Gujarat Court April 1981 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Suleman Abdul Sattar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Guj)432; [1983]139ITR8(Guj)
Mankad, J. 1. An assessee indicated the Part IV of his return of income for the assessment year 1969-70 that a receipt of Rs. 44,239 in the relevant year was not taxable on the ground that it was prize money received in a competition which was of the character of casual income earned during the previous year relevant to the said assessment year, according to the assessee, the said income of Rs. 44,239 represented the prize received by him in a crossword puzzle competition conducted by one Kasoti Sahitya Harilal (hereinafter referred to as 'Harifai') and, therefore, it was casual income which was not taxable, it was proved by overwhelming evidence that the story regarding winning of prize was a hoax and a device to legitimize the introduction of unaccounted money under the smoke-screen of the story. It was found as a matter of fact that the assessee had not received any such prize and the amount alleged to have been received as prize was in truth his unaccounted income. The statement, m...
Tag this Judgment!indravadav Occhavlal Modi Vs. Vadodara Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-1981
Reported in: (1982)1GLR88
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the two Councillors of the Vadodara Municipal Corporation impleading the remaining 58 Councillors as respondents and also the Vadodara Municipal Corporation, its Commissioner, its Ex-Mayor, continuing as Mayor because of the non-election of the new Mayor, its Ex-Deputy Mayor, the Secretary of the Corporation and the State of Gujarat as other respondents. This petition presents a unique situation in the sense that no reported case presents the peculiar factual aspects which we come across in this case.2. In order to comprehend fully the controversy that had been rigorously raged before me, certain facts require to be stated. The respondent No. 1 Vadodara Municipal Corporation is a Corporation constituted under the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (the 'Act', for short) The term of the Councillors of this Corporation elected in the year 1975 had become over and ...
Tag this Judgment!B.N. Chikarmane Vs. Swashraya Benefit Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation) and o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-24-1981
Reported in: (1982)1GLR111
B.K. Mehta, J.1. By these Company Applications, the petitioner, who is the Deputy Chief Officer, Dept. of Non-Banking Companies of the Reserve Bank of India, has taken out Judge's Summons for obtaining leave under s. 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, for launching prosecutions against respondents Nos. 1 to 3 in all these applications for the alleged violation of clause 4 of the Miscellaneous Non-Banking Companies (Reserve Bank) Directions, 1973, and thereby having committed an offence under s. 58B(1) read with s. 58C(1) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. 2. A question arose whether such a permission is necessary in view of the decision of this court (Coram : B. K. Mehta J.) in company Application No. 207 of 1980 - M. B. Parikh v. Manekchowk & Ahmedabad Mfg. Co., Ltd. (In liquidation) [1983] 53 Comp Cas 515 (supra), where in the context of criminal prosecution under the Provident Funds Act read with the Provident Funds Scheme, the erstwhile directors and other officers of the Manekch...
Tag this Judgment!Jeanie D. Karaka Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-24-1981
Reported in: (1982)31CTR(Guj)262; [1982]136ITR614(Guj)
Mankad, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two question for our opinion under s. 64 of the E.D. Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' : '1. Whether, the estate duty liability ought to have been allowed as a deduction in the computation of the principal value of the estate 2. Whether, on he facts and in the circumstance of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that no link or nexus between the original gifts made by the deceased to his daughter and the subsequent loan given by here to him was established and, therefore, the provisions of section 46 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, for abatement could not be attracted, is justified in law ?' 2. Out of the these two questions, question No. 1 referred to us at the instance of the accountable person is covered by a decision of these court is Smt. Shantaben Narottamdas v. CED and Mancklal Premchand Shah v. CED [1978] 11 ITR 365. Following the said decision, we answer this question in the negative and aga...
Tag this Judgment!Ramniklal J. Daftary Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-22-1981
Reported in: [1982]136ITR422(Guj)
Mankad, J.1. The two questions which are referred to us for our opinion arise out of the estate duty proceedings in respect of the estate of J.K.Daftary (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') who died on April 3, 1971. The deceased was a coparcener in the Hindu undivided family (hereinafter referred to as the 'HUF'), consisting of himself and his son, Ramniklal J.Daftary, who is the accountable person. In the course of the assessment proceedings, one of the questions which arose was whether the value of the share of the lineal descendant of the deceased was includible in the dutiable estate for rate purposes under s. 34(1)(c) of the E.D. Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, agreeing with the view taken by the Asst. Controller and the Appellate Controller, held that on the death of the deceased who was a coparcener in the Mitakshara Hindu Family, his interest cased under S. 7 of the Act and that the value of the interest of the lineal...
Tag this Judgment!Darbar Shivrajkumar Vs. Commissioner of Gift-tax, Gujarat-iv
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-22-1981
Reported in: (1981)24CTR(Guj)169; [1981]131ITR647(Guj)
Thakkar, J.1. Does a gift of immovable property become complete as soon as the gift deed is executed or only upon its being registered When does the transaction become complete so as to be exigible to gift-tax under the provisions of the G.T. Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') This question arises by reason of the fact that the charging section under the Act provides, inter alia, that there shall be charged for every assessment year commencing on and from the 1st day of April, a tax in respect of the gift, if any, made by a person during the previous year at the specified rate. In order to determine as to on which date in a particular year, the assessee would be liable to pay the tax on the gift made by him, a question arises as to when the transaction of gift is complete within the meaning of s. 3 of the Act so as to attract the liability to gift-tax in a particular year. The GTO took the view that the transaction of gift becomes complete on its registration and the liab...
Tag this Judgment!F.M. Kolia Vs. G.S. Barot and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-20-1981
Reported in: (1981)0GLR700; (1981)IILLJ269Guj
Thakkar, J. 1. The last straw which might break the back of camel may are may not exist, but if it exists, can one say that it will not break the back of the camel if it proceeds for a hundred miles but it will break its back if it proceeds 10 miles more Can one say so without examining the question closely and carefully and without applying one's mind to this dimension of the matter Similar is the question which arises in this petition instituted by the Chalthan Kamdar Mandal under Art. 227 of the Constitution arising from an award rendered by the Industrial Court in Reference (IC) No. 144 of 1980, on October 28, 1980. The award is challenged to a limited extent. The grievance is that while the award upholds the claim of the workers to a pay-scale adopted by the industry in the whole region as recommended by the Second Wage Board eleven years back in 1969 now in 1980, a rider is added. The rider is to the effect that it will be enforced only with effect from a subsequent date (Novembe...
Tag this Judgment!Prataprai Arjandas Dhameja and anr. Vs. Bhupatsing Gagji (by Lrs.) and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-20-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Guj72; (1982)1GLR437
A.M. Ahkadi, J.1. Mr. H. P. Shroff Director, and Mr. D. G. Pujani, Administrative Officer (Mithapur), of Tata Chemicals Limited, (hereinafter called the Company) reached Jamnagar by the morning flight from Bombay on Ist Nov. 1974 and immediately left in an Ambassador Car GTP 1519 belonging to the Company and driven by one Bhupatsing Gagji for Mithapur. While the Car was being driven on the Jarrmagar-Dwarka State Highway No. 25 with the aforesaid two officers in the rear seat, it got involved in a head on collision with a public carrier GTS 5639 which was proceeding in the opposite direction. This collision took place about nine kilometers from Bhatia towards Dwarka between 1.30 and 1.45 P. M. The driver of the Ambassador Car belonging to the Company was killed on the spot while the two officers were seriously injured and were removed to the Company's Hospital at Mithapur in critical condition. The Medical Officer Dr. G. N. Chag examined them at about 3. 45 P. M. and noted down the inju...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Electricity Board Vs. Consumer Education Research Center and o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-20-1981
Reported in: (1981)22GLR1076
M.P.Thakkar, J.1. Can a public sector undertaking be obliged by a Court order to gradually commit suicide by incurring continuous losses upon a petitioner claiming to represent the consumers declaring in emphatic words that it is being run inefficiently and in an uneconomic manner according to the petitioner? Can the Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India virtually turn itself into a Commission of Inquiry to investigate into the alleged inefficiency and prevent the Public Undertaking from raising its tariff to meet the demands of cost increase merely because it is a public sector undertaking (Private sector being immune from the purview of Article 226 of the Constitution of India from this perspective) in disregard of the constitutional vision of coexistence of Public and Private Sector? Can this be done when for obvious reasons the petitioner would not agree to or be in a position to reimburse the losses incurred on account of the restraint order ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-17-1981
Reported in: (1981)24CTR(Guj)171; [1982]136ITR621(Guj)
Thakkar, J.1. Shakespeare was in the realm of poetry and was speaking of roses when he said : 'What is in a name ?' In the field of taxation a lot turns on whether you call a parcel of land as 'agricultural land' or not. If it answers that description it is exempt from capital gains tax. Otherwise it is exigible to such tax. That is why the dispute. The assessee says, the land in question situated at a distance of one kilometre from Surat Railway Station is agricultural land mainly because it is entered as such in revenue records and land revenue is paid on that basis. Revenue contends otherwise. In our opinion, a very vital and decisive test having been overlooked by the Income-tax Tribunal and the Tribunal having failed to take an overall view based on the totality of the relevant circumstances in rendering the decision on the mixed (and vexed) questions of fact and law as to whether or not the disputed land was 'agricultural land' within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the I.T. Act,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »