Gujarat Court June 1973 Judgments
Manilal Gafoorbhai Shah Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-29-1973
Reported in: [1974]95ITR624(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. This reference involves the interpretation and effect of the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1965 (Act No. 55 of 1965), which is hereinafter referred to as the Act, and arises out of the reassessment of the income of the applicant for the assessment year 1957-58 (S. Y. 2021) on the ground that an undisclosed income of Rs. 90,000 has escaped assessment during the course of the original assessment, which was made on 24th October, 1961, on the total income of Rs. 43,219. 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee deals in precious stones like rubies, sapphires, etc., which are mainly sold to foreign countries. During the course of the assessment of the petitioner's income for the assessment year 1961-62 (S. Y. 2016) his accounts were scrutinised by the concerned Income-tax Officer with a view to see how his business was financed. During the said scrutiny it was noticed that the business was financed by money introduced in the form of hundi loans. It was further revealed that during...
Tag this Judgment!Sakarlal Chunilal and ors. Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1973
Reported in: [1975]98ITR610(Guj)
Bhagwati, C.J. 1. These two references raise an interesting but rather difficult question of law relating to the construction and application of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. It is necessary to state the facts of the two references in some detail in order to appreciate how the question arises. The facts are not the same in the two reference and, therefore, we shall first state the facts of Reference No. 2 of 1970 and then set out the facts of Reference No. 4 of 1970. 2. Ref. No. 2 of 1970. - This reference arises out of assessment to estate duty made on the principal value of the estate of one Chunilal Nathubhai who died on 9th October, 1961. Chunilal Nathubhai was a partner in a firm called Messrs. Chunilal Nathubhai in which he had 1/7th share. During his life Chunilal Nathubhai made the following gifts in favour of his sons, Chhotalal, Manganlal, Nanalal, Sakarlal and Vasantlal, his grandsons, Hiralal and Balvantrai, and his daughter, Bai Mani, on the dates shown against ...
Tag this Judgment!Mrudula Nareshchandra Vs. Controller Estate of Duty
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1973
Reported in: [1975]100ITR297(Guj)
T.T. Mehta, J.1. The question involved in this reference is whether in cases where it is specifically stipulated between the partners of a firm that on the death of any of the partner, the partnership shall not stand dissolved and that the heirs of the deceased partners shall have no right whatsoever to claim any share in the good will of the firm, the property of the deceased partner in the goodwill of the firm passes on his death under the provisions of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, or not. The said Act is hereinafter referred to as 'the Act.' 2. Short facts of the case are that one Nareshchandra Kantilal died on 13th September 1962. He was a partners in the firm of Messrs. G. Bhagwatiprasad & Co. having 28% share in the partnership. This partnership came into existence by virtue of the document, exhibit A, which is dated 6th June, 1957. On the death of the deceased, the petitioner of this reference, who is the accountable person, filed necessary return under the Act. The Assistant Cont...
Tag this Judgment!Harish and Co. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1973
Reported in: [1974]33STC12(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. Shortly stated the facts leading to this reference are as under : The Tata Chemicals Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') has a factory at Mithapur for manufacturing soda-ash. The company requires for the purposes of manufacture limestone chips. In order to procure limestones, the company had obtained on 20 years' lease certain plots of land situated in different villages in Ranavav Mahal of Sorath District. The State Government has sanctioned the grant to the company of the mining lease for the aforesaid for limestones with an option of renewal for the further period not exceeding the duration of the original lease. The company instead of extracting limestone materials from the quarries entered into an agreement with M/s. Palanji Shapoorji & Co. (hereinafter referred to as 'the contractors') for excavating, collecting and transporting limestone chips to the company from the leased land or from other sources. The contractors entered into a sub-contract in this...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Ram Industries Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1973
Reported in: [1974]34STC13(Guj)
Desai, J.1. The facts leading to this reference are that Shree Ram Industries, the applicant herein, is a partnership-firm doing the business of manufacturing for sale art silk saris and also reselling saris. The firm sells saris either in the same condition in which they are manufactured or, in some cases, after embroidering butta or attaching zalar to such saris. The total turnover of the sales of the firm for the period between 29th October, 1962, to 17th October, 1963, was Rs. 35,41,358. Sales to the extent of Rs. 3,24,262 were held by the Sales Tax Officer as sales of tax-free goods covered by entry 41 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Sales of Rs. 85,641 were held to be covered by entry 11A or entry 19 of Schedule E to the Act. Out of these sales for Rs. 85,641, sales for Rs. 45,216 were sales of saris either embroidered or decorated with butta, while sales for Rs. 40,425 were in respect of saris to which zalars were attached. T...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Mahavir Oil Mills
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-27-1973
Reported in: [1973]32STC385(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. The question which has been referred to us for our opinion is as under : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the bhinda (lady's finger) seeds purchased by the opponent-mill are oil-seeds covered by entry 6, Part II, of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, or are covered by the residuary entry 22 of Schedule A to the said Act ?' 2. The question has been referred to us in the following circumstances : The opponent herein is an oil mill manufacturing edible and non-edible oils and is registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. It was assessed for S.Y. 2020 corresponding to 18th October, 1963, to 4th November, 1964. During the said period it purchased bhinda seeds for Rs. 23,741 for purposes of manufacturing oil out of seeds. The Sales Tax Officer concerned held that the seeds purchased by the opponent-mill were oil-seeds and should be subjected to tax accordingly under entry 6, Part II, of Schedule B to the aforesaid Act. The opponent-mill...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Jamnagar Motor Stores
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-1973
Reported in: [1974]33STC353(Guj)
Desai, J.1. The question of law referred to in these references is identical and, therefore, we shall dispose of them by this common judgment. 2. It is not necessary to state the facts in detail in respect of these references. We will narrate shortly and broadly the necessary facts. The Sales Tax Officer in these references passed an order of assessment against the opponents herein relating to the turnover in respect of a particular year. The Assistant Commissioner invoked his revisional power in these references within the period of 5 years. The final orders in revision were passed by the Assistant Commissioner after a period of 5 years. It was contended before the Tribunal on behalf of the assessees that the orders revising the assessment passed by the Assistant Commissioner were illegal because it was necessary under the law that the final orders revising the assessment should have been passed within the period of 5 years. The Tribunal accepted the said argument and at the instance ...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Gujarat Engineering Company
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-25-1973
Reported in: [1974]33STC302(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. The following question has been referred to us for our opinion by the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, for the purpose of levy of tax, oil engines prior to 14th March, 1960, and spare parts thereof prior to 27th September, 1960, fall under entry 15 of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, or fall under entry 22 of Schedule E to the said Act ?' 2. The question arises in the following circumstances : The opponent-firm is a partnership firm dealing in manufactur and sale of oil engines and spare parts thereof. It is registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. It was assessed for two periods, viz., (i) 1st January, 1960, to 31st March, 1960, and (ii) 1st April, 1960, to 31st March, 1961, by separate assessment orders passed by the Sales Tax Officer, holding that oil engines and spare parts therefore are covered by entry No. 15 of Schedule C to the Act. The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax initiated suo mot...
Tag this Judgment!Karsandas Bhagwandas Patel Vs. G.V. Shah, Income-tax Officer, Rajkot a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-1973
Reported in: [1975]98ITR255(Guj)
Bhagwati, C.J. 1. This petition raises an interesting question of law relating to the power of the Income-tax Officer to rectify a mistake apparent from the record of the assessment after an appeal against a part of the assessment is disposed of by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The question arises under section 35, sub-section (1), of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. In order to appreciate the question it is necessary to state a few facts giving rise to the petition. 2. The petitioner was at all material times a partner in a firm called M/s. Steel and Forms Work Co. The assessment of the petitioner as an individual for the assessment year 1959-60 for which the relevant account year was the financial year ending 31st March, 1959, was completed by the Income-tax Officer on 9th March, 1960, and since the firm of M/s. Steel and Forms Work Co. had not been assessed at that time, the Income-tax Officer took the share of the petitioner in the profits of the said firm at nil subject to...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Jayant Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-1973
Reported in: [1975]36STC112(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. The question referred to us for our opinion in this reference is as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, refined bentonite powder is covered by entry 4 of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, or is covered by residuary entry No. 22 of Schedule E to the said Act ?' 2. The opponent-company is a registered dealer manufacturing and selling chemicals and medicines. During the period of assessment for S.Y. 2019, the opponent-company sold refined bentonite powder and claimed that the material sold was covered by entry 4 of Schedule C to the aforesaid Act. The Sales Tax Officer, however, negatived this contention and held that it fell under entry 22 of Schedule E. The matter was taken in appeal by the opponent-company, wherein the order of the Sales Tax Officer was confirmed. The opponent-company, therefore, took the matter in second appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal. The Tribunal after considering the nature of the description of the pro...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »