Gujarat Court September 1975 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.
Rukaiyabibi Wd/O. SamsuddIn Jivaji Raja Vs. Vohra Abdulbhai Isufally a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-19-1975
Reported in: (1977)18GLR164
J.M. Sheth, J.1. This appeal is filed by the original defendant No. 1 (judgment-debtor) against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mehsana, dated 8-3-1966, in Speeial Darkhast No. 14 of 1962. Original suit was Special Civil Suit No. 48 of 1949. It was an administrative suit for the estate of deceased Samsuddin Jivaji Raja. Partition also was claimed therein.2. In the course of the final decree in that suit, the parties entered into a compromise, wherein certain properties were allotted to the heirs and in lieu of certain properties allotted to the defendants, it was decided and agreed upon that defendants Nos. 1 and 3 should pay Rs, 30,000/- to plaintiffs Nos. 1/1 to 1/4, 2/1 to 2/5 and others as mentioned in para 4 of Ex. 3, within two month of the date of the compromise. Consequent upon the failure of defendants Nos. 1 to 3 to abide by the terms of the final decree, deceased Taiyabali Abdulkadar Raja filed the aforesaid Darkhast on 16-12-1962 for recovery o...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Harjivandas Hathibhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-18-1975
Reported in: [1977]108ITR517(Guj)
Divan, C.J. 1. The assessment year under consideration is 1968-69. The assessee is a registered firm and for the year of account which was the relevant previous year, being Samvat year 2023, the assessee had filed two return of income for assessment year 1968-69. The first return was for the period November 13, 1966, to May 25, 1967 and the second return was for the period May 26, 1967, to November 2, 1967. Samvat year 2023 was from November 13, 1966, to November 2, 1967. The original partnership deed was dated April 29, 1960, and under that deed of partnership, the firm consisted of four partners, each partner having 25 per cent. share in the profits of the firm. The firm was carrying on business in iron and steel, hardware and mill stores. One of the four partners, namely, Patel Harjivandas Hathibhai, died on May 25, 1967. Thereafter, a new partnership was entered into between the three surviving partners and the widow of the deceased. This new partnership deed was executed on June 1...
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bharat Vijay Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-10-1975
Reported in: [1985]152ITR255(Guj)
Mehta, J.1. The following question is referred to us for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of the Income-tax Officer passed under s. 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, holding that the said section did not apply ?' 2. A few facts may be noticed in order to understand the rival contentions in connection with the question referred to us. 3. The assessee in the public limited company running a textile mill at Kalol. It field its return of income for the assessment year 1967-68, disclosing a total income of Rs. 6,89,500 on September 30, 1967. It appears that for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1965-66, the assessee had declared dividend of Rs. 1,20,000, when its total income for the assessment year 1965-66 was determined at nil and, therefore, no tax was chargeable for that assessment year. Similarly, the total income for the assessment year 1966-67 was also determined at nil afte...
Ravindra Motilal Shah Vs. Chinubhai Chimanlal Dalal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-10-1975
Reported in: (1976)17GLR758
J.M. Sheth, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order passed by the learned judge of the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, Mr. H. B. Shah, dated 7th April, 1970, in Review Applications Nos. 71 of 1970 and 72 of 1970, below Ex. I. He has allowed the review applications and set aside the order made by him on 16-1-1970. He has allowed Application No. 275 of 1968 and directed that a decree be passed in terms of the award of the arbitrators, and dismissed application No. 354 of 1969. He has also further passed an order that there will be no order as to costs either in review applications or in application No. 273 of 1968 or 354 of 1969.2. The facts leading rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as under : the aforesaid review applications had been made for reviewing the orders made in application No. 273 of 1968 and application No. 354 of 1969 on 16-1-1970. Application No. 273 of 1968 was filed in the city civil court, Ahmedabad, by the arbitrators for passing a decree in terms of ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Sabarkantha Zilla Kharid Vechan Sangh ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-03-1975
Reported in: [1977]107ITR447(Guj)
DIVAN C.J. - The assessee in each of these three cases is the same, namely, Sabarkantha Zilla Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd., Himatnagar. The question which arises for consideration in each of these three cases is the same but the three references are for different assessment years. Income-tax Reference No. 100 of 1974 is in respect of assessment year 1964-65. Income-tax Reference No. 24 of 1974 is in respect of assessment year 1965-66 and Income-tax Reference No. 139 of 1974 is in respect of assessment year 1966-67. The question is as regards the computation of profits and gains of that part of the business activities carried on by the assessee-society which falls within the exempted categories. We will take up the facts of each of these three cases separately.In Income-tax Reference No. 100 of 1974, the relevant assessment year is 1964-65. The assessee carries on the business of buying and selling agricultural implements, seeds, etc. The society sells the said articles to its members as we...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Royal Motor Car Co
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1975
Reported in: [1977]107ITR753(Guj)
Divan, C.J. 1. In this case, at the instance of the revenue, the following questions have been referred to us for out opinio : '(1) Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the penalty order made by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274(2) as it stood before the amendment by the taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1970, was time barred, is erroneous in law in view of the amendment of section 275 by the aforesaid Amendment Act with effect from April 1, 1971 (2) Whether the finding of the tribunal that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had not jurisdiction under section 274(2) of the Act, in view of its amendment by the abovesaid Amendment Act, 1970, was erroneous in law (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the penalty levied by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are as follow : The relevant assessment year is 1968-69. At the ...
The Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat, Ahmedabad Vs. Shri ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Guj)151
B. K. Mehta, J. - A short but interesting point as to what is the import of the first proviso to Section 114 (b)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 arises in these two references and as the questions referred to us are identical, we intend to dispose of both these references by this common judgment. A few facts may be noticed in order to appreciate the questions referred to us.2. The original propositus was one Shri Mayabhai Premabhai who died leaving behind him two sons, Vimal and Sarabhai. Vimal had two sons. Arvind and Vinod, while Sarabhai had one on Dipak. A HUF consisting of all these persons was assessed as Mayabnhai Prembhai through Vimalbhai Mayabhai. This larger HUF had properties including certain immovable properties in Ahmedabad which were self occupied. Some of the properties were also let out. It is claimed that there was a partial partition between the two brothers involving the self occupied as well as the other properties. By a deed of partition of October 22, 1965, the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›