Gujarat Court September 1965 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.
Bhanuprasad Hariprasad Dave and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-10-1965
Reported in: (1965)GLR958; (1970)ILLJ417Guj
Sarela, J.1. The appellant 1, Bhanuprasad Hariprasad Dave, and appellant 2, Rajuji Gambhirji, were accused 1 and 2 respectively, in the trial Court. At the relevant time, appellant 1 (who for convenience, will be referred to as accused 1 hereinafter) was a police sub-inspector in charge of the Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad, and appellant 2 (who, for convenience, will be referred to as accused 2 hereinafter) was his writer-constable. The case relates to an alleged offence of acceptance of bribe by accused 1 with the assistance of and through accused 2. Accused 1 was charged with an offence under S. 161 of the and S. 5(1)(d) read with S. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Accused 2 was charged with an offence under S. 161 read with S. 165A of the Indian Penal Code and S. 5(1)(d) read with S. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947. Both of them have been found guilty of the offences with which they were charged by the learned Special Judge, Ahmedabad, who by hi...
Bhanuprasad Hariprasad Dave and anr. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-10-1965
Reported in: (1965)6GLR958
Akbar S. Sarela, J.1. The appellant No. 1 Bhanuprasad Hariprasad Dave and appellant No. 2 Rajuji Gambhirji were accused Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in the trial Court. At the relevant time appellant No. 1 (who for convenience will be referred to as accused No. 1 hereinafter) was a Police Sub-Inspector in charge of the Navrangpura Police Station Ahmedabad and appellant No. 2 (who for convenience will be referred to accused No. 2 hereinafter) was his writer constable. The case relates to an alleged offence of acceptance of bribe by the accused No. 1 with the assistance of and through accused No. 2. The accused No. 1 was charged with an offence under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 The accused No. 2 was charged with an offence under Section 161 read with Section 165A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 Both of them have been found guilty o...
Nyalchand Malukchand Dagli Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-08-1965
Reported in: [1966]62ITR102(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. The short question that arises in this reference relates to the validity of a notice issued by the Income-tax Officer under section 34(1) (a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. In order to appreciate the question, it is necessary to notice briefly the facts giving rise to the reference. On 9th March, 1959, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice under section 34(1) (a) to the assessee reciting : 'Whereas I have reason to believe that your income assessable to income-tax for the year ending 31st of March, 1950, has escaped assessment, I, therefore, propose to reassess the said income that has escaped assessment' and calling upon the assessee to deliver 'within 35 days of the receipt of the notice a return in the attached form of your total income and total world income assessable for the said year ending 31st March, 1950'. There was enclosed in the same envelope along with this notice another notice of the same date headed 'Notice under sections 22(2) and 38 of the Indian Income...
Anil Starch Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-1965
Reported in: [1966]59ITR514(Guj)
Shelat, C.J.1. The main question which arises in this reference is whether the assessee company, while computing profits or gains derived from its newly established industrial undertaking, which are exempt under section 15C(1) of the Income tax Act, 1922, is entitled to claim the actual cost to it rather than the market value of the raw materials manufactured by its existing industrial undertaking and used by the new undertaking. The question arises from the following facts : The assessee is a public limited company originally formed for manufacturing and sale of industrial starch. It started production of starch some time in the year 1939. In the year 1956, the assessee company set up another plant for producing dextrose, a pharmaceutical product, of which starch is the raw material. During the assessment for the assessment year 1960-61, the question arose whether the profits or gains made by the new industrial undertaking established for producing dextrose were exempt under section 1...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. L.A. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-1965
Reported in: [1966]60ITR685(Guj)
Bhagwati, J.1. This reference arises out of an assessment made on the assessee as an individual under section 34(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. This reference related to the assessment year 1946-47, the relevant account year being the financial year ending 31st March, 1946. During the relevant account year the assessee was serving as a Deputy Engineer in the Public Works Department of the Government of Bombay and that salary drawn by him in that year amounted to Rs. 5,326. The assessee was assessed for the first time for the assessment year 1947-48 and so far as the prior assessment years including the assessment year 1946-47 were concerned, no notice was issued to the assessee under section 22(2) nor did the assessee file any return of his income and no assessment was made on the assessee for those assessment years. It appears that some time after the assessment for the assessment year 1947-48 was completed, the Income-tax Officer received information that the assessee had made la...
Karansingh Balubha Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-03-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Guj219; (1967)0GLR31
ORDER(1) This revision application has been filed by the original accused, dismissing his appeal against his conviction under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, hereinafter referred to as `the Act' by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bagasara Wadia and for which he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.(2) The case of the prosecution was that the accused was driving S.T. bus between Bhavnagar and Jamnagar on 27th November, 1963. When the said bus stopped at Babra, the accused and the driver of the motor bus had gone to a house near the bus stand and had consumed illicit liquor there. The driver had thereafter taken the motor bus along the road to Rajkot. The motor bus met with a serious accident in which several persons sitting in the bus were injured and one of them had died. The P.S.O. at Babra Police Station was one Abdulla Nurmahomed. On receiving the ...
Khemchand Dayalji and Co. Vs. Mohmadbhai Chandbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-03-1965
Reported in: (1965)6GLR829
J.M. Shelat, C.J.1. The petitioners are the tenants and the respondent is the landlord. This revision application has been taken out by the tenants against the order passed by the Small Cause Court, Ahmedabad, dated March 15, 1965 in an application made by the opponent for a distress warrant in respect of an amount of Rs. 10,243-06 nP, and for permitting a sum of Rs. 9 442 being the amount for municipal taxes due and payable in respect of the leased premises to be seized from a certain amount deposited by the petitioners in the Court. An ex parte order on that application was first passed on February 19 1965 The petitioners however raised certain contentions and the Court after hearing the parties confirmed on March 15 1965 the order for issuing a distress warrant.2. Prior to these proceedings the petitioners had filed a suit being Suit No. 1308 of 1963 in the Small Cause Court for possession of a bathroom which it was alleged was comprised in the leased property for fixation of standa...
Ravishanker Keshavji Dave Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-03-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Guj293; 1966CriLJ1429
Shelat, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and Order passed on 22-4-1964 by Mr. N. B. Desai, Special Judge, Rajkot whereby the accused-appellant came to be convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for four months in respect of offences punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.2. The accused-appellant was serving as a Medical Officer, Government City Dispensary at Morvi during the period from May to July 1963. He was class III Officer and was in charge of an out-door dispensary. On the upper storey of the dispensary-building, he had his residential quarters. The dispensary was a free dispensary for all people and that its working hours were 8-30 a.m. to 12-0 p.m. and from 4-0 p.m. to 6-30 p.m. On 6-5-1963 one Natvarsinhji alias Natubha Mansinhbhai of Derala had gone to Morvi along with his servants...
Kashipuri Rajpuri and anr. Vs. Rabari Mela Sala
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-02-1965
Reported in: (1966)7GLR68
J.M. Shelat, C.J.1. This revision application is concerned with two agricultural lands, hereinafter referred to as Bavalia and Kumbharia lands, situate at Nagwada in Dasada Taluka, District Surendranagar. The litigation in question has had a somewhat chequered career and therefore it becomes necessary to state a few facts in order to appreciate the respective stands taken by the parties.2. The first petitioner is the some of the second petitioner and at all material times formed a point and undivided Hindu family along with one Mohanpuri, the second so of the second petitioner. The two lands in question stood in the revenue records in the name of the second petitioner. Both the properties were barkhali lands and therefore were governed by the Barkhali Abolition Act, 1951. In his deposition before the Debt Adjustment Board, to which 1 shall presently refer, the first petitioner took the stand that he was a barkhalidar of Nagwada.3. On May 5, 1950 the first petitioner executed a register...
Sakarlal Balabhai and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Guj165; [1966]61ITR273(Guj)
Shelat, C.J.1. This reference arises from proceedings taken under section 23A of the Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of the assessment year 1956-57 of which the previous year is the calender year 1955. 2. The assessee-company is carrying on business as the managing agents of certain companies. It is an undisputed fact that it is a company to which section 23A applies and that it was required under that section to distribute as dividends the whole of its total income after deducting therefrom the amounts permissible under sub-section (1) of that section as its reserves exceed the total paid-up capital. There is also no substantial disagreement with regard to facts from which these proceedings arose. For the assessment year 1956-57, the total income assessed under the order dated May 29, 1957, came to Rs. 13,42,960 and the tax payable on that amount came to Rs. 6,93,968 which left a balance of Rs. 6,48,972. At the annual general meeting held on March 29, 1956, the company declared a div...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›