Gujarat Court February 1982 Judgments
Subhash Iron and Steel Rolling Industries Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-09-1982
Reported in: [1982]50STC305(Guj)
Shukla, J. 1. M/s. Subhash Iron & Steel Rolling Industries had filed the second appeal in the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal at Ahmedabad against the order of the learned Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ahmedabad, who had dismissed its first appeal against the order of forfeiture of the amount of Rs. 27,104 passed by the learned Sales Tax Officer of Ahmedabad dated 15th November, 1971, in respect of the period from 7th April, 1967, to 31st March, 1968, as the relevant year of account. 2. The facts of the case may shortly be stated as under : M/s. Subhash Iron & Steel Rolling Industries was a dealer registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, and was dealing in the business of manufacture and sale of bars, billets and rods of iron and steel as manufactured out of iron scrap. The assessee, namely, M/s. Subhash Iron and Steel Rolling Industries, had purchased iron scrap locally from registered dealers and had manufactured and sold the said bars, billets and rods during the above yea...
Tag this Judgment!Motilal Madhavlal Chauhan Vs. Padmaben
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Guj254; (1982)2GLR107; (1982)2GLR107
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment rendered by Ahmedabad City Civil Court in H. M. P. No. 43 of 1980 by which the marriage between the parties was ordered to be dissolved on 9-10-1980. It appears that there was marriage between the parties which was celebrated according to Hindu rites on 5-5-1975. Thereafter the appellant had filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. 103 of 1977 for obtaining decree of divorce on the ground of desertion and cruelty and the respondent had filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. 186 of 1977 for obtaining relief of restitution of conjugal rights against the appellant. Both the petiti6ns were heard together and they were disposed of by one judgment. The petition of the appellant was dismissed by the court while respondent's petition for restitution of conjugal rights was ganted. This judgment was delivered on 31-3-1978.2. The appellant filed First Appeal No. 552 of 1978 and the respondent filed cross-objections in that appeal. Ultimately the appeal and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Parikh Amratlal Ramanlal and ors. Vs. Rami Mafatlal Girdharlal and ors ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-05-1982
Reported in: (1982)2GLR337
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. This petition raises a short but an interesting an question regarding the legality of deposition given by the general power of attorney holder of a party before the tenancy authorities. The learned Member of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) Mr. V.B. Bakshi has taken the view that the general power of attorney holder of a party cannot depose on oath before the Mamlatdar holding an inquiry under Section 32-G read with Section 29 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and accordingly the learned Member of the Tribunal has remanded the proceedings for a fresh decision by the Mamlatdar. The aforesaid view of the Tribunal has been challenged by the dissatisfied applicants in the present proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. A few relevant facts deserve to be noted at this stage. The petitioner no. 1 is the try steel and administrator of an institution known a...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. NagIn Amara Vasava and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-04-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1880; (1982)1GLR661
D.H. Shukla, J.1. The State of Gujarat, the appellant herein, is dissatisfied and aggrieved by the order of acquittal in respect of the present respondents Nos. 1 to 15 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jhagadia, on 23-4-1979 from the charge under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 426, 336, 337, 225 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.2. The prosecution case before the learned Judicial Magistrate was that the accused Nos. 13 to 15 (the present respondents Nos. 13 to 15) were apprehended while committing theft of cotton-pods. They were detained at the house of Police Patel, village Chikli. Therefore, accused Nos. 1 to 12 and some 150 other persons formed an unlawful assembly at 13-30 hours and attacked, equipped with weapons, the house of Police Patel and the water-works of the Panchayat. In the course of that attack, P. W. 2 was injured on his eyebrow.3. The Rojkam of Criminal Case No. 1448 of 1978, shows that a charge-sheet was filed date...
Tag this Judgment!Lalmohan Confectionery Works Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-03-1982
Reported in: [1983]54STC376(Guj)
Surti, J. 1. Under section 69 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, the following question formulated as a point of law is referred to us by the Sales Tax Tribunal. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that liquid glucose or 'glucanil' which the applicant had purchased and used in the manufacture of confectionery was a chemical covered by the expression 'dyes and chemicals' used in entry 9 of Schedule II. Part A, to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 ?' 2. When such a point was referred to us, Mr. R. P. Bhatt, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State, raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the the reference in question of fact, and that being so, question (sic). He, in substance, strenuously urged before us that the question referred to us is purely a question of fact, and that being so, we have no jurisdiction to decided the aforesaid question. He also brought to our notice our limited jurisdicti...
Tag this Judgment!Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-01-1982
Reported in: [1982]50STC352(Guj)
Mehta, J. 1. At the instance of the assessee, the following seven questions have been referred to us under section 69(1) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Gujarat Act'), for our advice : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was an implied agreement to deliver the goods at the destination of purchasing dealers; and therefore, the property in the goods would not have passed unless the packing charges were paid by the purchasers (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that packing charges charged for in the white bills were part of the turnover of sale price under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that packing charges, handling charges, loading and unloading charges and delivery charges at destination, charges fo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›