Gujarat Court December 1973 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.
Nazarali Kazamali and ors. Vs. Fazlanbibi and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-10-1973
Reported in: AIR1975Guj81
M.U. Shah, J.1. These two appeals wise out of the original Special Jurisdiction Civil Suit No. 52 of 1965 of the Court of the 2nd Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Baroda, for administration of the estate of deceased Kazamali Mustafamiya who died intestate leaving extensive immovable properties and leaving behind him the plaintiff daughter and the parties to the suit as his heirs. First Appeal No, 283 of 1968 is filed by original defendants Nos. 1 and 5 of the said suit and is directed against the decision of the learned Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Baroda, in Special jurisdiction Civil Suit No. 52, of 1965 given on 31-8-1967 whereby the learned Civil Judge, has passed a preliminary decree as in an administration suit and directed that accounts be taken and enquiries be made in relation to estate left by deceased Kazamali Mustafaali save the immovable properties comprised in Kazamali's gift-deeds Exs.125 and 126. Second Appeal No. 242 of 1971 is directed against the deci...
Commissioner of Expenditure-tax, Gujarat Vs. H.H. Thakore Saheb of Lak ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-07-1973
Reported in: [1974]97ITR1(Guj)
T.U. Mehta, J. 1. This reference raises the question whether the payment of Rs. 75,000 which the assessee has made to meet the marriage expenditure of his daughter is covered by the exemption clause (j) of section 5 of the Expenditure-tax Act, 1957 (which is hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The payment in question is made by the assessee in S. Y. 2016 which is the accounting period relevant for the assessment year 1961-62. The case of the assessee is that the disputed amount of Rs. 75,000 was impressed with an obligation in the nature of a trust and, therefore, its expenditure is exempted from expenditure-tax under clause (j) of section 5, while the contention of the revenue is that the said clause has no application to the facts of the case. 2. Facts of the case are that the assessee was an ex-Ruler of Lakhtar State. Some time before the year 1952, there were some disputes between him on one side and his senior wife and her children on the other. These disputes seem to have been...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Moolchand Jaikishandas a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-07-1973
Reported in: [1977]108ITR500(Guj)
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. In this reference made at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred to us for our opinion by the Tribunal : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment of commission paid to the employees of the respondent is allowable under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee is a registered firm and the relevant assessment years are 1963-64 and 1964-65. The assessee-firm carries on business in Bombay and Ahmedabad in the textile chemicals, dyestuffs and auxiliaries and supplies these materials to the textile mills at Ahmedabad and Bombay. During the course of the assessment proceedings the Income-tax Officer noticed that the following commission was paid by the assessee-firm to its employees in assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65 : Name Amount Amountof commission of salary1963-64Rs. Rs.p.m.1. Shri N.J. Trivedi 25,320 3252. Shri B.K. Gutta 18,465 500---------43,785--...
Jashwantlal Natverlal Thakkar Vs. Sushilaben Manilal Dangerwala and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-07-1973
Reported in: (1975)16GLR181
A.A. Dave, J.1. This appeal arises out of the order of the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, dismissing the application preferred by the present appellant under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the sale on the ground of irregularities and illegalities as per particulars mentioned in the application.2. When this appeal came up for hearing before me, a preliminary objection was taken by Mr. M.D. Pandya, learned Advocate for the respondent No. 1 (original judgment-creditor) that the present appeal filed by the insolvent-appellant is incompetent as on the date of the appeal, he had no interest in the property. He urged that the insolvency court had already passed an order appointing an official receiver in whom the interest of the insolvent in the property had already vested. Mr. Pandya, therefore, urged that as the insolvent has no locus standi to file the present appeal, the appeal deserves to be dismissed summarily.3. In support of his submissions, Mr....
Associated Cement Companies Ltd. Vs. Chhaya Gram Panchayat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-07-1973
Reported in: (1975)16GLR400
S.H. Sheth, J.1. The Associated Cement Companies Ltd. has filed this petition against Chhaya Gram Panchayat under the following circumstances. The petitioner-Company is running a cement factory which is situate partly within the limits of the Gram Panchayat and partly within the limits of Porbandar Municipality in Junagadh District. The total area which the Company's factory and quarters occupy is 278 acres out of which 140 acres fall within the limits of the Gram Panchayat where the factory is situate and 138 acres fall within the limits of Porbandar Municipality where the residential quarters for the officers and servants of the Company are situate. In June 1956 the Company undertook the construction of its factory. On 3rd January 1959 Chhaya Gram Panchayat was constituted. On 17th May 1961 the Panchayat decided to levy octroi duty. On 18th February 1964 the Gujarat Panchayats (payment of lump sum contribution by factories in lieu of taxes) Rules, 1964 came into force. In August 1966...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Trinity Traders
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-1973
Reported in: [1974]97ITR81(Guj)
T.U. Mehta, J.1. The question which arises to be considered in this reference is whether a declaration made under section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, before the expiry of the accounting period is a valid declaration in law. This question arises in the context of the following facts. 2. The respondent-assessee is a partnership firm. The question relates to the assessment of the assessee's income for the assessment year 1967-68, the relevant accounting period being Samvat year 2022. It is an admitted position that the accounting period ended on 12th November, 1966. 3. For assessment year 1967-68 the assessee filed his return on August 19, 1968, along with a declaration under section 184(7) of the Act. However, this declaration was not signed by two of its partners, namely, Sajanben Zaverilal and Divyakant Zaverilal. The said declaration was, therefore, defective. However, on April 16, 1969, the assessee filed a revised return along with the new declaration which was made on June ...
Vinodkumar Ratilal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujrat Ii
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-1973
Reported in: [1975]100ITR564(Guj)
Divan, C.J. 1. In this reference made at the instance of the assessee the following question has been referred to us : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 13,600, being the aggregate of the share of the wife and minor allocated to them up to July 1, 1963, was liable to be including in the assessee's total income for Samvat Year 2019 and liable to be assessed in the hands of the assessee in the assessment year 1964-65 ?' 2. The assessee in this case, Ratilal Ranchhoddas, died on July 1, 1963, and in the income-tax proceedings the assessee's estate has been represented by the hair and legal representative of the deceased, Ratilal Ranchhoddas. The relevant assessment year is 1964-65. The deceased assessee was a partner in a two firms : (1) Messrs. Ranchhoddas Bhaichand & Co. and (2) Messers. Ranchhoddas Bhaichand (Grain Dept.) and both these firms were being assessed at Bombay. The previous year for the two firms relevant for the assessment year 196...
Controller of Estate Duty, Gujarat I Vs. Kantilal Bhailal Dave
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1973
Reported in: [1975]100ITR577(Guj)
T.U. Mehta, J. 1. The point involved in this reference is whether the disbursement of the amount of Rs. 90,005 made by the deceased amongst his five sons amounts to gift so as to attract the provisions of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, which is hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. 2. Short facts of the case are that in the Samvat year 2009 which is equivalent to the year 1952-53, the deceased, Bhailal Harjivandas Dave, was running a proprietary business known as 'M/s. Bhailal Harjivan'. At that time the deceased had five sons and one daughter. On 6th January, 1953, he made the disbursement of the amount of Rs. 90,005 equally between his five sons, each getting an amount of Rs. 18,001. At the same time, he set apart a further amount of Rs. 3,673 for the marriage expenses of his daughter, Jayagauri, crediting the same amount to her personal name. A further amount of Rs. 6,001 was set apart by him on his own personal name. He further put the havala entry for the amount of Rs. 2...
Maneklal Narandas Vs. Gajaraben Widow of Chunilal Maneklal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1973
Reported in: (1975)16GLR11
J.B. Mehta, J.1. These two matters arise out of execution of two eviction decrees which this landlady got against her two concerned tenants on January 10, 1966, in the two suits Nos. 17/65 and No. 18/65 respectively'. The C.R.A. relates to the tenant Bhrambhatt Parsottam Motisinh against whom suit No. 17/65 was filed by this landlady on the ground also of arrears of rent from November 1, 1962 to December 31, 1964 and on the common ground of personal requirement for her son-in-law who was residing with her and the suit premises were necessary for extending his coal business which was carried on by him. The tenants in both the suits had disputed the landlord's claim by riling a written statement and they were represented by some lawyer. The landlord was represented by Mr. Khatri. Before evidence was recorded the parties filed compromise purshis in identical terms. In the first Clause in that compromise Purshis, it is stated that the plaintiff's suit was admitted. It may be noted that thi...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Hides and Leather Products Pvt ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1973
Reported in: [1975]101ITR61(Guj)
Divan, C.J. 1. In this case at the instance of the revenue the following question has been referred to us for our opinion by the Appellate Tribunal : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, depreciation was rightly allowed to the assessee on the basis that the cost to it of the machinery purchases was Rs. 30,572 ?' 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are as follows : The relevant assessment years are assessment years 1961-62 to 1965-66. The assessee is a private limited company. During the calendar year 1955, that is, the previous year relevant for the assessment year 1956-57, the assessee purchased from the Industrial Trading and Financial Company Ltd., Zurich, Switzerland, a mechanical Picker press for 27,820 Swiss Francs equivalent to Rs. 30,572 as shown in the supplier's bill dated April 28, 1955. The machinery was actually received by the assessee on June 15, 1955. According to the bill the payment was to be made against sight draft within 180 days. On ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »