Gujarat Court March 1972 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sarabhai Sons Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-21-1972
Reported in: [1973]90ITR318(Guj)
Bhagwati, C.J.1. The reference arises out of assessment to income-tax made on the assessee for the assessment year 1966-67, the relevant previous year being the financial year ending 31st March, 1966. The assessee is a private limited company which has been acting as managing agent of Swastik Oil Mills Ltd. since several years past. Some time towards the end of 1965, the assessee decided to start a new business for manufacture of scientific instruments and communication equipment. The assessee appointed one Dr. Ramanathan as General Manager of the new business in November, 1965, and Dr. Ramanathan immediately thereafter started exploring possibilities for purchase of machinery and equipment necessary for the purpose of carrying on the business. In January, 1966, the assessee placed orders for machinery and equipment and some of the machinery and equipment was received by the assessee in February, 1966. The assessee also started placing orders for raw materials and stores from January, ...
Tag this Judgment!Fakir Mohebubshah Vs. Bai Chandbu and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-21-1972
Reported in: AIR1972Guj270; (1973)GLR187
ORDER1. A very interesting question as to he interpretation of O.33, R.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been raised in this petition. Opponent No.1 Bai chandbu made an application for permission to sue as a pauper. This application was presented on 5th April, 1968. A notice was issued upon the petitioner, respondent No.2 and the district government Pleader, fixing the day for receiving evidence as the application may adduce in proof of her pauperism and for hearing any evidence which may be adduced in disproof thereof as provided by O.33, R.6. the application was taken up for hearing on 2nd April, 1970. When the applicant tendered evidence in proof of her pauperism, a question was asked in her cross-examination on behalf of the opponent that her husband died leaving some property and in answer to this question, the applicant Bai Chandbu stated that her husband died about six months back leaving the house and lands bearing S.Nos.281, 372 and 43/2 . it was then submitted to the learn...
Tag this Judgment!Dahyabhai Ranchhoddas Shah Vs. Jayantilal Mohanlal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-1972
Reported in: [1973(27)FLR143]; (1973)0GLR1; (1973)ILLJ604Guj
D.A. Desai, J. 1. The main question raised in this petition is about the jurisdiction of the Labour Court under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. The petitioner herein made an application to the Labour Court at Ahmedabad, which came up for disposal before the Second Labour Court at Ahmedabad, alleging therein that respondents Nos. 2 and 3 who were carrying on business in the name of respondent No. 1 closed the undertaking with effect from 13th November, 1966; and consequently discharged the petitioner from service. The petitioner requested the Labour Court to Compute his retrenchment compensation, to which he was entitled, according to him under S. 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act. The respondent contested the application inter alia contending that the petitioner was not discharged from service as contended by him; but his services were terminated on 12th November, 1966 because of his old age, and, therefore, he was not entitled to compensation under S. 25FFF. It also ...
Tag this Judgment!Chhangan Karsan Vs. Bhagwanji Punjab and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Guj165
Bhagwati, C.J. 1. This Second Appeal comes before us on a reference made by M. U. Shah. J. The appellant is the original plaintiff and the respondents are the original defendants. The appellants filed Civil Suit No. 168 of 1968 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division). Jamnagar, claming permanent injuction restraining the respondents from obstructing the appellant in the exercise of his right of way to his fileds varing Survey Nos,. 719 and 732 though the Shadha. that is, the boundary line of the fields of the respondents. Since the fields of the respondents of which the right of way was claimed by the appellant were situate in the Sim of Jamnagar but outside its municipal limits. The suit fell within Clause (c) of Section 6(iv) of the Bombay Court-fees Act. 1959 and a fixed Court -fee of Rs. 15/- was accordingly paid by appellants on the plaint. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jamnagar, referred the suit for disposal to the Second Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division). Jamna...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-i Vs. Chunilal Khushaldas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-1972
Reported in: [1974]44CompCas90(Guj); [1974]93ITR369(Guj)
Bhagwati, C.J. 1. This reference raises a short but interesting question as to what is the date from which bonus shares issued by a company can be said to be held by an assesse : is it the date when they are issued or is it the date when the original shares in respect of which they are issued were acquired by the assessee The question assumes importance because when bonus shares are sold by the assessee and there is capital gain, the incidence of tax on such capital gain varies according as the bonus shares are short-term capital assets or long-term capital assets. If they are short term capital assets, the incidence is highe : if they are long-term capital assets, the incidence is lowe : and the question whether they are short-term capital assets or long-term capital assets depends on how long they have been held by the assessee immediately preceding the date of transfer. 2. The short fact giving rise to the reference may be briefly stated as follow : Some time prior to January 1, 195...
Tag this Judgment!Alihusen Najarali Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-1972
Reported in: 1974CriLJ524; (1972)GLR678
C.V. Rane, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned City Magistrate, 11th Court, Ahmedabad, in summary case No. 48/70 on 6-11-1970, The prosecution story in the above case, was in brief, as under:On 3-8-1969 Police Sub-Inspector Chandrasing Raol received information at about 6-30 p.m. that one person dressed in a particular manner was to go to the Central S. T. Bus Station at Ahmedabad with a suit-case containing opium. He, therefore, sent for the panchas and thereafter all of them went to the S. T. Bus station. When the members of the raiding party were waiting at the S. T. Bus station, the accused came there with a suit case. He was apprehended and when the suit case was searched in the presence of the panchas, four Kgs. of opium wrapped in a plastic paper was found from it. The accused had no permit to keep the opium in his possession, About 100 grams of opium was taken out from the above packet as a sample which was duly wrappe...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Thakorbhai Vallabhbhai Naik and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-1972
Reported in: (1972)0GLR708
Bhagwati, C.J. 1. This letters patent appeal raises a short question as to the constitutional validity of prescription of different scales of pay for assistant lecturers who are holders of second class degree with or without experience and assistant lecturers who are experience and assistant lecturers who are second class diploma-holders with three years' teaching and/or professional experience. The question arises in relation to assistant lecturers in different branches of engineering employed in various Government Polytechnics in the State of Gujarat. The recruitment of these assistant lecturers is to be made by nomination and the qualifications for their recruitment are laid down in the Recruitment Rules made by the State Government. These rules are administrative rules without any force of law but it is common ground between the parties that they have been consistenly observed in making recruitment of assistant lecturers. Rule 1 of these rules which provides for recruitment of assi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Sayaji Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-13-1972
Reported in: [1974]94ITR54(Guj)
Bhagwati, C.J. 1. This reference raises a question of some importance as to whether bonus paid by an assessee to its workmen out of the profits of the previous year after the relevant valuation date is debt owed by the assessee so as to be deductible in computing the net wealth of the assessee. The question is not free from difficulty and it is with some hesitation that we have arrived at a decision against the assessee. The assessee which is a public limited company submitted a return showing a net wealth of Rs. 89,39,671 for the assessment year 1959-60, the relevant valuation date being 31st March, 1959. There was no provision for the accounting year 1st April, 1958, to 31st March, 1959, but in the return submitted by it the assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 5,33,000 on account of liability for bonus for the said accounting year on the ground that it was a debt owed by the assessee on the relevant valuation date, namely, 31st March, 1959. This claim for deduction was negative by th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Sayaji Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-10-1972
Reported in: [1974]94ITR26(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J. 1. This reference out of assessment in income-tax made on the assessee for the assessment years 1959-60 and 1960-61, the corresponding accounting years being the financial was ending 31st March, 1959, and 31st March, 1960. Two questions arise for our determination in this reference : first, whether the assessee's claim in each assessment year for allowance of a sum by way of development rebate in respect of the machinery and plant, etc., installed in one of the industrial unit run by it was rightly disallowed and, secondly, whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had the power and jurisdiction to direct the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to entertain and take into consideration the assessee's contention that the profits on sale of certain machinery were not taxable since the business was not in existence at any time during the relevant previous years. In order to properly appreciate and determine those questions it would be ...
Tag this Judgment!Suryakant Alias Suresh Laxmishanker Vs. Indumati Vithaldas Daiya and a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-10-1972
Reported in: (1973)14GLR169
D.A. Desai, J.1. Petitioner Suryakant alias Suresh Laxmisbankar Dave 'has preferred this Revision Application against an order made by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rajkot in Maintenance Application No. 40 of 1969 by which the learned Magistrate directed the petitioner to pay to his wife respondent No. 1 Indumati Vithaldas Daiya maintenance in the amount of Rs. 130/-made up of Rs. 35/- per month for each child and Rs. 60/- per month for herself under Section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code which order was subsequently confirmed in Criminal Revision Application No. 44 of 1970 preferred by the present petitioner in the Court of Session at Rajkot.2. The petitioner married with respondent on 26th May 1960 at Porbandar. Hitesh is first son born to the wife on 31st January 1961 at Rajkot and Nayan is the second son born to her on 14th July 1962 at Rajkot. Respondent No. 1 wife is serving in the District Panchayat at Rajkot and has been staying in the rented premises with h...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »