Gujarat Court July 1977 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.
Shankerlal H. Dave Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-iii
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1977
Reported in: [1980]124ITR733(Guj)
J.B. Mehta, J.1. In the first reference the question which is posed by the Tribunal is as under : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in disallowing the remuneration paid by the HUF to its karta, Shri Shankerlal H. Dave, for all the three years under reference ?' That question had arisen in this reference for the three years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70. The other reference No. 82 of 1975 is on the identical question for the subsequent two years, i.e., 1970-71 and 1971-72, and they are disposed of by this common order. We would state the facts so far as the first reference is concerned as the facts are identical for the purposes of the other reference. 2. The assessee, an HUF (Shri Shankerlal Harishankar Dave) in question, was at the relevant time constituted of the karta. Shri Shankerlal H. Dave, his wife, Shardaben, and their son, Pramod Shankerlal Dave, and two daughters, all children being minors. The HUF was a partner through its kar...
N.C. Dabhi and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-1977
Reported in: (1978)19GLR393
B.K. Mehta, J.1. A question of some importance as to how the seniority of transferred Government servants to the Panchayat Service is to be determined has arisen in this petition. The question arises in the following circumstances:2. The petitioners joined the services of the State of Gujarat on various dates between 1961 and 1964. They were appointed after interview and necessary test by the District Screening Committee by the State Government. The petitioners have also undergone training prior to the service or while they were in service. They were all appointed in the Revenue Department in Mehsana District. It appears that as a result of the decision of the State Government to close down Civil Supplies Section, which was a part of the Revenue Department, the staff working in Civil Supplies Section was required to go back to their parent Department, namely, the Revenue Department. There arose a likelihood of the petitioners being treated as surplus and consequently the retrenchment. ...
Hasanand Pinjomal Vs. Commissioner of Incocme-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1977
Reported in: [1978]112ITR134(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J.1. The assessment year with which we are concerned in this reference is assessment year 1970-71, the relevant previous year being the financial year commencing from April 1, 1969, and dealing with March 31, 1970. The assesse, a partnership firm, is a dealer in sugar. It carries on business on wholesla e basis at Bantwa in Junagadh district. During the relevnat previous year the assessee purchased about 4,554 bags of sugar for Rs. 9,77,523. Amongst the purchases so made were included the purchases made at auctions held by two co-operative societies, viz., the Bileshwar Khand Udyog Khedut Sahakari Mandali Ltd. at Kodinar, an the Una Taluka Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandali Ltd. at Una. Part of the payment of purchase price to both the said co-operative societies was made in cash. The first named co-operative society was paid purchase price in cash to the tune of Rs. 2,49,359 and the second named co-operataive society was paid purchase price in cash to the tune of Rs. 1,08,316. T...
Dhami Navnitbhai Amratlal and ors. Vs. Bhagvanlal Chhaganlal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1977
Reported in: (1978)19GLR420
D.A. Desai, J.1. Though the question raised in this appeal is a narrow one, it was argued on a wider canvass and that has added to our anxiety in reaching the correct conclusion in this matter.2. Facts lie in a narrow compass. Respondent No. I (mortgagee) had filed Special Suit No. 8 of 1962 against the appellants (mortgagors) praying for a decree for recovery of amounts under two mortgages one in the amount of Rs. 21,000 dated 19th July 1947 and another Rs. 16,000 under mortgage dated 21st March 1950, first being mortgage with possession. Prayer specifically was for sale of the mortgage security and payment of the amount payable under the aforementioned two mortgages. This suit ended in a consent decree on 19th November 1962. There is some dispute between the parties whether the decree dated 19th November 1962 was a preliminary decree or a final decree or partly preliminary and partly final decree. By the decree, the mortgagors were required to pay Rs. 18,000 within six months that is...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›