Gujarat Court July 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.
The State of Gujarat Vs. Chelabhai Bhanabhai Prajapati
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1973
Reported in: [1974]33STC147(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. The opponent herein is a dealer carrying on business of manufacturing bricks for sale. The opponent was not registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1963 (sic). Assessment proceedings were started against the opponent in 1964. The opponent was assessed for the period from 11th April, 1958, to 31st December, 1959, and 1st January, 1960, to 4th May, 1961, as an unregistered dealer. He was also assessed for the subsequent periods from 5th May, 1961, to 31st March, 1963, and 1st April, 1963, to 24th October, 1965, as a registered dealer. It appears that the assessment order for the period form 1st January, 1960, to 4th May, 1961, was passed by the Sales Tax Officer on 30th September, 1964, holding that the opponent was liable from 1st January, 1960. The opponent went in appeal before the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax who fixed his liability from 1st April, 1960. The Assistant Commissioner passed his order on 27th August, 1965. In view of this order of the Assistant Comm...
Gagu Vs. the State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1973
Reported in: 1975CriLJ670; (1974)GLR584
ORDERA.A. Dave, J.1. This revision application raises a very interesting question of law relating to the power of the court to tender a pardon with a view to obtaining the evidence of any person supposed to have been directly or indirectly concerned in or privy to an offence.2. In order to appreciate the point in question, it will be worthwhile to refer to the salient facts of this case. A charge sheet was submitted by the police against seven accused alleging that in furtherance of the common intention to murder the deceased, they all committed his murder punishable under Section 302, I. P. C. read with Section 34, I. P. C. It was alleged that accused No. 1 had illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased Gagu. So accused No. 1 wanted to kill Gagu. He, therefore, is alleged to have taken into confidence other accused and in furtherance of their common intention, Gagu is alleged to have been murdered. One Arjan Khengar is one of the seven accused persons. The statements recorded ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›