Gujarat Court October 1980 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.
Gordhanbhai Kahandas Dalwadi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujrat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-03-1980
Reported in: (1981)21CTR(Guj)177; [1981]127ITR664(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 holding that the land in question was non-agricultural in character ?' 2. The assessment year under consideration is assessment year 1970-71, the previous year being Samvat Year 2025. The assessee is an individual and by two sale deeds, one in August, 1954, and the other in August, 1955, the assessee purchased the area covered by survey Nos. 1586/1/2/3 of Anand Town admeasuring one acre twenty gunthas. This land was situated within the limits of Anand Municipality. The purchase price paid by the assessee for this land was Rs. 5,928. The assessee was a manufacturer of bricks. The entire land admeasuring one acre twenty gunthas was sold by the assessee to Vijay Corporation for Rs. 1,20,000 under a deed of sale dated January 30, 1969. The ITO sought to include the gains made by t...
Ramprasad C. Dalal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-03-1980
Reported in: [1982]136ITR633(Guj)
Majudar, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has referred a question of law for out opinion under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee. The said question reads as unde : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the land under reference was not agricultural land within the meaning of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The fact leading to this reference are as unde : The assessment year under reference is 1970-71. The assessee is an individual. He sold land bearing survey No. 419, opposite to Law Garden, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. The total area of the said land was 1,876 sq. yds. Out of this land, a portion on the western side with the boundary shown in red line in the map annexed with the sale deed, admeasuring 938 sq. yds. was sold to a partnership firm of M/s B. K. Jadhav and Co., Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad, who were carrying on the business of purchase and sale of land and cons...
Commissioner of Gift-tax, Gujarat Vs. Ansuya Sarabhai-(Decd)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-01-1980
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Guj)201; [1982]133ITR108(Guj)
Majmudar, J. 1. At the instance of the revenue, a question of law has been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', for out opinion under s. 26(1) of the G. T. Act, 1958. The said question reads as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the transaction effected by the release deed dated July 12, 1964, executed by the assessee is taxable within the meaning of the Gift-tax Act, 195 ?' 2. The relevant facts leading to this reference may now be stated. Assessee, Smt. Ansuya, was the sister of late Shri Ambalal Sarabhai. Late Shri Ambalal Sarabhai created a trust whereby the transferred to the trustees, who were the members of his family, certain shares with a direction that the net income of this trust property, that is, shares, should be given to the assessee, Smt. Ansuya Sarabhai, during her lifetime for her absolute use and benefit. After the death of Smt. Ansuya Sarabhai, the trustees had to transfer and assign the trust pr...
Visnagar Yantrashal Vanker Sahakari Mandali Ltd. Vs. Union of India an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-01-1980
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT124(Guj)
R.C. Mankad, J.1. What is at stake in this petition by a Co-operative Society formed by workers who themselves operate powerlooms is the credibility of high officials of a Government Department (Central Excise Department). To act or not to act in accordance with their directions is no more the question. The question is whether to act according to their directions is a good ground for penalizing them. And this is how the dilemma has arisen. 2. Petitioner society was required to pay duty at the rate of Rs. 50 per loom per annum by way of compounded levy permissible under rule 96J read with the relevant notifications. The Society sought guidance from the competent authority on the question as to whether or not there was any ceiling on the number of looms that can be operated under the scheme of compounded levy. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad, by his letter dated March 20, 1969 had informed them that excise duty was payable at the rate of Rs. 50 per powerloom per annu...
Gujarat University Vs. Sharad Pravinchandra Upadhyaya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-01-1980
Reported in: (1980)2GLR469
S.H. Sheth, J.1. These three appeals are directed against the common judgment recorded by the learned Single Judge on April 24, 1980 in three petitions which were filed by some students who appeared at the First B. Sc. Examination held by Gujarat University in April, 1978.2. The learned Single Judge has stated in his judgment facts of each case in details. It is, therefore, not necessary for us to reproduce them in this judgment. The broad allegation which the University made against original petitioners was that they had directly or indirectly influenced the moderators and unduly obtained more marks than they deserved in certain papers in which they appeared. Notice was issued by the University to each of the original petitioners to show cause why their results should not be cancelled and why they should not be debarred from appearing at the examination for a certain period of time. The Enquiry Committee which the University appointed held the enquiry and came to the conclusion that t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›