Gujarat Court October 1964 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat Vs. New Rajpur Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-27-1964
Reported in: [1965]55ITR556(Guj)
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. These questions are referred to us for opinion in this reference, two at the instance of the Commissioner and one at the instance of the assessee. The third question which has been referred to us at the instance of the assessee has not been presed by Mr. Kaji, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee, and it is, therefore, not necessary to state any facts relating to the same. So far as the other two questions are concerned, the answers to them are concluded by two decisions given by this court, one in Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. Raipur . and the other in Wealth-tax Reference No. 3 of 1961, Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. Ajit Mills Ltd., the latter being an unreported decision given on 18th October, 1962. However, in order to understand how the questions arise, it is necessary to state briefly a few facts. The assessee is a limited company carrying on business of manufacturing textile goods and it is common ground between the parties that the accounts o...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat, Ahmedabad Vs. New Raipur Mills Co ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-27-1964
Reported in: AIR1967Guj12
Bhagwati, J.(1) Three questions are referred to us for our opinion in this Reference two at the instance of the Commissioner and one at the instance of the assessee. The third question which has been referred to us at the instance of the assessee has not been pressed by Mr. Kaji, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee and it is, therefore, not necessary to state any facts relating to the same. So far as the other two questions are concerned, the answers to them are concluded by two decisions given by this Court, one in Commissioner of Wealth Tax v. Raipur . : [1964]52ITR482(Guj) , and the other in Wealth Tax Ref. No. 3 of 1961, Commissioner of Wealth Tax v. Ajit Mills, the latter being an unreported decision given on 18th October, 1962 (Guj). However, in order to understand how the questions arise, it is necessary to state briefly a few facts. The assessee is a Limited Company carrying on business of manufacturing textile goods and it is common ground between the parties ...
Darshan Surendra Parekh Vs. Commissioner of Expenditure-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-26-1964
Reported in: [1965]57ITR592(Guj)
Shelat, C.J.1. This reference relates to the two assessments years 1958-59 and 1959-60 under the expenditure-tax Act, 1957, the previous years being the calendar years 1957 and 1958. The controversy between the parties arises on account of the Expenditure-tax Officer including two items of expenditure, namely Rs. 28,683, and Rs. 10,321, in computing the taxable for the assessment year 1958-59 and his including similarly, for the assessment year 1959-60 two sums of the same kind, namely, Rs. 19,285 and Rs. 7,951. The assessments were made in the status of a Hindu undivided family. 2. During the two relevant years, the karta of the Hindu undivided family was Surendra Mangaldas who died on October 19, 1961. while the appeals filed by him before the Appellate Tribunal were still pending. On his death, his sons, Darshan, the Present karta of the Hindu undivided family, continued the two appeals. 3. During the two assessment years, the Hindu undivided family consisted of the said Surendra, h...
Chimanlal B. Joshi Vs. Nagrashna (M.N.), Second Labour Court, Ahmedaba ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-23-1964
Reported in: (1965)ILLJ318Guj
Miabhoy, J.1. This is a petition by Chimanlal B. Joshi under Art. 227 of the Construction of India paying for the issuance of a writ of or in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction for calling for the records of the case, to be presently mentioned, and to quash or suitably correct the order, dated 17 July 1961, passed by the presiding officer, second labour court, Ahmedabad, in Recovery Application No. 522 of 1959. The petitioner arises out of an application made by petitioner before the aforesaid labour court under S. 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereafter called 'the Act'), for recovering a sum of Rs. 6,650 on the allegation that that amount was the arrears of his wages from 1 March 1958 to 30 September 1959. The facts leading upto the presentation of that application may first be briefly stated. Respondent 2, Kilachand Devachand & Co. (Private), Ltd., is a private limited company doing business inter alia at Mehasana. Tulsidas Kilachand, responde...
Natwarlal Vithaldas Patel Vs. the Municipality of Wadnagar and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-23-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Guj15; (1965)GLR189
Mehta, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the order of the First Labour Court, Ahmedabad, dated 28th August 1961, under which the petitioner's application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, (hereinafter referred to us 'the Act') has been dismissed. The short facts which have given rise to this petition are as under: The petitioner is an oilman working in the Power House run by the respondent No. 1, Vadnagar Municipality, which is a District Municipality governed by the Bombay District Municipal Act, 1901, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Municipal Act'). The respondent No. 1, on 2nd July 1949, entered into a settlement under the Act, during conciliation proceedings, under which the salaries of the workmen including the petitioner were revised with effect from 1st July 1959. As the petitioner was not paid the revised wages from 1st July 1959 to 30th September 1059, the petitioner applied to the Labour Court under Section ...
State of Gujarat Vs. Ambalal Vithaldas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-23-1964
Reported in: (1964)5GLR1079
V.B. Raju, J.1. The contention in this application is that a person against whom a prosecution was launched for contravention of the Gujarat Ground-nut (Declaration of Stock) Order 1964 has been released on bail without stating that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of the contravention alleged as such a finding is required by Rule 155 (b) of the Defence of India Rules. 1962. Rule 155 of the said Rules reads as follows:155. Special provision regarding bail--Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 (V of 1898) no person accused or convicted of a contravention of these rules or orders made thereunder shall if in custody be released on bail or on his own bond unless-(a) the prosecution has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release and(b) where the prosecution opposes the application and the contravention is of any such provision of these rules or orders made thereunder as the Central Government or t...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Bai Vina
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-22-1964
Reported in: (1965)0GLR583; [1965]58ITR100(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. An interesting question of construction of section 2(6A)(c) of the Income-tax Act arises on this reference. The reference relates to the assessment of the assessee, an individual, for the assessment year 1956-57, the corresponding accounting year being Samvat year 2011 (i.e., 27th October, 1954, to 14th November, 1955). The assessee at all material times held 18 shares in a limited company called the Gujarat Spinning and Weaving Company Limited which we shall for the sake of convenience briefly refer as the company. The company went into liquidation on 23rd October, 1954. On 20th November, 1954, the liquidator of the company decided to make a distribution of Rs. 3,500 per share amongst the shareholders and pursuant to this decision the assessee received from the liquidator on 25th November, 1954, a sum of Rs. 63,000 as and by way of distribution in respect of her 18 shares. The sum of Rs. 3,500 per share distributed amongst the shareholders was composed of the following ...
F.Y. Khambhaty Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-21-1964
Reported in: [1966]61ITR30(Guj)
Shelat, C.J.1. This reference involves two questions, one relates to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under section 33(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and the other relates to the status of the firm of Messrs. F. Y. Khambhaty which carried on business at Kano in Nigeria and in which the assessee was a partner along with one Lahorewala and was having a share of sixty per cent. as against the share of forty per cent. of the said Lahorewala. The first question was referred to this court by the Tribunal in the reference made by the Tribunal on June 10, 1960, while the second question has been referred to us as a result of an order passed by this court on November 29, 1962, in Income-tax Application No. 13 of 1962. 2. The two questions arise as a result of assessments having been made against the assessee, F. Y. Khambhaty and the said firm of Kano, hereinafter referred to as the Kano firm, for the assessment years 1950-51 to 1953-54. The relative previous years, in so far as the assessee' s...
Swastik Oil Mills and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat, Ahmedabad and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-21-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Guj31
Mehta, J.1. In this petition under Articles 225 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the notification, dated 8th December, 1960, issued by respondent No. 1, the State Government, under Section 4 of the Bombay District Municipal Act, 1901, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The short facts which have given rise to this petition are as under:The petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on business of oil mills at Rajpipla. The petitioner's factory, known as Swastik Oil Mills, is situated on lands bearing S. No. 809. The said factory was formerly run by M/s. Dhane-shwar Oil Mills, a partnership firm, from whom in or about March 1960. Shri Ishvarlal Lallu-bhai and Shri Chajurbhai Lallubhai had purchased the same. The petitioner had in turn purchased the said factory on or about October 25, I960, from the said Ishvarlal Lallu-bhai and Chaturbhai Lallubhai and after that date the petitioner had started this factory on the said survey number. On December 4, 1958,...
Patel Pratapsinh Hirabhai Vs. the Panchmahals District Panchayat and o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-21-1964
Reported in: (1965)6GLR329
N.M. Miabhoy, J.1. This is a petition by Patel Pratapsinh Hirabhai under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming certain reliefs against the three respondents to be presently mentioned. The point which arises for decision in this petition is a short one and it relates to the construction of Section 131 Sub-section (3)(ii) of The Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961 (hereafter called the Act) as amended by Gujarat Act No. LIII of 1963. We may at first briefly state the facts leading up to the presentation of the present petition. The District Panchayat of the Panchmahals District respondent No. 1 herein was constituted under Section 15 of the Act. In the month of February or March 1964 an election was held in which amongst others petitioner and respondent No. 2 were elected as Members of that Panchayat petitioner was elected on the ticket of the Swatantra party and respondent No. 2 was elected on the ticket of the Congress party. Respondent No. 3 is the ex-officio Secretary of the Dist...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »