Gujarat Court November 1964 Judgments
Subodhchandra Himatlal and ors. Vs. I.G. Thakore and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Guj71
Bakshi, J.1. The only point canvassed at the hearing of this petition is about the constitutionality of Section 95 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which provides for review of a decision or award of an Industrial Court. The petitioners who are the employees of the opponent Mills had obtained an order in their favour both from the Labour Court as well as from the Industrial Court in appeal for compensation for loss in wages suffered by them on account of the fact that they were not given work on certain days in 1957 by the opponent Mills. The opponent Mills preferred an application for a review of the order of the Industrial Court under Section 65 of the Act and in these proceedings for review, the petitioners raised a preliminary objection that the Industrial Court had no jurisdiction to review its order as Section 95 of the Act was unconstitutional and void as it violated Article 14 of the Constitution of India. A Full Bench of the Ind...
Tag this Judgment!Subodhchandra Himatlal Vs. Thakore (i.G.) (President, Industrial Court ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-30-1964
Reported in: (1965)0GLR358; (1965)ILLJ593Guj
Bakshi, J.1. The only point canvassed at the hearing of this petition is about the constitutionality of S. 95 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (hereinafter Referred to as the Act), which provides for review of a decision or award of an industrial court. The petitioners who are the employees of the opponents mills had obtained an order in their favour both from the labour court as well as from the industrial court in appeal for compensation for loss in wages suffered by them on account of the fact that they were not given work on certain days in 1957 by the opponent mills. The opponent mills preferred an application for a review of the order of the industrial court under S. 95 of the Act and in these proceedings for review, the petitioners raised a preliminary objection that the industrial court had no jurisdiction to review its order as S. 95 of the Act was unconstitutional and void and it violated Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. A full bench of the industrial court d...
Tag this Judgment!Sayaji Mills Ltd. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-30-1964
Reported in: [1966]18STC287(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. Though there are three questions raised in this petition, the main question that we are called upon to consider is whether a certain order made by the Commissioner of Sales Tax imposing sales tax on the petitioners in respect of certain sales of machinery effected by the petitioners discloses an error of law apparent on the face of the record. In order to understand how the question arises and to be able to arrive at a proper determination of it, it is necessary to state briefly a few facts giving rise to the petition. The facts are as follows :- The petitioners at all material times carried on business of manufacturing and selling cotton textile goods and were registered as such under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. In or about 1955 the petitioners imported under actual user's licence a mercerizing plant from Switzerland at the cost of Rs. 3,32,000 and two doubling plants from the United Kingdom, one at the cost of Rs. 83,558 and the other at the cost of Rs. 63,976. The...
Tag this Judgment!Ramgopal and Sons Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Surat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-27-1964
Reported in: [1965]16STC1005(Guj)
Bhagwati, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution raises a question relating to the construction of section 12A(4) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946, and in the event of the construction contended for on behalf of the State being accepted, challenges the vires of the section on the ground of lack of legislative competence on the part of the State to enact it. In order to appreciate the questions arising in the petition it is necessary to set out briefly the facts giving rise to the petition it is necessary to set out briefly the facts giving rise to the petition. The facts are few and for the most part undisputed and may be briefly stated as follows :- The petitioners are dealers carrying on business in cloth and at all material times they held a certificate of registration under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). During the period 1st January, 1950, to 31st March, 1951, the petitioners effected various sales outside the State of Bomb...
Tag this Judgment!M. Dadubhai and Co. Vs. C.C. Trivedi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-27-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Guj84; [1966]17STC59(Guj)
Bhagwati, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges two orders of assessment made against the petitioners on 25th January, 1963. One in respect of the period 1st April, 1964, to 31st March, 1955, an the other in respect of the period 1st April, 1955, to 31st March, 1956. Most of the questions arising in this petition are concluded by two decisions given by us during this and the last sessions and only one question really survives for consideration. But in order to understand and appreciate that question, it is necessary to state briefly a few facts giving rise to the petition. 2. The petitioners at all material times carried on business as coal merchants and burning contractors in Ahmedabad. The petitioners were dealers registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, and held a certificate of registration under the provisions of that Act. During the period with which we are concerned in this petition, there were restrictions on purchase of coal and no textil...
