Gujarat Court June 1974 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.
Sports Club of Gujarat Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Gujarat, Ah ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-20-1974
Reported in: [1975]36STC511(Guj)
J.B. Mehta, J. 1. The Tribunal has posed the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the club is a dealer within the meaning of section 2(11) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, in respect of its activity of catering to invitees of the members other than the ordinary guests allowed under bye-law 24 at special parties, lunches, dinners, etc., booked and paid by the individual members.' 2. The short facts which have given rise to this reference are as under : The petitioner, Sports Club of Gujarat, is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act and the liability of its members is limited. It was registered as a dealer under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. Its object was to provide facilities for promotion of various sports. The club was open only to its members and it deals only with members. The members were about 3,120 in number. Under the relevant bye-laws, guests not exceeding four were allowed sub...
State of Gujarat Vs. Sakurbhai Abedbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-20-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC57(Guj)
T.U. Mehta, J.1. The question involved in this reference is whether while considering the applicability of the test of the tax assessment exceeding more than 20 per cent of the tax already paid, as provided by sub-section (3A) of section 36 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (which is hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), the amount of tax paid by the assessee, after filing his return but before the final tax assessment was made, should be taken into consideration or not. 2. This question arises in the background of the following facts : The respondent-assessee is a partnership-firm doing the business of reselling timber, stone, etc., at Vadnagar. It is duly registered as a dealer under the Act. During the course of S.Y. 2025 the respondent-assessee filed quarterly returns under the Act showing the total taxable turnover of sales at Rs. 78,385 for the levy of sales tax and of Rs. 9,510 for the levy of general sales tax. It is an admitted position that along with the four returns filed ...
Harmadia Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Mandli Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sal ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-18-1974
Reported in: [1974]34STC409(Guj)
J.B. Mehta, J. 1. The question which has been referred to in this case is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the transactions of sale of the groundnuts of the members made by the society by auction are sales liable to tax under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ?' 2. The society in question is registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925, and it was assessed for the period from 1st January, 1960, to 6th June, 1961, to sales tax on its turnover of sales of groundnuts to the tune of Rs. 75,081. As this liability has been upheld even by the Tribunal, the society asked for this reference. At an earlier stage when this matter was taken up, the relevant bye-laws were considered along with the modus operandi of this business of the society. It was pointed by our learned brother A. D. Desai, J., speaking for the Division Bench that the object of the society was to advance loans at cheap rates to the members and to sell on commission their pro...
Jayantilal Chunilal Panchali Vs. Bai Jashoda
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Guj140; (1975)0GLR146
1. The tenant who is the petitioner before me filed in the Civil Court at Surat Rent Application No. 1186 of 1969 against his landlord for fixation of standard rent of the premises let out to him. The premises are situate in the city of Surat. The contractual rent of the premises was Rs.65. The premises consist of one room admeasuring 12'X15'. It appears that there were at an earlier stage proceedings between the tenant and the landlord for fixation of standard rent of these very premises. Those proceedings had led to the consent order by which Rs.65 per month which was the contractual rent was fixed as standard rent by the Court. The landlord therefore resisted the present application on the ground that it was barred by res judicata. The earlier application for fixation of the standard rent of the premises was rent application No. 487 of 1968 which was decided on 29th July, 1968. The compromise entered into between the parties in that Rent Application is at Ex. 22/1.2. The trial Court...
Bhogilal Jethalal Patel Vs. Yusufbhai Ramanbhai Gajiwala and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-18-1974
Reported in: (1975)16GLR215
B.K. Mehta, J.1. A short question arises in this petition, whether the first respondent who was nominated by the Government of Gujarat as its nominee on the Board of Directors of the second respondent-and under Section 80 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961-was entitled to act as a director and attend the meeting or to vote or participate in the discussion of the Board of Directors. The said question arises in the following circumstances:2. The second respondent herein is a Co-operative Bank registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act and the petitioner is a member of the said Bank. Respondent No. 1 was appointed as a State nominee by the State of Gujarat on the Board of second respondent-Bank on September 26, 1973. The first respondent herein had taken a loan from Baroda People's Cooperative Bank on September 22, 1970. The Baroda People's Co-operative Bank is a Co-operative society carrying its activities within the area of operation of the second respondent-Ba...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›