Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-18-1973
Reported in : [1974]97ITR334(Bom)
Tulzapurkar, J.1. In this reference as many as 10 questions have been referred to this court for its opinion, some at the instance of the assessee and some at the instance of the department and the basic or primary facts out of which these several questions arise may be stated thus : There is a public limited company called the Amalgamated Electricity Co. Ltd., which carries on the business of supplying electrical energy, originally to Bulsar, Bhiwandi and Belgaum. On 1st April, l951, it took over two other electric supply companies known as Ajmer Electric Supply Co. Ltd. and Jalgaon Electric Supply Co. Ltd. under separate amalgamation agreements sanctioned by this court by two orders dated 20th July, 1951. Copies of the orders sanctioning the amalgamation together with agreements of amalgamation in the case of each have been annexed as annexure 'A' to the statement of the case. The Amalgamated Electricity Co. Ltd. also purchased the undertakings with all the assets minus certain asset...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-21-1973
Reported in : [1974]96ITR50(Bom)
Desai, J. 1. This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'C', under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The reference arises out of the assessment proceedings under the Indian Income-tax Act for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59, the relevant account years being Samvat years 2012 and 2013. Necessary facts material for the purpose of this reference are as follows : The assessee is one Gordhandas K. Vora who is the only son of one Kishandas Vora and a grandson of one Sir Manmohandas Ramji, sir Manmohandas had three sons, Kishandas, Narandas and Bhagwandas. During his lifetime Manmohandas gifted to his son, Kishandas, shares of several companies. Kishandas died intestate in 1930 and on his death his son Gordhandas inherited those shares; they became ancestral property in his hands. A son was born to Gordhandas in 1953. It is the agreed position that the property that Gordhandas inherited in this manner from his father, Kishandas, was ancestr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-12-1973
Reported in : [1974]94ITR519(Bom)
Vimadalal, J.1. This is a petition under article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash and set aside an order of rectification of a wealth-tax assessment passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax (respondent No. 1) on the 22nd of February, 1972, pursuant to the amendment effected in section 5(1)(viii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1971 (Act No. 32 of 1971) as well as for a writ in the nature of prohibition and/or mandamus restraining the respondents from taking any further steps or proceedings for recovery of the tax on jewellery and ornaments in enforcement of the said rectification order dated 22nd February, 1972. 2. The petitioner is a lady who was assessed by the Wealth-tax Officer for the assessment year 1969-70 to Wealth-tax on the total wealth of Rs. 6,07,690, including jewellery and ornaments of the value of Rs. 4,15,942 by the assessment order dated 11th F...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-05-1973
Reported in : [1975]98ITR287(Bom)
Vimadalal, J.1. The facts giving rise to this reference are quite simple. The assessment year in question is 1960-61, and the corresponding valuation date within the terms of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, is the 31st of March, 1960. The assessee by a trust deed dated the 23rd of March, 1960, transferred 500 shares of the Surat Cotton Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd. to trustees upon the trusts set out therein. The first recital to the trust deed stated that the settlor was desirous of setting the shares in question for the benefit of his daughter, Maithili, and her issue and in certain events for the benefit of his other children and their issue in the manner and subject to what was provided in the said deed. The material portion of the operative part of the said document provided that the trust property was to be held upon the following trusts : 'A. Until the end of calendar year 1963 to accumulate the whole residue of such income of the trust fund and invest the same and the resulting incom...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-04-1973
Reported in : [1977]107ITR760(Bom)
Vimadalal, J. 1. The facts giving rise to this reference, which relates to assessment years 1947-48 and 1950-51, are that for these assessment years, original assessments were made on the assessee-company (now in liquidation) on February 20, 1950, and February 29, 1952, respectively. In those assessments, the Income-tax Officer allowed the claim of the assessee to deduct interest payable to M/s. Vussonjee Munjee & Co. Pvt. Ltd., who were formerly the managing agents of the said company. Subsequently, in the assessment for the year 1951-52, however, the Tribunal held that the claim for deduction of interest payable by the assessee-company to the said M/s. Vussonjee Munjee & Co. Pvt. Ltd., was not a permissible deduction in computing the assessee-company's business profit under section 10. 2. In the meantime, in respect of some other items, the Income-tax Officer was satisfied that there was sufficient justification for reopening the assessment for the assessment years 1947-48 and 1950-5...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-30-1973
