Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1980]124ITR334(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The assessment years under reference are 1966-67 and 1967-68, corresponding to previous years being S.Y. 2021 ending on October 24, 1965, and S.Y. 2022 ending on November 12, 1965, respectively. The assessee is a registered partnership firm carrying on business as general merchants and commission agents in Jamnagar and also manufactures of groundnut oil at Veraval. The assessee-firm has got a solvent extraction plant at Veraval. It exported or sold to exporters de-oiled cakes of the value of Rs. 48,92,902, during the year of account relevant to assessment year 1966-67. The assessee-firm claimed deduction from income-tax in respect of such exports or sales to the exporters under s. 2(5)(a)(ii) and (iii) of the Finance Act, 1966. Similarly, during the year of account relevant to the assessment year 1967-68, the assessee-firm exported or sold to exporters de-oiled cakes of the value of Rs. 24,13,040, and claimed deduction from income-tax in respect of such exports or sale...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1978]113ITR785(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. In this reference made at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred to us for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the surplus realised on the sale of the plots of land was assessable as capital gains and not as business profits ?' 2. The assessment year under consideration is assessment year 1969-70, and the relevant previous year is the financial year 1968-69. The assessee, who is an individual, owned agricultural land bearing survey No. 335 on the outskirts of Rajkot City. This plot was admeasuring 7,500 square yards. This land was inherited by him from his ancestors and in 1957-58 he converted this survey number into non-agricultural land. He divided the land into plots and sold the plots as and when a purchased was available. Prior to assessment year 1969-70, whenever a plot of land or plots of land were sold, the profit realised by the assessee on such sales had ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1979]117ITR86(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The following question is referred to us for out opinion: 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 20,000 contributed by the assessee-company to the District Panchayat Board for constructing a road leading to Bhaili Project was a capital expenditure ?' 2. A few facts need be noticed in order to appreciate the import of this question and the dispute involved in this reference. 3. The relevant assessment year with which we are concerned in this reference is 1970-71. The assessee is a limited company carrying on business of manufacturing photo-chemicals, such as sodium sulphite, sodium bisulphite, etc. The company has been in existence for the last more than 15 years and has established the manufacturing unit at Pratapnagar, Baroda. It appears that the company undertook to set up a new project at village Bhaili near Baroda. In the course of the construction of this project, the company was required ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1978)19GLR378
P.D. Desai, J.1. On February 13, 1976 a Division Bench of this Court made the following peremptory order while allowing Letters Patent Appeal No. 276 of 1974:In the result, the appeal is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay up all the petitioners the arrears of their aforesaid special pay within three months from the date of this order. Rule is made absolute with costs all throughout.The Writ communicating the aforesaid directive was admittedly served on the State Government (one of the respondents to the Letters Patent Appeal) on or about March 8, 1976. The certified copy of the judgment of this Court was admittedly made available to the State Government on or about May 13, 1976.2. According to the order made by this Court, the arrears of special pay were required to be paid to the petitioners on or before May 12,1976. Since payment was not made accordingly, the petitioners addressed a letter dated July 22, 1976 to the second respondent herein (Secretary to the Government, Rev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1980]124ITR448(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. In this case at the instance of the assessee the following question has been referred to us for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in applying the provisions of section 40(c)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in upholding the disallowance made by the Income-tax Officer both in respect of motor car expenses as well as depreciation ?' 2. The facts leading to this reference are as follows : We are concerned with assessment years 1966-67 to 1969-70, the relevant accounting years being calendar years 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968. The assessee is a private limited company which carries on business in textile accessories. If follows mercantile system of accounting. During the relevant years of account, the company had maintained four cars at Bombay and two cars at Ahmedabad. In connection with these six motor cars the company had incurred certain expenditure towards maintenance and running of motor cars and had al...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1978)19GLR29
A.N. Surti, J.1. The question of considerable importance affecting a woman's right to obtain an order of maintenance and against whom a decree for judicial separation is passed under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is raised in this revision application.2. In order to appreciate the point canvassed before me, a few relevant facts may be stated.3. The petitioner Bai Ramilaben daughter of Ambalal Jinabhai and wife of Kantilal Shankerlal of Baroda is the lawfully wedded wife of the opponent-husband. The marriage was performed on June 10, 1971 at Baroda as per Hindu religious rites and ceremonies. After the marriage, the petitioner-wife resided with her husband at Bombay. It was alleged that the opponent-husband's behaviour towards her was not good as her father had given less amount as 'Kariawar' at the time of the marriage. The opponent-husband was residing in a joint family along with his brother and sisters who used to mentally torture the petitioner-wife in regard to the am...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1978)19GLR1117
A.M. Ahmadi, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by a partnership firm trading in the name and style of Swastik Oil Industries, which held a licence under the Gujarat Groundnut Dealers Licensing Order, 1966, to carry on business in groundnut oil. The premises of the firm were inspected on 10th July, 1976 by the District Supply Officer, Kaira and 397 tins of ground-nut oil were seized and, intimation thereof was given to the Collector of Kaira immediately. Thereafter a show cause notice was issued calling upon the petitioner firm to show cause why these tins of ground-nut oil should not be confiscated to the State. In the show cause notice, 9 grounds were set out for confiscation of the ground-nut oil tins to which the petitioner sent replies on 16th September, 1976 and 17th September, 1976. The petitioner was then given an opportunity of personal hearing on 4th October, 1976 and upon a consideration of the material placed before him, the Collector of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1978)19GLR464
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The petitioners, who are the trustees of a public trust known as PATEL LALJI LAXMIDAS SADAVRAT SANSTHA, have challenged the order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal of April 12,1973, confirming the order of the Deputy Collector, Patan, holding that the aforesaid trust was not entitled to exemption under Section 88-B of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tenancy Act'). The Charity Commissioner, Gujarat, has by his order of April 27, 1962, sanctioned the scheme while permitting the amalgamation of the two trusts viz. Patel Lalji Laxmidas Nava Ramji Mandir Public Trust and Swami Muktanand Sadavrat Public Trust. The objects of the said trust were, according to Clause 2 of the said scheme, (1) maintenance and upkeep of the temple, (2) performance of Dev Seva Puja of the temple, (3) Sadavrat, (4) education and medical relief, and (5) general acts of public ultility. Clauses 5 of the said scheme enjoins the trustees to apply the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1980]122ITR341(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J.1. The assessee is a registered firm which carries on business as a dealer in radio and radio accessories. In the course of proceedings for assessment to income-tax for the assessment year 1965-66, corresponding accounting year being calendar year 1964, the ITO found various cash credits in its books of account amounting to Rs. 35,459. As the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain the nature and source of the said cash credits, the ITO brought to tax the said amount as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. The ITO also initiated action for levy of penalty for concealment of such income by giving the following directive :'Also issue show-cause notice for concealment of income.'2. As, however, the minimum penalty imposable exceeded a sum of Rs. 1,000, the ITO referred the case to the IAC. Before the penalty proceedings reached hearing before the IAC, the appeal preferred by the assessee, against the assessment order passed by the ITO, before the AAC was decided...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1978)19GLR751
J.B. Mehta, Ag. C.J.1. The petitioners, members of the teaching and non-teaching staff of Sharda Vidyalaya, Bhat village Daskroi Taluka, Ahmedabad District, which is a private registered Secondary School, have filed this contempt petition against the Manager of the school, joined as Respondents Nos. I and 2, Chandubhai P. Amin, who is also the Managing Trustee of the trust in question and against the District Education Officer, who is joined as Respondent No. 3.2. The case of the petitioners is that they had not been paid their salary and that is why they had approached, by an application under the Gujarat Secondary Education Act, 1972 to the Education Tribunal. The Tribunal has disposed of this matter by the final order dated October 15, 1976. The Managing Trustee, Chandubhai P Amin, appeared in that matter. His plea was that he had not received the grant from the Government. He assured the Tribunal to take adequate steps to pay the arrears of salary of all these persons. The Tribunal...
Tag this Judgment!