Gujarat Court March 1991 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.
Ashok Transformers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Superintendent of Central Ex ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-07-1991
Reported in: 1992(38)ECC268
March 7, 1991A.P. Ravani, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company and petitioner No. 2 is a Director thereof. Petitioner No. 1 company is a manufacturer of transformers - a commodity which was falling under Tariff Item No. 68 of First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, at the relevant time. For the purpose of manufacturing the aforesaid item, petitioner-company required electrical lamination which was again falling under Tariff Item No. 28 A of the said Schedule. Electrical laminations could be purchased from market or could be manufactured from Cold Rolled Grain Oriented Sheets (hereinafter referred to as 'CRGO sheets') imported from foreign countries. Petitioner-company imported CRGO sheets and entered into agreement with different manufacturers. They manufactured laminations and supplied the same to the petitioner-company. Different manufacturers who manufactured laminations were either paying excise duty or were not liable to excise duty as they were cov...
Satellite Engineering Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-06-1991
Reported in: 1991LC387(Gujarat); 1992(58)ELT503(Guj)
Ravani, J. 1. The petitioner company manufactured Fluorescent Starter Switches. While manufacturing this product, Aluminium Cannisters were also being manufactured as intermediate product which were derived either from aluminium slugs or from aluminium strips by process of extrusion, trimming, knurling and cutting. According to the petitioner aluminium cannisters were not excisable goods and the petitioner was not liable to pay duty of excise on the same. The dispute was carried upto the Government of India by way of revision as per the relevant provisions of law which were in force at the relevant time. The Government of India by order dated December 12, 1975 held that aluminium cannisters were ancillary to the manufacture of fluorescent starter switches and that the goods were extruded, but the same were not bought or sold in the market. For the reasons mentioned in the order, the Government of India allowed the revision application. 2. Thereafter the petitioner preferred refund clai...
Rajkot District Panchayat Vs. Mansukhlal Dalichand Mehta
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-06-1991
Reported in: (1991)2GLR1128
A.N. Divecha, J.1. By this appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellant has questioned the legality and validity of the judgment and the decree passed by the Joint District Judge at Rajkot on 19th August, 1978 in R.C.A. No. 83 of 1977. Thereby the learned Joint District Judge set aside the judgment and the decree passed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge (J.D.) at Rajkot on 25th February, 1977 dismissing C.S. No. 895 of 1972.2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal may be summarised thus: The original respondent herein was the plaintiff before the trial Court. He instituted the suit against the appellant herein. It would be desirable to refer to the parties to this appeal as they were arraigned before the trial Court, that is, the original respondent as the plaintiff and the appellant herein as the defendant. The plaintiff was appointed as a Vaidya sometime in 1952. On 1st April, 1963, his services came to be allocated to the Panchayat service and he was...
K.M. Bhatia (Quarry) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: (1991)99CTR(Guj)10
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. The assessee-registered firm had originally filed a return of income for the assessment year 1971-72 in October 15 1971, declaring a total income of Rs. 1,01,917. Therefore, on March 11, 1974, the assessee filed a revised return declaring a total income of Rs. 1,58,917, the difference being an identical item of Rs. 57,000 which was debited twice firstly by debiting the value of 14,250 tonnes of salt stated to have been washed away due to rain and again by showing less closing stock on account of reduction at 10% (14,250 tonnes) on account of rain wash. The assessee was doing the activity of collecting, lifting and transporting of salt from Charkala Salt Works on behalf of Tata Chemicals, Mithapur. In its books of account, the assessee had, while determining the gross profit, debited the sum of Rs. 57,000 as value of 14,250 tonnes of salt at rate of Rs. 4 per tonne. During the said year, the opening stock of salt was 57,646 tonnes and the assessee has produced 91...
State of Gujarat Vs. Pfizer Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: [1991]82STC374(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. In this reference made at the instance of the State, the question which has been referred to us is : whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the sales of four products in question, namely, (1) T.M. poultry formula; (2) T.M. egg formula; (3) T.M. forte and (4) T.M. 5 would be covered by entry 25 of Schedule I to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 and, therefore, they are free all taxes under the said Act, and not by entry 26(1) of Schedule II, Part A to the said Act 2. M/s. Pfizer India Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the opponent'), a well-known company manufacturing pharmaceuticals in its veterinary and agricultural division, also manufactures products meant for use of cattle and poultry. Out of many products manufactured by it for the use as poultry feed, we are concerned with (1) T.M. poultry formula, (2) T.M. egg formula, (3) T.M. forte, and (4) T.M. 5. The company sold these products under d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›