High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-13, Mumbai v. Sterling Oil Resources Ltd.

22 Jun 2016 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that the time limit under Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act for completing assessment after DRP directions is mandatory, and an assessment order passed beyond this period is barred by limitation and invalid.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 144C(13) Income Tax Act time limit mandatory assessment barred by limitation Dispute Resolution Panel

Suvarnayug Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. Suresh Shivajirao Kale

21 Jun 2016 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that Co-operative Courts lack jurisdiction over service disputes between cooperative societies and their employees under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, directing the employee to seek remedy through civil courts.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Co-operative Court jurisdiction service dispute Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 Section 91

Vilas Rambhau Chaudhari v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority

20 Jun 2016 · Sandeep V. Marne

The court held that a slum rehabilitation proposal is accepted only after prescribed scrutiny and fees payment, and until such acceptance, subsequent proposals can be entertained; thus, the SRA lawfully accepted a rival developer's proposal following majority consent verified by secret ballot.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Slum Rehabilitation Scheme Slum Rehabilitation Authority proposal acceptance developer appointment

Irfan Allabaksh Shaikh v. The Commissioner, Solapur Municipal Corporation

06 Jun 2016 · Sunil B. Shukre; Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that a purchase notice under Section 127 of the MRTP Act issued before the expiry of 10 years from the development plan coming into force is premature and invalid, thereby upholding the refusal of building permission.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Section 127 MRTP Act purchase notice development plan reservation lapse

Manoj Manilal Gala v. Eruch Boman Khaver & Ors.

19 May 2016 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court allowed Manoj Manilal Gala to continue as agent of the Court Receiver for a dissolved partnership's business premises, fixed fair royalty based on market valuation, and set aside the City Civil Court's contrary order appointing another party.

civil appeal_allowed Significant partnership dissolution Court Receiver agency agreement royalty fixation

Manoj Manilal Gala v. Eruch Boman Khaver & Ors.

19 May 2016 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court allowed Manoj Manilal Gala to continue as agent of the Court Receiver for the partnership business premises upon payment of court-fixed royalty and security, setting aside the City Civil Court's order appointing Plaintiff No.2.

civil appeal_allowed Significant partnership dissolution court receiver agency appointment royalty fixation

Macrotech Developers Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.

19 May 2016 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 1 · Cited by 4

The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated after four years based on subsequent information indicating failure to disclose material facts, rejecting the petitioner’s challenge under the first proviso to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reassessment

Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika v. Ashirwad Shelters Private Limited

02 May 2016 · Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court dismissed the Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika's appeal and refused to condone a four-year delay in filing, holding that administrative delays and pandemic-related reasons do not justify ignoring statutory limitation periods in municipal revenue matters.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay limitation period municipal corporation rateable value

M/s. Nanded City Development and Construction Company Ltd. v. Laxman Eknath Dedge and Ors.

28 Apr 2016 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court allowed the appellant's appeal setting aside the trial court's injunction in favor of respondents, holding that landowners who are shareholders in a joint development project cannot seek injunction against the developer after enjoying benefits under the agreement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Joint Development Agreement Temporary Injunction Possession Profit Sharing

Mujibur Rehman Chaudhary v. Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai

20 Apr 2016 · G. S. Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court held that unauthorized vertical extensions to unauthorized commercial structures in slum areas are not protected by photo-passes under the Slums Act and upheld the Municipal Corporation's right to demolish such constructions.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant unauthorized construction vertical extension photo-pass Maharashtra Slum Areas Act

Pfizer Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

29 Mar 2016 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act for AY 2009-10, holding that reassessment is impermissible where the issue was fully examined and adjudicated in original assessment and appeal proceedings.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 reopening of assessment

Shri Prasad Pandurang Tapkir & Another v. The Asst. Director of Town Planning & Ors.

14 Mar 2016 · Nitin Jamdar; Sharmila U. Deshmukh

The Bombay High Court held that statutory premium paid for exemption from FSI under Maharashtra town planning regulations is non-refundable in absence of express provision, dismissing the petitioners' claim for refund and rejecting their discrimination plea under Article 14.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Development Control Regulations Floor Space Index (FSI) premium refund

Shri Gavit Gulabsing Suka v. Shri Swami Vivekanand Shikshan Sanstha

29 Feb 2016 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court upheld the lawful termination of a probationary teacher for admitted inappropriate electronic contact with a student, holding that no formal enquiry was required under the MEPS Act for non-stigmatic termination during probation.

labor petition_dismissed Significant probationary employee termination natural justice Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Act

Mubaraz Musafir Khan v. Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation & Ors.

26 Feb 2016 · R.D. Dhanuka; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court upheld the Municipal Corporation's order directing removal of unauthorized structures, ruling that payment of property taxes does not legalize unauthorized constructions and that procedural defects in notice do not invalidate demolition orders.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act Section 260 unauthorized construction property tax

Lavino Kapur Cotton Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of CGST

10 Feb 2016 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Valmiki Sa Menezes

The High Court held that interest on delayed refund under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act accrues from three months after the initial refund application date, not from the date of the refund order.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 11B Central Excise Act Section 11BB Central Excise Act interest on delayed refund refund application

Securitrans India Private Limited v. FIS Payment Solutions and Services Private Limited

09 Feb 2016 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award holding the ATM cash replenishment service provider liable for theft by its employees and rejecting its challenge based on failure of the principal to mitigate losses through reconciliation.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Mitigation of damages Indian Contract Act, 1872

Vikrant Vinayak Khadpe & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

01 Feb 2016 · S.V. Gangapurwala, ACJ; Sandeep V. Marne, J.

The Court held that mere inclusion in an earlier wait list without meeting cut-off marks after applying horizontal reservations does not confer a right to appointment, dismissing the petition challenging exclusion from the revised wait list.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant reservation horizontal reservation vertical reservation wait list

Vivek Kishan Nandgude v. Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation

28 Jan 2016 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that a landowner deprived of land without statutory acquisition procedures is entitled to compensation as promised, rejecting the Municipal Corporation’s denial based on later rules and ordering grant of TDR/FSI or monetary compensation.

property petition_allowed Significant Transferable Development Rights Floor Space Index Land Acquisition Article 300A

Imperial Consultants and Securities Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(2)

14 Jan 2016 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening of the petitioner’s income tax assessment beyond four years, holding that reassessment cannot be based on a mere change of opinion without failure to disclose material facts.

tax petition_allowed Significant reopening of assessment Section 147 Income Tax Act Section 148 Income Tax Act failure to disclose material facts

Nijam Mohamad Mulani v. Transport Manager, Pune Mahanagar Pariwahan Mahamandal Ltd.

13 Jan 2016 · G. S. Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court upheld the dismissal of a bus driver for unauthorized absenteeism after a fair domestic enquiry, rejecting claims of unfair labour practice and disproportionate punishment.

labor petition_dismissed domestic enquiry unauthorized absenteeism disciplinary action natural justice