Reported in : (1974)76BOMLR475
Naik, J.1. This appeal and companion appeals raise an important question about the scope and interpretation of Section 8(2) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950--which shall be hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. It arises in this way:--In the vicinity of the famous Mumbadevi temple at Bombay there are temples of Shree Ganapati, Murlidhar and Indrayani. It appears that on some representations being made to the Charity Commissioner, in the matter of these three temples, the managers or trustees of these temples were called upon to apply &r; registration under Section 18 of the Act. They having declined to do so and contended that the temples in question are their private properties, the Assistant Charity Commissioner instituted suo motu enquiry in respect of these three temples. In the course of the enquiry, he sent notices to the managers of the three temples and also to the trustees of the Mumbadevi temple. But the trustees of tie Mumbadevi temple, however, informed the Assistant C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-17-1973
Reported in : [1974]97ITR361(Bom)
Vimadalal, J. 1. The facts giving rise to this reference are that there was a firm of the name of Ramdas Khimji & Co. doing cotton mukadami business for a Japanese firm called Gosho Kabushiki Kaisha Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Japanese firm') which was in existence in 1921 and the income from which had been charged to income-tax under the Indian Income-tax Act of 1918. It was first charged to super-tax in 1920-21. The constitution of that firm was changed from time to time and some of the partnership deeds relating to the name are on record. On 11th December, 1933, Ramdas Khimji & Co. ceased to act as mukadams for the Japanese firm, and from that date a firm which bore the name of Ramdas Khimji Bros. was appointed as mukadmi and broker to the Japanese firm. The constitution of the firm of Ramdas Khimji Bros. changed from 1st September, 1935, and it thereafter consisted of two partners, viz., Ramdas Khimji and Gopaldas Khimji, and a partnership deed was executed on 26th March,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-15-1973
Reported in : 1974CriLJ995; 1974MhLJ173
ORDERChandurkar, J.1. These two applications arise out of Session Trial No. 14 of 1973 in which 44 accused persons from village Erangaon in Tahsil Saoner. District Nag-pur are being tried on the allegations that they committed the murder of one Ramdas on 11-8-1972. Dr. Arun Ganesh Phansalkar, applicant in Criminal Application No. 257, who is an Assistant Surgeon at the Health Unit Hospital Saoner, is alleged to have carried out the post-mortem examination of the dead body of deceased Ramdas at Saoner. Head Constable Mohboobkhan son of Mohammad Khan, applicant in Criminal Application No. 261 of 1973, is alleged to have made the inquest panchanama and the spot panchanama when the dead body of the deceased was taken out from a well. The prosecution at the trial examined several witnesses. Both the applicants were cited as witnesses but were not examined by the prosecution, because, according to them, the two witnesses were hostile to the prosecution Therefore, after evidence of all the wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-06-1973
Reported in : (1973)IILLJ558Bom; 1974MhLJ83
Kantawala, C.J.1. Damodar Shantaram, Nadkarni, the petitioner, has filed this appeal against the judgment and order of Vimadalal, J., dated July 3, 1969, whereby he dismissed the petition that was filed by the petitioner. At the material time the petitioner was employed as a tutor in Chemical Pathology in the Department of Pathology and Bacteriology of the Topiwala National Medical College and he worked in that capacity until he was dismissed from service in October, 1964. In the month of July, 1963 certain irregularities were suspected in the affairs of the Stores Department of the Pathology Department and investigation was started and, in the course of the investigation, certain statements were recorded including that of the petitioner. After completion of the preliminary enquiry on December 28, 1963, G. W. Shiveshwarkar, Officer on Special Duty, was appointed as Enquiry Officer to hold a departmental enquiry. On January 4, 1964, the petitioner was suspended. On or after February 4, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-06-1973
Reported in : AIR1975Bom88; (1974)76BOMLR304
Nathwani, J.1. This is a letters patent appeal by the original petitioner-husband against the decree of Mr. Justice Gatne in appeal confirming the decree of the City Civil Court. Bombay, dismissing his petition for divorce and raises a point of importance and interest arising out of judicial separation, namely, whether desertion by a spouse on which ground a decree for judicial separation was passed in favour of the original petitioner spouse under Section 10(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act. 1955 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) continues unless the original respondent spouse makes efforts to resume cohabitation and constitutes a wrong which would disentitle the spouse so failing to get the relief of divorce on ground of non-resumption of cohabitation, and involves construction of Sections 10(2), 13(1A), 23(1)(a) of the Act.2. The facts are not in dispute. The appellant is the husband and was married to the respondent wife according to Hindu FDIC rites on Dec. 16, 1956 at Bombay. ...
Tag this Judgment!