Gujarat Court August 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.
Simatul Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cibatul Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-09-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Guj216; (1978)0GLR315
Thakkar, J.1. One will have to reflect a great deal before saying 'What is in a name?' for everything centers around a name (Cibatul? Simatul?) in the battle between two business houses giving rise to the present appeal. And the question debated before the Court is as to whether the trial Court was right in holding that the name 'Simatul Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd.' under which the appellant-defendant is doing business is so deceptively similar to the name of the respondent-plaintiff 'Cibatul Limited' that the public at large and the consumers are likely to be deceived into believing that they are dealing with the same Company or Companies having some connection or association with each other and that in order to protect the plaintiff Company from its goodwill being invaded and in order to' prevent confusion among the public at large and consumers, it was necessary to restrain the defendant Company from carrying on business under any name and style comprising the words 'Simatul' or '...
Aminabibi, W/O. Mohmed Yusuf Hatia Vs. Havabibi D/O. Ahmed Yusuf Musaj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-1977
Reported in: (1978)19GLR339
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. The above appeal from order is filed by the original plaintiff-applicant of a pauper Application No. 182 of 1976 before the Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) Surat, who had rejected her prayer for allowing her to sue in forma paauperis. The above-mentioned civil application is filed for the stay of the further proceedings.2. The applicant had filed the above application. Her suit was for the recovery of her ornaments and clothes worth Rs. 50,000/- and in the alternative to recover Rs. 50,000/- as the price of the said ornaments and clothes. Her application for pauperism was resisted by the would be defendants. The learned Judge rejected the application on two counts. Firstly, the learned Judge found from the evidence of the applicant herself that she had some share in a house at Rander and also in some land on the Surat-Rander road, they being the properties of her father, who had died about two years prior to her date of deposition. She also had admitted in her cross-examinati...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gajarat-iv Vs. Balabhai and Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-1977
Reported in: [1980]122ITR301(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J.1. The question which arises for determination in this reference is covered by the decision of a Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Royal Motor Car Co. : [1977]107ITR753(Guj) . In order, however, to dispose of the reference, a few facts will have to be set out and we proceed to do so. 2. The assessment year involved is assessment year 1970-71, the relevant previous year being S.Y. 2025. The assessee is a firm which deals in cloth on wholesale basis. It appears that in the course of proceedings for assessment to income-tax, for the relevant assessment year, the ITO found on examination of the accounts of the assessee that it had not disclosed the closing stock. After further examination of the accounts, the ITO found that the assessee had not accounted for the sale of four bales of cloth. The assessee asked for and was given time to explain the discrepancy. The assessee thereupon filed a revised return including therein the sale price of four bales which came to Rs. 4,...
Gujarat Machine Tools Industries and ors. Vs. State Bank of Saurashtra ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Guj91; (1978)0GLR385
Obul Reddi, C.J.1. The applicants were defendants Nes. I,Sand& They bave filed an application under S. 4 of the IAmitation Act for condoning delay oi 147 days in filing the ftst Appeal. The Sftft Bank of Saurashtra had laid action in the Court below against the defendauft for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,88,682-08 ps. and the Court below passed a decree in favour of the Bank for Its. 1,73,259-58 ps. with interest thereon at 9 per cent Per annum from the date of the suit till date of payment~ R is agonst that decree that the present appeal is sought ta, be filed by makin an application foir am. donation. of delay of 147 days. Defendant No. 1, Messrs Gx4arat Machine Tools Industries, is a partnership firm and applicants Nos. 2 and a along with some, others who have sweep retired were ift partners. The reason given by the applicaub in their ap. plication for condonation, of delay for not filing the appeal in time is that the Mane Dig Partner, applicaixt No. 2. 'was keeping indifferent healt...
P. Vs. Doshi V. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR22(Guj)
JUDGEMENTJ. B. METHA J. - At the instance of the assessee the Tribunal has posed in this reference the following three questions :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that once the Tribunal passed an order the matter became final with regard to the point which was settled by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and was not agitated before the Tribunal unless it was taken up to the High Court ?2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the previous order of the Tribunal dated June 21, 1969, restoring the case to the file of the Income-tax Officer meant that the only point that was open was in respect of the addition of Rs. 19,421 and not the legal or jurisdictional aspect whether the reassessment proceedings were correctly initiated under section 147/148 ?3. Whether, on the facts, the assessee was justified at this late stage in re-agitating the matter whether the case was rightly reopened (which is purely a legal matter g...
Mahagujarat Hawkers Vepari Mahajan Vs. the Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-03-1977
Reported in: (1978)19GLR274
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This revision application under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code raises an important question of law concerning theft court fees. The petitioner before this Court is the original plaintiff, an Association, known as Mahagujarat Hawkers Vepari Mahajan of Ahmedabad, claiming to espouse the cause of hawkers in the City of Ahmedabad, both its members and non-members. The said Association had filed the Civil Suit No. 10 of 1976 in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad against the Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad and the State of Gujarat, claiming in paragraph II of the plaint ,he following reliefs:(a) restrain the officers of these defendants (the Corporation and the State) from changing the fixed stands or deciding anything contrary without hearing the members and other persons concerned, who are carrying on their business in barrows, cabins, etc. placed on the stands specified and restrain them and their agents and servants from acting singly or conjointly from removing...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Motilal Hirabhai Spg. and Wvg. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR173(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J. 1. The assessment year with which we are concerned in this reference is the assessment year 1970-71, the corresponding previous year being calendar year 1969. The assessee is a public limited company. It was originally running a textile mill. However, since 1971-72, the textile mill was closed down and thereafter the assessee derived income from property and by way of interest on certain advances and/or deposits made by it. Up to the assessment year previous to the assessment year under consideration, the income derived by way of interest was returned under the head 'Income from other sources'. In the assessment year in question, however, the assessee claimed that the interest income was business income and that it was liable to be taxed under the head 'Profits and gains of business'. The assessee also claimed deduction of expenses against the said income by treating it as business income. The Income-tax Officer and, on appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, negat...
indravijaysinhji Monubha Rana Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-02-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1199
B.K. Mehta, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the brother of the detenu one Mahavirsinh Manubha Rana has challenged the order of detention of December 15, 1976 purported to have been made by respondent No. 2 herein under Section 8 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention ot Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter known as 'COFEPOSA') with a view to preventing him from engaging in keeping smuggled goods. A few facts need be noticed in order to understand the challenge made in this petition,By an order of February 26, 1976. the brother of the petitioner was detained under Section 3 of the COFEPOSA with a view to prevent him from engaging in keeping the smuggled goods. This order was revoked by the State Government by its order of December 15, 1976 and on the same day the impugned order was made. It is an admitted position that the grounds on which the revoked order of detention was made were the same on which the impugned order has bee...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ratanlal Lallubhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-01-1977
Reported in: [1978]112ITR985(Guj)
P.D. Desai, J. 1. The assessee in this case is a registered partnership firm and we are concerned with proceedings relating to its assessment to income-tax for four assessment years, namely, assessment years 1966-67, 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70. The corresponding previous years for these assessment years are Samvat years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2034, respectively. The proceedings for assessment to income-tax in the aforesaid assessment years were reopened by the Income-tax Officer under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and the question which arises for consideration is whether the reassessment was valid. 2. It appears that in the course of assessment to income-tax for the aforesaid assessment years, the Income-tax Officer allowed as a permissible deduction certain amounts which were paid to the partners of the assessee-firm as and by way of interest. The relevant particulars with regard to the amounts of interest paid to each partner and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›