Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-03-1997
Reported in : AIR1998Bom157; 1998(2)ALLMR207; 1998(1)BomCR214
ORDERM.B. Shah, C.J.1. These appeals are filed against the judgment and order dated 5th/6th December, 1996 passed by the learned Single Judge, directing the appellants to grant Certificates of Service as provided under section 80(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), to the respondents, who have attained the rank of Lieutenant in the Executive Branch of the Indian Navy prior to 14th August, 1986. Section 80 of the Act was deleted from 14th August, 1986. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 490 of 1997 and Writ Petition No. 924 of 1997 have prayed for grant of similar Certificate of Service.2. These appeals and writ petitions involve common questions of law and facts. Contentions raised and submissions made in all these matters are identical. Hence, all these matters are disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, we would refer to the facts stated in Appeal No. 149 of 1997.3. The learned Additional Solicitor-General appearin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Decided on : Mar-21-1997
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. In the instant writ application the petitioners have challenged Rule 6 of the Bihar Stamp (Prevention of Under-valuation of Instruments) Rules, 1995 as ultravires the provisions of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and also ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India. A further prayer has been made by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 5-10-1996 issued by the District Sub-Registrar, Jamshedpur whereby the petitioner was directed to pay stamp fee amounting to Rs. 1,86,538/- and Registration fee Rs. 46,734/- in respect of the sale deed executed on 22-6-1993 in favour of the petitioners. 2. The brief facts of the case which gave rise to filing of this writ application are as follows: One M/s. Mithila Motors (Pvt.) Ltd. through its Director, Dinesh B. Parikh had purchased a building being Holding No. 20 at Contractor's Area, Bistupur, Jamshedpur by sale deed dated 23-3-1975 for a consideration of Rs. 90,000/-. It is submitted that M/s. Mithila Motors (Pvt.) Ltd. go...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Decided on : Sep-26-1997
V. K. SINHA, A.M. : June, 1995This is an appeal filed by the Department against an order of the CIT(A) cancelling a penalty of Rs. 1,25,053 imposed under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income.2. The assessee-company was running a cold storage and also had a small plant for manufacture of ice. The assessee disclosed a net loss for the current year as per P&L a/c of Rs. 7,92,517, which was shown in the return of income also. During the assessment proceedings, certain additions were made on account of which the net loss for the year was reduced to Rs. 5,88,220 as per assessment order. We are concerned in this appeal with the following additions which were later taken into account for imposition of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) :Excess receipts estimated 71,092 Expenses relating to earlier year 1,06,837 Income from Ice estimated 5,000 1,82,929 3. The accounts of the assessee were audited. Total receipts from cold storage were shown at Rs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Decided on : Sep-26-1997
Reported in : (1998)64ITD129(Pat.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the Department against an order of the CIT(A) cancelling a penalty of Rs. 1,25,053 imposed under s. 271(1) (c) of the Act for concealment of income.2. The assessee-company was running a cold storage and also had a small plant for manufacture of ice. The assessee disclosed a net loss for the current year as per P&L a/c of Rs. 7,92,517, which was shown in the return of income also. During the assessment proceedings, certain additions were made on account of which the net loss for the year was reduced to Rs. 5,88,220 as per assessment order. We are concerned in this appeal with the following additions which were later taken into account for imposition of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) :Excess receipts estimated 71,092Expenses relating to earlier year 1,06,837Income from Ice estimated 5,000 ------------- 3. The accounts of the assessee were audited. Total receipts from cold storage were shown at Rs. 85,788, which was a steep decline compared to receipts of Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-27-1997
Reported in : AIR1997SC2523; [1997]226ITR625(SC); JT1997(5)SC529; 1997(4)SCALE271; (1997)5SCC482; [1997]Supp1SCR394
ORDERK. Venkataswami. J.1. In all these cases the scope of Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the 'Act') arises for consideration.2. Brief facts are necessary to appreciate the question that arises for our consideration.3. The respondent in Tax Reference Case Nos. 9-10/86 is a company and an assessee under the Act (hereinafter called the 'assessee'). It owns four flats bearing Nos. 231, 232, 241 and 242 in a building call as 'Silver Arch' on Nepeansea Road, Bombay. The builders of the said building are M/s. Malabar Industries Pvt. Ltd. Out of the four aforesaid flats, two were directly purchased by the respondent-company from the builders and the other two were purchased by its sister concern and subsequently by the assessee. The possession of the flats was taken after payment of consideration in full some time in August, 1973. It is common ground that all these flats have been let out to various persons. The rental income from these flats was included in the Re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Oct-24-1997
Reported in : AIR1998Ori68; 85(1998)CLT120
ORDERR.K. Dash, J. 1. Defendant No. 1 in Title Suit No. 62 of 1990 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division). Nayagarh, has preferred this revision under S. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, 'CPC') challenging the order dated 18-8-1995 whereby the plaintiff's prayer for amendment of pleading under Order 6, Rule 17, CPC has been allowed. M/s. Shriram Saw Mills (hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff) is a registered partnership firm of which Sila Rajeswar Rao is the Managing Partner. It has filed the aforesaid suit against the petitioner as well as Government of Orissa and its functionaries (hereinafter referred to as 'defendant's) for a decree for specific performance of contract and other ancillary reliefs. 2. Plaintiffs case, in brief, is this : Defendant No. 1 is the owner of the suit land measuring Ac. 20.53 dec., more specifically described in the schedule of the plaint over which there has been a forest growth. In order to have rubber plantations on the suit la...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-29-1997
Reported in : ILR1997KAR2956
S. Rajendra Babu, J.1. In the year 1991 the Government of India decided to liberalise the policy for the development of power Sector in India. Electricity (Supply) Act. 1948 was amended by the Electricity Laws (Amendment) Act of 1991 to enable private parties to establish, operate and maintain generating stations. A scheme was formulated by Government of India on 22nd October, 1991 to encourage the private enterprises to take part in power generation, supply and distribution which was published in the Gazette of India, The said scheme provided that the Generating company can enter into a contract for the sale of electricity generated by it with the State Electricity Board in any State where it owns/operates generating station/stations or in any other State it is carrying on its activities or with any ether person with the consent of the competent Government concerned. The procedure for fixing the tariff for the sale of electricity was also provided in the scheme. Government of India co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-04-1997
Reported in : AIR1998Bom107; 1997(4)ALLMR698; 1997(3)BomCR178
S.S. Nijjar, J. 1. The plaintiff has filed this suit for a declaration that the defendant is a trespasser in respect of the suit flat and has no right, title or interest therein or to continue to use the same. He further prayed that, the defendant be ordered to forthwith quit and vacate the suit flat, remove his belonging lying there, and 16 hand over the same to the plaintiff. A claim for recovery of Rs. 7 lakhs as mesne profits is also made. It is further prayed that the defendant be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- per month from February, 1995 onwards as mesne profits till the date the vacant possession is handed over to the plaintiff. Appointment of Receiver of the suit flat is prayed for as an interim in measure. A prayer for injunction is also made.2. This Notice of Motion has been taken out to the appointment of a Receiver of the suit flat with power to take possession of the flat from the defendant and put the plaintiff in possession of the suit flat on such terms as this...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-27-1997
Reported in : AIR1998SC518; JT1997(9)SC384; 1997(7)SCALE261; (1998)1SCC437; [1997]Supp5SCR551
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. Leave granted in SLP (C) Nos. 5384-85 of 1984.2. The common question which arises in these appeals is whether the turnover in respect of hides and skins which has once been subjected to tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, on its purchase at the raw stage, could be taxed again on inter-state sales as tanned or dressed hides and skins.3. According to the appellants they purchase raw hides and skins and after dressing they are sold in the course of inter-state trade. The contention of the dealers before the assessing authority was that hides and skins, whether in a raw or dressed form, are declared goods under Section 14(iii) of the Central Sales Tax Act and they are regarded by the said Act as a single commodity. This being so Section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act provides that the goods which have suffered tax once cannot be taxed again at the time of inter-state sale. As the tax had been levied at the time of purchase of raw hides and skins, therefore, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-27-1997
Reported in : AIR1998SC465; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)220; JT1997(9)SC431; 1997(7)SCALE741; (1998)2SCC109; [1997]Supp5SCR469
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. These writ petitions and appeals raise common questions relating to the validity of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (as amended) enacted by Parliament (hereinafter referred to as 'the Central Act') and the Assam Disturbed Areas Act, 1955 enacted by the State Legislature of Assam (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Act').2. The Central Act was enacted in 1958 to enable certain special powers to be conferred upon the members of the armed forces in the disturbed areas in the State of Assam and the Union Territory of Manipur. By Act 7 of 1972 and Act 69 of 1985 the Central Act was amended and it extends to the whole of the State of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura. The expression 'disturbed area' has been defined in Section 2(b) to mean an area which is for the time being declared by notification under Section 3 to be a disturbed area. Section 3 makes provision for issuance of a notification declaring the whole or ...
Tag this Judgment!