Gujarat Court July 1981 Judgments
Arvind Mills Ltd., Ahmedabad Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-30-1981
Reported in: 1983(12)ELT326(Guj); (1982)1GLR505
Divan, C.J. 1. The petitioner in this group of special civil application are all composite mills who manufacture yarn and thereafter from the yarn manufactured by them, they weave cloth, thus utilising the yarn for the purpose of weaving in the weaving department or the weaving section. Excise duty on yarn is by weight and the question whether excise duty should be taken on yarn as it emerges from the spinning department of these composite mills. Sizing is a process as found from the materials which sill hereafter be referred, which is applied to yarn when it is taken to the weaving department. Sizing is applied to yarn in order to strengthen the yarn so as to have proper strength at the time of weaving and it must be borne in mind that it is used only for the warp yarn for the weaving of fabric, weft being unsized. If a manufacturer manufactures only yarn and then sells the yarn manufactured by it, the manufacturer is not required to size the yarn and yarn, a commercial commodity know...
Tag this Judgment!Narendrakumar Pranlal Gandhi and Etc. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-30-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1682; (1982)1GLR194
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. These two petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of habeas corpus or a writ or order of the like nature complaining that the petitioner in each of these two petitions was unlawfully detained by the State of Gujarat pursuant to the identically worded orders both dated 29th June 1981, Annexure 'A' to each of these two petitions, the detention having been ordered in the purported exercise of the powers conferred on the Government by Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (No. 7 of 1980 (the 'Act', for short). The petitioners in both these petitions allege that their detention is otherwise than in accordance with law and they, therefore, pray that they should be set at liberty forthwith. Since these two petitions are almost identical, they can be convenient by dealt with together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners of ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. K.K. Shah,
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-28-1981
Reported in: (1982)1GLR258
Thakkar, J.1. 'Till death doth us part' - the oath uttered at the time of solemnization of marriage may have to be altered into 'till the I.T. authorities doth us part' by the medicos who marry and intend to carry on their professional activities in partnership. That cannot be helped if the interpretation placed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the provision popularly known as the 'clubbing provision' embodied in s. 64(1)(i) of the I.T. Act of 1961 is untenable as is canvassed by the revenue. The said provision speaks as under : '64. (1) In computing the total income of any individual, there shall be included all such income as arises directly or indirectly - (i) to the spouse of such individual from the membership of the spouse in a firm carrying on a business in which such individual is a partner.' 2. In essence it provides that when the husband and the wife are members of the very same partnership firm carrying on a business, the income of the two is to be clubbed ...
Tag this Judgment!United India General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shantaben Jerambhai and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Guj212; [1983]54CompCas418(Guj); (1982)1GLR513
S.L. Talatl, J.1. United India General Insurance Company, original opponent No. 2 of Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 152 of 1979 has preferred this appeal against the judgment and award rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No, 1, at Surat on 23-11-1979.2. The petition was filed by the widow of deceased Jerambhai Dahyabhai Parmar and the children of the deceased. The undisputed acts were that deceased Jerambhai was travelling in a Tempo hearing registration No, G. T. T. 4075 on the date of the incident i.e. on 2-6-1978. In the tempo milk cans were carried. The milk cans were carried on behalf of Jawahar Dudh Utapadak Sahkari Mandli Ltd. to Kunverda Village. The milk cans were required to be delivered to Pal Dairy at Surat. Jerambhai was sitting in the rear portion of the vehicle, The accident occurred at Kim four roads on National Highway road at about 7-30 A. M. Deceased Jeram fell down from the vehicle and ultimately he expired. The tempo in question belonged to one Daula...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat and anr. Vs. Naranbhai Sadabhai Parmar and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-23-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1892; (1982)1GLR38
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. This Reference has been made to this Court under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kalol in Mahesana District, in respect of certain statements alleged to constitute contempt of Court of the learned Judge's Court. The facts giving rise to this Reference are as follows : The original complainant in the contempt proceedings is one Nandlal Khodidas Barot, an advocate practising at Kalol. At the material time, Nandlal Khodidas Barot who was the Vice-President of Kalol Municipality, had filed three regular civil suits, namely, Suits Nos. 12 of 1980, 116 of 1980 and 136 of 1980. All the three suits were filed by Nandlal Khodidas Barot as party in person and in each of them the principal defendant was Kalol Municipality and there were several other defendants as co-defendants in these suits. In his capacity as municipal councillor of Kalol Municipality, Barot wanted to safeguard what he considered the interest of mun...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Ashaland Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-22-1981
Reported in: (1981)25CTR(Guj)294; [1982]133ITR55(Guj)
Mankad, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') has, at the instance of the revenue, referred the following questions for the our opinion under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') : 'Whether, on the facts of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding, (i) that the amount of Rs. 5,000 received by the assessee as earnest money constituted its income taxable for the assessment year 1971-72, (ii) that the amount of Rs. 2,08,772 received by the assessee as part price constituted its income taxable for the assessment year 1971-7 ?' 2. Facts leading to this reference briefly stated are as follows. The assessee, a partnership firm, is a dealer in land. It purchased land bearing S. Nos. 122/1, part of S. No. 122/2 and S. No. 124 situate on Harni Road in the outskirts of Baroda City on March 15, 1967. Out of this land, a portion of the land was sold by the assessee to a housing society in 1968, but that sale i...
Tag this Judgment!Bhikhaji Vaghaji Vs. L.K. Barot and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-22-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ2014; (1981)GLR956
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. The first five special criminal applications under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and the Misc. Criminal Application No. 1418 of 1980 filed by the original accused raise common questions of law, though the incidents at the root of these first five matters arise out of different criminal cases at one time pending in one or the other Court of the Metropolitan Magistrates, Ahmedabad.2. The special criminal application Nos. 3 to 7 of 1981 arise out of the orders in the criminal cases Nos. 1318/79, 263/79, 717/79, 1320/79 and 134/79 respectively in those Courts. The concerned learned Magistrate in these five cases held that as the accused were Police Officers and as the prosecution was launched without obtaining the previous sanction of the State Government as required under Section 197(2) of the CrI.P.C., the prosecutions were bad and so they were dropped. Being aggrieved by the said common decision, criminal revision applications Nos. 27/83, 134/80, 30/80, 28/80...
Tag this Judgment!The Signath Dudh Utpadak Mandal at Suva Vs. the Narmada Dudh Utpadak M ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-21-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Guj154; (1982)1GLR657
ORDER1. A short question which arises in this petition is whether the appeal filed before the Registrar of Cooperative Societies is competent or not from the order made by the Assistant District Registrar (Co-operative Societies) Jhill a Panchayat, Bharuch directing that the registration of respondent No. I Society will continue. A few facts need be noticed in order to appreciate the rival contentions of the parties before me.2. The petitioner-Society applied for registration in the office of the Taluka Development Officer, Vagra on September 28, 1976. It appears that on July 27 1976 a similar application was presented by the Chief Promoter of respondent No. 1-society in the same office. The application of respondent No. I-society was forwarded on Oct. 14, 1976. In the meeting held on Oct. 19, 1976 of the concerned Sub Committee of the District Panchayat, it was decided to register only one society from village Suva and accordingly the application of respondent No 1.society was accepte...
Tag this Judgment!Shah Visanji Dhugarshi Vs. Joshi Bhara Dhaya and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-17-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Guj220; (1982)2GLR19
ORDER1. These two almost identical matters by the common petitioners but against different respondents who are the father and the son can be convenient dealt with together and disposed of by this common judgment. The land involved in these two 'petitions is the agricultural land situated within the district of Kutch. The petitioners herein claim to be the Inamdars and on the advent of the Bombay Inams (Kutch Area) Abolition Act, 1958 (the 'Act,' for short) they claim to have procured the occupancy certificate as provided for in the said Act. According to them they were cultivating the same through hired labour. These respondents for the first time in the year 1967-68 put forth a contention that they were tenants on the land. In order to obviate this assertion on the Part of the respondents the Petitioners filed declaratory proceedings before the Mamlatadar under Section 100(2) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred ...
Tag this Judgment!Kothari Oil Products Company Vs. Government of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-16-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Guj107; (1982)1GLR20
Divan, C.J.1. The first petitioner before us is a partnership firm and the second petitioner is one of the partners of the first petitioner firm. The firm carries on business of manufacture of Vanaspati ghee, edible oil. de-oiled cakes, cotton seed oil, cotton lints and cotton seed oil extraction and for that purpose it has set up a factory at Jetpur Road, Gondal, in Rajkot District. The petitioner firm went into production and started its factory for the purpose of manufacturing Vanaspati ghee somewhere in the month of Feb., 1972 in the industrially backward area of Gondal in the District of Rajkot. The said factory of the petitioner firm is also registered and a licence to that effect has been secured by the petitioner firm under the provisions of the Factories Act. Somewhere, in the end of 1972, the petitioner firm started its oil mill in the same premises for the purpose of procuring raw material for manufacturing Vanaspati ghee. In this oil mill the petitioner firm used to crush g...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »