Gujarat Court October 1973 Judgments
The State of Gujarat Vs. Patel Pramkhlal Gordhandas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-30-1973
Reported in: 1975CriLJ324; (1974)15GLR174
ORDERT.U. Mehta, J.1. The main point which is involved in this Reference is whether while making order of remand of the accused 'in custody' as contemplated by Section 344 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is open to the Magistrate to remand the accused to the police custody or not. The contention of Shri Barot, who appeared on behalf of the accused is that the custody which is contemplated by Section 344 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is only judicial custody and not the police custody, which the contention of Shri Nanavati. who appeared on behalf of the State, is that the custody contemplated by Section 344 of the Code is judicial as well as police custody.2. In order to appreciate the contentions raised by the learned Advocates of the parties, it would be necessary to state shortly the facts relevant to this Reference. The prosecution case is that the opponent-accused has committed an offence of murder of one Bai Savita, whose dead body was found at a Dharamsala at Khedbrahma. ...
Tag this Judgment!V.P. Minocha, Income-tax Officer, Special Investigation Circle Vii, Ah ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-15-1973
Reported in: [1977]106ITR691(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. The petitioner herein is the Income-tax Officer, Special Investigation Circle VII, Ahmedabad, and at the relevant time he was in charge of the matter pertaining to the second respondent herein. The second respondent-firm was a registered firm for the purpose of the Income-tax Act, and it was manufacturing hosiery goods in Ahmedabad. In the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1964-65, the then Income-tax Officer noticed that the second respondent was dissolved and each of the partners had distributed amongst themselves all the assets including the machinery of the firm and this was done under the deed of dissolution dated August 31, 1964. It appears that on this machinery, development rebate had been allowed under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, under the provision of section 10(2)(vib), but the property was found to have been transferred by the firm to its partners before the expiry of the statutory period prescribed un...
Tag this Judgment!Rajnagar BobbIn Works Vs. the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-10-1973
Reported in: (1975)16GLR156
C.V. Rane, J.1. This judgment will govern the disposal of first Appeal Nos. 702/66, 246/67, 247/67, 218/67, 219/67, 220/67, 221/67, and 222/67, which arise out of the decrees of the learned Judges of the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad in Civil Suit Nos. 903/64, 239/65, 848/65, 193/65, 198/65, 199/65, 230/65 and 315/65 respectively. All these appeals involve a question as to the validity of the notices issued by the Junior Assistant to the Estate and City Improvement Officer, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, Ahmedabad, calling upon the plaintiffs in those suits to pull down or remove the structures mentioned in the notices. The notices in all the cases are identical except in respect of the names of the persons and the description of the property to be pulled down or removed. It is, therefore, not necessary to consider in detail the facts of all the suits and the civil suit No. 903/64 may be considered as a sample case for the purpose of these appeals.2. In the above suit, the notice was...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Gift-tax, Gujarat I Vs. Chhotalal Mohanlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1973
Reported in: [1974]97ITR393(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. A few facts need be stated to appreciate the question which has been referred to us by the Appellate Tribunal. The relevant assessment year in this case is 1963-64. The assessee was a partner in the firm carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. Chhotalal Vadilal. There were two other partners besides the respondent-assessee. A partnership deed of November 12, 1958, was executed between the partners in respect of the said partnership business. According to the said partnership deed, the respondent-assessee had seven annas interest whereas the other two partners, namely, Shri Gunvantlal Chhotalal and Shri Pravinchandra Vadilal, had four annas and five annas share, respectively, in the profit and los of the partnership business. It appears that this partnership continued till the assessment year 1962-63. However, from the beginning of S. Y. 2018, relevant to the assessment year 1963-64, with which we are concerned here, there was a change in the constitution ...
Tag this Judgment!Tajbhai Alibhai (Decd.) (by Legal Heirs) Vs. Commissioner of Gift-tax, ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1973
Reported in: [1974]97ITR566(Guj)
Divan, C.J. 1. In this reference, the following question has been referred to us at the instance of the assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisional assessment for the assessment year 1960-61 is an assessment within the meaning of the second proviso to section 2(XX) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 ?' 2. At the time when the application was made by the assessee to the Appellate Tribunal to refer certain questions arising out of the Tribunal's order to the High Court for the opinion of the High Court, the assessee had demanded that three questions as prayed for by him should be referred to the High Court. Out of those three questions, the Tribunal referred only one question and, thereafter, the assessee has filed Gift-tax Application No. 1 of 1971, praying that the Tribunal should be asked to refer the remaining two questions also to the High Court for its opinion. In that gift-tax application, on November 2, 1971, this court directed that rule should...
Tag this Judgment!Merani Ranibai Ata Vs. Mer Khima Jakhra anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1973
Reported in: (1974)15GLR850
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. The question which confronts the Court in this revision by the original plaintiff is as to whether the trial Court rightly held that the instrument executed by the opponents in favour of the petitioner plaintiff was insufficiently stamped and was inadmissible in evidence without payment of the alleged deficit stamp duty of Rs. 113/- alongwith penalty of Rs. 1130/-.2. The plaintiff is a widow. She has no son. She has only two minor daughters, Her husband died about 12 years back. After the death of her husband, the opponents-defendants executed a writing in favour of the plaintiff. By that writing the opponents promised to pay certain sums for the maintenance of the plaintiff and her minor daughters. They also promised to supply her with grains etc. According to the plaintiff, the opponents committed a breach of the agreement and failed to honour the obligation undertaken by them. She accordingly instituted a suit claiming the restoration of the lands of her deceased ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramagauri Girdharlal Vs. Narottam Narandas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1973
Reported in: (1975)16GLR176
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. A startling proposition has been canvassed by the petitioner-landlord with his eyes glued on Section 13(1)(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Act). 'If a tenant in town X acquires vacant possession of premises in a different town, Y, and if the premises are suitable for residence' says Counsel for the landlord with confidence, 'he is liable to eviction under Section 13(1)(1) of the Act.'2. The provision in question in so far as material, reads as under:13(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act (but subject to the provisions of Section 15, a landlord shall be entitled to recover possession of any premises if the Court is satisfied-xxx xxx xxxxxx xxx xxx(L) that the tenant after the coming into operation of this Act has built, acquired vacant possession of or been allotted a suitable residence.3. The Rent Act is made applicable to towns in which there is acute scarcity of housing acc...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat Ii Vs. Arvind Narottam
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-01-1973
Reported in: [1976]102ITR232(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. This reference arises out of the assessment orders for assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65, passed by the Wealth-tax Officer, Group Circle II (1), Ahmedabad, assessing the assessee-respondent herein for the entire value of the assets held by the trustees under three discretionary trusts and created by the father of the assessee on the ground that he was the sole beneficiary at the valuation date of the aforesaid respective assessment years. The Wealth-tax Officer has passed the said orders under section 21(2) of the Wealth-tax Act for the said respective assessment years on February 16, 1963, July 25, 1964, and March 5, 1965, respectively, including Rs. 24,15,641, Rs. 19,64,352 and Rs. 19,25,655, being the valuation of the entire trust estate in the net wealth of the respondent-assessee. These orders, it is so claimed by the revenue, were made by the Wealth-tax Officer in the nature of protective assessment, though the assets of the three discretionary trusts...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›