipal corporations act, 1949, cast duty upon the state and in particular, in the present case, respondent no.2, to supply potable water to the citizens of aurangabad. apart from this, there are other provisions in ..... problems are recurring with expansion and development of city and also because of increased population. it is further stated that instead of spending energy and finance for maintenance and repairing a new big project for water supply namely "samantar jalwahini" project is undertaken covering entire city taking into consideration the population ..... reply of the respondents, this court will think whether to initiate contempt proceedings or not against the respondents and in particular, respondent no.2. the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has assured this court that details in respect of "samantar jalwahini" will be placed on record. as already observed, further affidavit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2012 (HC)

Smt. Kausalyabai Kisan Chavan Vs. Sakharam Namdeo Gaikwad, Deceased, T ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... petitioner and accordingly, the matter is taken up for final hearing. therefore, whatever consequences would follow under relevant rules for non-compliance of not serving respondent no.2, because the writ petitioner did not furnish copies of the writ petition to send the notices, will have to be suffered by the petitioner. the court of ..... or maintenance of their families. therefore, i find considerable substance in the arguments of the learned senior counsel appearing for respondent nos.3(a) to 3(h) that, section 2 (11) of the said act defines that person includes a joint family. 17 though, the learned senior counsel submitted that, the lease was for sugarcane under ..... section 43a and the provisions of various sections of the said act, would not apply, needs no consideration in view of the fact that, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2012 (HC)

Smt. Kausalyabai Kisan Chavan Vs. Sakharam Namdeo Gaikwad, Deceased, T ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... the petitioner and accordingly, the matter is taken up for final hearing. therefore, whatever consequences would follow under relevant rules for non-compliance of not serving respondent no.2, because the writ petitioner did not furnish copies of the writ petition to send the notices, will have to be suffered by the petitioner. the court of ..... or maintenance of their families . therefore, i find considerable substance in the arguments of the learned senior counsel appearing for respondent nos.3(a) to 3(h) that, section 2 (11) of the said act defines that person includes a joint family. 17 though, the learned senior counsel submitted that, the lease was for sugarcane under ..... section 43a and the provisions of various sections of the said act, would not apply, needs no consideration in view of the fact that, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 2012 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax And#8211; I Vs. Shri Ganesh Sahakari Sa ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... the authorities below. these questions are required to be examined because, in these case, we are not only concerned with the applicability of section 40-a(2) of the act but we are primarily required to consider whether the said differential payment constitutes an expense or distribution of profits? we will also like to note the reasons ..... that both the parties are given liberty to amend their pleadings before the commissioner of income tax (appeals) takes up the matter for final hearing. we express no opinion on the merits of the case. the parties are at liberty to argue their respective points uninfluenced by any observations made in the impugned judgments on the ..... dhorde, have assisted the court on behalf of respective assessees. they have not disputed the earlier orders passed by this court. none appears for the respondents in tax appeal nos. 65/2008 and 84/2008, though duly served. 4. the division bench judgment of this court reported at 2007 (11) ljs (urc) 73 commissioner of income- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 2012 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax – I Vs. Shri Ganesh Sahakari Sakha ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... the authorities below. these questions are required to be examined because, in these case, we are not only concerned with the applicability of section 40-a(2) of the act but we are primarily required to consider whether the said differential payment constitutes an expense or distribution of profits? we will also like to note the reasons ..... that both the parties are given liberty to amend their pleadings before the commissioner of income tax (appeals) takes up the matter for final hearing. we express no opinion on the merits of the case. the parties are at liberty to argue their respective points uninfluenced by any observations made in the impugned judgments on the ..... dhorde, have assisted the court on behalf of respective assessees. they have not disputed the earlier orders passed by this court. none appears for the respondents in tax appeal nos. 65/2008 and 84/2008, though duly served. 4. the division bench judgment of this court reported at 2007 (11) ljs (urc) 73 commissioner of income-tax .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 2012 (HC)

Rajkumar Harwani Vs. Sagar S/O. Mohandas Tolwani and Another

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... /2010 by 7th judicial magistrate, first class, aurangabad. in a private complaint filed by respondent no. 1 for the offence punishable under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, the order under challenge is made. both the sides are heard. 2. the order is challenged only on one ground viz. non compliance of the provision of section 202 (1) ..... r. 2000 s.c. 637) is also referred. 6. in the case reported as 2010 all mr (cri) 3168 [shri. bansilal s. kabra vs. global trade finance ltd. and anr.] another bench of this court has expressed exactly contrary view in the decision dated 9.7.2010. this bench has referred both the cases of the hon ..... persons like chairman and directors of the company was involved and information was not sought in respect of these persons as required under section 141 of negotiable instruments act. in view of these circumstances, some observations were made by one bench of this court regarding the aforesaid practice. when the necessary information in respect of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 09 2011 (HC)

Shaikh Kalam S/O Shaikh Nabi Vs. the State of MaharashtrA.

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... legal. 38. we, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 25.10.2010, recorded by the additional sessions judge-2, jalna, in sessions case no. 143 of 2009. 39. the appellant-accused, mr. shaikh kalam shaikh nabi, stands acquitted. he be set at liberty forthwith, unless required to be detained in ..... be proved by the evidence of chandkhan pathan (pw-3) and syed asif syed mohammad (pw-11). it may be recalled that chandkhan pathan (pw-3) had also acted as a panch witness in respect of the spot panchanama (exhibit-20), that was drawn on 04.06.2009. without commenting on the selection of the same person as ..... go deeper into this evidence, for judging its reliability and value. 19. the contention advanced by mr. satej jadhav, the learned advocate for the accused that there is no evidence to show that the said tommy was the weapon, with which the deceased was assaulted, deserves serious consideration. it was emphasised before us that the injury that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2011 (HC)

Ms. Vilas Transport Co. Vs. the Divisional Joint Registrar.

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... dated 25th june 2010 and 7th june 2011 annexures n and s to the petition, which orders have been made on an application bearing no.2 of 2010. 2] the petitioners are a partnership firm carrying on business as transporters and carriers. the first respondent is a cooperative bank registered under the maharashtra cooperative societies ..... marking the recovery certificate nos.101/sangli/1588 of 2002 and no.101/sangli/1589 of 2002 both dated 13th september 2002 as satisfied and for refund of excess amount to the extent ..... act, 1960 whereas the second and third respondents are the special recovery officer and sales officer, so also the divisional joint registrar, cooperative societies who have passed the orders impugned in this petition. 3] it is the case of the petitioners that they have filed an application bearing no.2 of 2010 for .....

Tag this Judgment!


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