Tag this Judgment!Kalubhai Kesrisingh Mahida Vs. the State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-26-1964
Reported in: (1965)6GLR451
A.R. Bakshi, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is brought by the petitioner on the following facts:2. The petitioner is a resident of village Deva Vanta in Petlad Taluka District Kaira. The village Panchayat of the village Deva Vanta was established for the first time in 1956 under the provisions of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act of 1933. Under Section 4 of that Act the local area comprising of the village Deva Vanta with its suburb Ruun was declared to be a village for the purposes of the said Act. That village was comprised of S. Nos. 1 to 738 including roads, pasture lands and other waste lands. The Village Panchayats Act 1959 came into force in January 1959 and the village Panchayat constituted immediately before the Act of 1959 came into force were continued to be village panchayats thereafter Therefore the local area for the Panchayat of the village Deva Vanta continued to be the same as before and comprised of S. Nos. 1 to 736 which included wi...
Tag this Judgment!Bai Kamla Vs. B.R. Mane Patil, Competent Authority and Collector, Ahme ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-25-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Guj37; (1965)GLR221
Mehta, J.1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ to quash the requisition order dated October 21, 1961, and for restraining the respondents from enforcing or acting under the said order.2. The petitioner is the owner of a house bearing Municipal Census No. 330 situate at Kothni Pole, Raipur Khadiu. Ahmedabad. The said property consisted of a ground floor and two upper floors. The second floor of the said house was occupied by a tenant. The third floor was with the petitioner. The ground floor accommodation consisted of one room and an open Chawk with Osri The premises on the ground floor were first requisitioned under the Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Act', by the order dated July 3, 1950, and they were allotted to one Dhansukhlal Dave. In May 1961 the said Dhansukhlal Dave vacated the said premises and the petitioner had applied for releasing the...
Tag this Judgment!Chunilal Harakchand Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-24-1964
Reported in: [1966]17STC123(Guj)
Shelat, C.J. 1. This and the following reference raise the same petition and involve the same facts, except that the assessment period in the first reference is from April 1, 1956, to March 31, 1957, and in the second reference it is from April 1, 1957, to October 23, 1957. The common question involved in both the references is whether palavs, admittedly woven on handlooms out of cotton and silk yarn and jari thread and which are generally attached to sari pieces for decorating saris, fall under entry 47(i) of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The applicants produced certain samples of palavs before the taxing authorities. There is no dispute that they are of standard sari length, are used for attaching them widthwise to the sari pieces and vary in width from eight inches to thirty-two inches, unlike borders or laces which also are attached to sari pieces but lengthwise. 2. The Sales Tax Officer held that palavs fall under entry 47(i) of Schedule B and subjected to purchase...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Umedram Lallubhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-23-1964
Reported in: [1965]16STC1059(Guj)
Bhagwati, J. 1. The short question that arises on this reference is whether borders woven on handloom out of pure silk, art silk and jari thread are handloom cloth within the meaning of entry 29 in Schedule A of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The assessees are dealers registered under the Act and they carry on business as manufacturers and dealers in all kinds of sarees, blouse pieces, borders etc. The assessees in the course of their business sold certain borders at the rate of Rs. 3.50 per yard under a bill No. 965 dated 11th August, 1961, and submitted an application to the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax under section 52 for determination of the tax payable on the sale of the borders. The borders were woven on handloom out of pure silk, art silk and jari thread and the proportion or pure silk was more than 60 per cent. It was contended before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax that the borders were exempt from tax inasmuch as they were handloom cloth covered by entry 29 of Sche...
Tag this Judgment!Chelaram Hasomal Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-20-1964
Reported in: [1965]16STC1021(Guj)
Shelat, C.J. 1. The question that has been referred to this Court is :- 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the work of preparing and supplying a personal technicolour enamelled photograph of an individual to the goldsmith from whom an order with specifications is received for its preparation, amounts to a contract of sale and whether such sale is liable to tax under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ?' 2. The applicants prepare coloured photographs of Goods, saints and public men on miniature enamelled copper plates with a view to sell them to the public. Such photographs they describe as religious photographs. They also receive orders for preparing such photographs of individuals on enamelled copper plates. Such photographs are described by them as individual photographs. These plates have sometimes loops with which they are attached to ornaments, such as necklaces, and in such cases, the copper plates so arranged can be used as lockets. 3. On 6th August, 1961, th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »