Gujarat Court March 1993 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.
Gujarat Ginning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income- ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-1993
Reported in: (1993)113CTR(Guj)204; [1993]205ITR314(Guj)
G. T. NANAVATI J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to this court at the instance of the assessee :'(1) Whether, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to vacancy allowance in respect of property that was neither struck with sterility nor was at any time in the past let out and was always vacant (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to get the vacancy allowance or exclusion for occupancy for business purposes for the properties wherein machines were lying (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the deduction of municipal taxes in respect of properties which were not let ?'For the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70, 1971-72 and 1972-73 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income w...
State of Gujarat Vs. Jerubhai Fuljibhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-1993
Reported in: (1994)1GLR29
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. The present appeal by the State of Gujarat challenges the judgment and order of acquittal dated 30th September, 1982 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Dholka in favour of the accused, whereby the accused is acquitted of having committed an offence punishable under Section 408 of I.P.C.2. The case of the prosecution, stated briefly, was as under :2.1. There is a Co-operative Society by the name of 'The Ambareli Seva Sahkari Mandali' at village Ambareli, Taluka Dholka whereof the complainant was Chairman and the accused was the Secretary at the relevant time. The accused was on a salary of Rs. 315/- per month, that he was assigned the work of writing accounts, maintaining the cash balance and to look after the banking transactions, and the accused, was accordingly doing such work. The accused, as a Secretary, could not maintain a cash balance in excess of Rs. 500/- at any point of time and excess amount of cash balance was required to be deposited in the Bank as per a Reso...
R.G. Jadeja Vs. P.K. Bansal, Commisioner of Police and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-1993
Reported in: (1993)2GLR1077
S. Nainar Sundaram, C.J.1. The petitioners are Police personnel. The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 9613 of 1992 and so also the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 9614 of 1992 are in the cadre of Police Sub-Inspectors. The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 9615 of 1992 and the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 9616 of 1992 are in the cadre of Police Inspectors. The petitioners want us to examine the propriety or otherwise of the orders of suspension passed against them. The impugned orders of suspension recite that, there were large scale riots, resulting in loss of life and property in particular areas and petitioners, who were Police personnel in control of the areas, failed to prevent such incidents, and it is decided to hold a detailed inquiry against the petitioners; and until a decision is rendered in the Departmental Inquiry, the petitioners shall be placed under suspension. There was a strenuous endeavour on the part of Mr. Arun H. Meh...
State of Gujarat Vs. Rajesh Medical and General Stores and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-1993
Reported in: (1993)2GLR1094
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. This appeal by the State of Gujarat for enhancement of sentence is directed against the impugned judgment and order, dated 13-2-1986, rendered in Criminal Case No. 2900 of 1985, by Shri S.J. Sheth, learned J.M.F.C., Anand, wherein three respondents, viz., M/s. Rajesh Medical & General Stores, Anand, and two others - who incidentally happen to be the father and son and also the owner and the person-in-charge of the said Stores, on each of them pleading guilty to the charge of contravening Rules 65(4)(4) and 65(4)(3) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, 1945 for short 'the Rules' framed under the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 for short 'the Act' which are offences under Sections 18(a)(i), 18(d), 18A of the said Act, punishable under Sections 27(b)(ii) and 27(c) of the Act, were ordered to be convicted and sentenced for the same till rising of the Court and to pay fine of Rs. 2,500/- in default, to undergo R.I. for one year.2. Few relevant facts: According to the Drugs Inspecto...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kamalini Gautam Sarabhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-1993
Reported in: (1993)114CTR(Guj)244; [1994]208ITR139(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. The following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the expenditure of Rs. 39,753 incurred by Messrs. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. on the foreign tour of the assessee is not includible as income under section 2(24)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the computation of total income of the assessee ?' 2. For the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee filed a return of income disclosing a total income of Rs. 81,289. The assessment was completed on March 10, 1975. Later on, the Income-tax Officer, during the course of assessment of Messrs. Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd., came to know that the said company had incurred expenditure on the foreign tours of one of its directors, Gautam Sarabhai, and his wife, Smt. Kamalini, the assessee. He also noticed that for the tour of Smt. Kamalini, the company had expended Rs. 39,753...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nandkishore Sakarlal (indl.) and
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-13-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR14(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. All these three references have been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue. As the questions are, in substance, the same they are disposed of by this common judgment. However, in order to avoid any confusion, we set out the questions referred in each of these references respectively. 2. Income-tax Reference No. 445 of 1980 : '1. Whether the amount of Rs. 26,221 being 1/3rd of the sum of Rs. 78,663 paid to the Life Insurance Corporation by Sarangpur Mills for purchase of deferred annuity policy is includible in the hands of the assessee as income chargeable under the head 'Salaries'? 2. Whether, on the facts, circumstances and the evidence on record, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 26,221 utilised by Sarangpur Mills towards purchase of single premium for obtaining the deferred annuity policy did not form part of r...
Bhagwandas Vallabhrao Khatri Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-12-1993
Reported in: (1994)2GLR1087
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order of the Deputy Collector passed on 9th July, 1974 whereby the Deputy Collector, after holding an inquiry and giving the petitioner an opportunity of having his say found that there was sufficient warrant for taking over the management of the disputed lands under Section 65 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), since the disputed lands though cultivable were lying fallow since 1951-52.2. Though the order was made on 9-7-1974, for assumption of management of the disputed land which remained uncultivated, the petitioner challenged that order only in April, 1982 when he filed this petition. The petitioner was.by a letter dated 3rd May, 1975 already informed by the Government that if he felt aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Collector, he could approach the competent Court of law. That communication is at Annexure 'D' to the petition. It has been contended in the petition th...
Thakorbhai Tribhovandas Rao and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-12-1993
Reported in: (1995)1GLR636
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners challenge the notice issued by the Deputy Collector, Kheda on 4-9-1981 in Tenancy Revision Nos. 183 to 224 and seek direction on the Collector not to take the matters enumerated at Annexure 'A', in Revision under Section 76A of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. It appears that in an inquiry under Section 32-G of the Act, the Mamlatdar and A.L.T. by his order dated 30-12-1971 passed in Tenancy Case No. Govindpura/80 in the case of respondent No. 3 held that he was a tenant of the land in dispute. Similar decision was taken in respect of respondents Nos. 4 to 49 and this aspect has not been disputed before this Court. The petitioners have, after the matter was decided by the Mamlatdar and A.L.T. under Section 32-G in respect of respondents Nos. 3 to 49 as far back as in the years 1971, 1972 and 1973 suddenly received a notice calling upon them to appear before the Mamlatdar and A.L.T. as th...
Shamji Govind and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-12-1993
Reported in: (1994)1GLR492
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners have challenged the judgment and order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal dated 25th November, 1980 in Revision No. TEN. B.A. 17 of 1979 by which the Tribunal set aside the orders passed by the authorities below holding that the transfer of the disputed land which was effected by a sale deed dated 29th September, 1969 was in violation of the provisions of Section 89 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bombay Tenancy Kutch Area Act'), being in favour of non-agriculturists and therefore, the land was deemed to have been vested in the State Government free from all encumbrances liable to be disposed of as per the provisions of Section 122 of the Bombay Tenancy Kutch Area Act.2. Admittedly, petitioner No. 1 had transferred by a registered sale deed dated 29th September, 1969, the lands bearing survey Nos. 9 and 10 admeasuring 7 Acres 27 Juntas and 8 Acres 23 Juntas respe...
State of Gujarat Vs. Savitriben N. Tandon and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-12-1993
Reported in: (1993)1GLR943
S. Nainar Sundaram, C.J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 4494 of 1987. Respondent No. 1 in the Special Civil Application is the appellant herein. Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 herein are the legal representatives of the original petitioner in the Special Civil Application and respondent No. 4 herein is respondent No. 4 in the Special Civil Application. It will be convenient if we refer to the parties as per their array in the Special Civil Application, except respondents Nos. 1 to 3 herein, who if occasion therefore arises, shall be referred to as 'the legal representatives'.2. The original petitioner was employed in the erstwhile Sind Government on and from 14-3-1941. His employment upto 11-6-1945 was on temporary basis. With effect from 12-6-1945, he became a permanent employee of the erstwhile Sind Government and he continued to be so upto 30-10-1947. There was a break in service between 1-11-1947 and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »