Gujarat Court August 1980 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Nagari Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-1980
Reported in: [1981]127ITR230(Guj)
Divan, C.J.1. Both these references arise out of the same order of the Tribunal and one reference is at the instance of the revenue and the other is at the instance of the assessee. After the Tribunal had passed its order in the relevant appeal, two applications under s. 256(1) were made to the Tribunal, one by the assessee and the other by the revenue, and in the light of those two applications, the Tribunal has referred the following four questions to us for our opinion : '(1) Whether the payment to the Textile Commissioner by the assessee for contravention of the instructions given by the Textile Commissioner was in the nature of penalty and not incidental to the carrying on of the assessee's business (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payments of Rs. 2,267 and Rs. 1,78,576 in the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, respectively, made to the Textile Commissioner under the provisions of clause 21C(b) of the Cotton Textile (Control) order, 1968, was...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-iii Vs. Minor Bababhai Alias Lavku ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-1980
Reported in: [1981]128ITR1(Guj)
Majmudar, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, Bench 'B', has referred to us a question of law for our opinion under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, at the instance of the revenue. The said question reads as under : 'Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to short-term capital loss of Rs. 11,617 on the ground that the 'extinguishment of rights therein ' as contemplated under s. 45 read with s. 2(47) need not be from any extraneous source and that such extinguishment may be brought about by the assessee's own action ?'2. In order to appreciate the background against which the aforesaid question come to be referred to us, it is necessary to have a look at the relevant facts. The assessee is an individual. The year of assessment was 1970-71 and the accounting period was the calendar year 1969. The assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 25,000 to the New Commercial Mills Co. Ltd. on a promissory note. The said mill-company had suffered fr...
Tag this Judgment!Artex Manufacturing Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-28-1980
Reported in: (1981)21CTR(Guj)31; [1981]131ITR559(Guj)
Divaj, C.J.1. In this case, at the instance of the assessee, the following six question have been referred by the Tribunal to us for our opinion : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the principle of mutuality will not apply and, therefore, the assessee was liable to be taxed (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, section 41(2) was applicable (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the surplus was not capital gains, but was business income (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the status of the assessee was a registered firm and not that of an association of persons (5) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to any relief on the basis of the two circulars relied on by it (6) Whether the transfer of a going concern is liable to...
Tag this Judgment!Matubhai C. Patel Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-27-1980
Reported in: [1982]133ITR303(Guj)
Majmudar, J. 1. In this reference, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has referred for out opinion a question of law under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee. The said question runs as under : 'Whether, on the facts of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to deduction of the interest payments of Rs. 20,435, Rs. 54,632, Rs. 50,025 and Rs. 5,497 for the assessment years 1966-67 to 1969-70, respectively ?' 2. In order to appreciate the background of the controversy between the parties which has given rise to the aforesaid reference, it is necessary to have a look at certain relevant facts : The assessee's father expire somewhere in July, 1965. On his death, the assessee inherited assets worth Rs. 12,38,000 and liabilities worth Rs. 2,47,000 in respect of the borrowing from the Bank of India by the assessee's father. The bank liabilities represented overdraft taken by the assessee's father f...
Tag this Judgment!Dharamchand S/O. Gopi Ram Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-27-1980
Reported in: (1980)2GLR341
V.V. Bedarkar, J.1. This is an application requesting this Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') with an allegation that complainant Arjanbhai Ratnabhai Patel, who filed the First Information Report (F.I.R.) before the Junagadh Police against the present petitioner Dharamchand Gopiram and one driver Kishanlal for the offence punishable under Sections 407, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code is either the abuse of process of the Court or there is a scope for substantial injustice and, therefore, the power should be exercised to secure the ends of justice.2. Complaint was filed by complainant Arjanbhai with the allegation he had sent 550 tins of solvent refined oil to the petitioner who runs M/s. Jindal Enterprises at Delhi, through Delhi-Gujarat Freightways Transport Company of Rajkot. The complainant runs Jagdish Export Industries, at Junagadh. These goods were sent on 7-3-1980 by receipt...
Tag this Judgment!A. Vs. B.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-27-1980
Reported in: (1981)22GLR273
D.C. Gheewala, J.1. A wife having applied under Section 125 of the Cr.P. Code for maintenance from respondent No. 1 husband before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court, Ahmedabad and having emerged second best in the said proceedings has preferred the present revision application.2. The main contention on which she based her claim was that the husband was sexually impotent and that he was unable to discharge his primary responsibilities towards his wife. The parties were married on 27-5-1978 at Ahmedabad according to the Sunni Muslim Shariat rites. After the marriage the petitioner had gone to the house of respondent No. 1 to live with him and lived with him as his legally wedded wife under the same roof upto 11-7-1978. According to the petitioner wife during that particular period of about six weeks the respondent No. 1 did not sleep with her; and she was asked to sleep in a separate bed and he did not talk with her. When questioned about the strange beha viour the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Bhalchandra Nathalal Acharya Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-27-1980
Reported in: (1980)2GLR250
B.K. Mehta, J.1. This revision application must be allowed obviously for the following reasons:The petitioner, who is the plaintiff of Regular Civil Suit No. 437 of 1977 on the file of the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.) at Baroda, sought leave of the Court under Sub-section (2) of Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code which is inserted by Civil Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1976, to file suit without serving any notice as required by Sub-section (1) thereof. It is an admitted position that the leave was granted by the then Civil Judge (S.D.) who was then presiding in the Court. It appears this leave was granted when the plaint was presented in the Court on April 29, 1977. The leave was sought from the Court because the petitioner was made to retire with effect from April 30, 1977 by the appellate order of the State Government of April 16, 1977 and, therefore, there was no sufficient time for the plaintiff to serve the notice as required under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code. It ...
Tag this Judgment!Jayantilal Bhogilal Desai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-1980
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Guj)186; [1981]130ITR655(Guj)
Majmudar, J.1. This reference at the instance of the assessee raises for our consideration the following three questions of law which have been referred to us for opinion by the I. T. A. Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the machineries and tools, goodwill and stock sold by the assessee to M/s. Acme Pencil Factory were separately valued for the purpose of sale and that, therefore, the assessee was liable to pay tax on capital gains and profits u/s. 41 (2) of the Act on sale of machineries and tools, etc. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 13,000 was liable to tax by way of profit on sale of stock 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was liable to pay tax on Rs. 25,000, being capital gains on transfer of goodwill ?' 2....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-1980
Reported in: (1981)21CTR(Guj)20
Divan, C.J. 1. In this case, at the instance of the revenue, the following two questions have been referred to us for our opinion : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the foreign tour expenditure incurred by the assessee on its director, Shri S. I. Patel, who was sent abroad to appoint two foreign engineers for manufacture of aerial ropeways for passenger traffic and material handling, is allowable as revenue deduction (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, under rule 19(5) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, half of the profits had to be added for the computation of capital for determining relief under section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. We are concerned in this case with the assessment year 1967-68, the previous year being the calendar year 1966. The assessee before us is a limited company. It was manufacturing engineering equipments of various kinds. In the year of account, relevant for this reference, one of its directors,...
Tag this Judgment!Sharad Bansilal Vakil Vs. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-1980
Reported in: (1981)22GLR1019
ORDER:Inspection of Judge's minute book cannot be given. Copies of the minute books cannot, in my opinion, be given. It does not form a part of the record (See 9 B.L.R. 1042). If Supreme Court wants it, it will be sent there.Sd. S.H. Sheth. J,16-7-80Sd. S.L. Talati, J.16-7-80.7. The substance of the order made as above was communicated to the petitioner by a communication dated July 19, 1980 issued under the signature of the Assistant Registrar of this High Court (respondent No. 5) and the petitioner was informed that:.Their Lordships have, on consideration of your request, directed me to inform you that the inspection of the Judge's Minute Books cannot be permitted nor the copies of such notes taken down by Their Lordships in the Minute Books can be supplied. I am also to inform you that if the Supreme Court wants the notes in question the same would be supplied to them.It might be stated that after the receipt of the aforesaid communication from the Assistant Registrar, the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »