Gujarat Court August 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.
Parshottam Rajabhai (Since Decd.) by His Heirs and Lrs. Deevaben Rajab ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-19-1993
Reported in: (1994)1GLR93
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Parshottam Rajabhai, an Armed olice Constable, by this writ petition has brought under challenge the impugned order dated 24-12-1986 [Annexure 'B'] dismissing him from service, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad [Respondent No. 2 herein], which ultimately came to be confirmed in appeal by the Commissioner of Police, inter alia praying for [i] quashing and setting aside the same; and [ii] to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits including backwages.2. The petitioner was appointed as an Armed Police Constable in Ahmedabad on 12-5-1973, and thereafter was working as such till the time he came to be dismissed by an Order dated 24-12-1986 [Annexure 'B']. In a show-cause notice dated 16-10-1986 [Annexure 'A'] issued against him it has been alleged that he had remained absent from his duty without leave from 31-8-1983 to 12-10-1983 [42 days] for which he came to be prosecuted and tried before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedab...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ahmedabad Flexible Tubs Mfg. Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR86(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J. 1. In this reference made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions to this court for its opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that in order to invoke the provisions of section 79 of the Act, the Department must prove not only that there was a transfer of the shareholding of not less than 51 per cent. of the voting power as per clause (a) of section 79 but also that such a transfer was with the intent to reduce or avoid the tax liability as per clause (b) of section 79? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal has been right in law in holding that section 79 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not attracted in the instant case and, consequently, the assessee was entitled to the adjustment of carry forward of previous loss and also unabsorbed depreciation as well as adjustm...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gunvantlal Ratanchand
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR1028(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following question to this Court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the capital gains on the sale of ornaments of Rs. 48,465 is not exigible to tax and is entitled to relief and exemption under s. 54C of the IT Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee is an HUF. During the previous year relevant to the asst. yr. 1975-76, it sold jewellery and gold ornaments for Rs. 57,089. The sale proceeds were reinvested by purchasing new jewellery and ornaments. According to the assessee, it was entitled to the relief/exemption under s. 54C of the Act. But the ITO took a different view and worked out capital gains in respect of sale of the said ornaments at Rs. 48,465. The reason why the ITO took that view was that the provisions of s. 54C apply to individuals any and not to HUFs. This view of the ITO was confirmed by the AAC in appeal. The Tribunal, however, held otherwise and, therefor...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Maharana Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1993
Reported in: (1994)120CTR(Guj)271; [1994]208ITR972(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following three questions to this court, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for its opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 69,076 being expenses incurred on current repairs of the guest house Villa 7 at Porbandar is not disallowable under section 37(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of Rs. 69,076 incurred on current repairs is allowable under section 30 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of Rs. 36,329 on messing and tea cannot be disallowed as entertainment expenditure under section 37(2B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. During the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1976-77, the assessee claimed deduction in respect of various items of expenditure. It had cl...
Ravindra Gunvantlal Shah and Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR995(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. In both these references, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred an identical question to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The question is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of investment made by it in the purchase of residential property out of the proceeds of the residential property belonging to it ?'2. On a partial partition effected in 1974, of certain properties belonging to the bigger Hindu undivided family of Gunvantlal Jivanlal Shah, the assessees which are small Hindu undivided families and Jasudben got a house property. They sold away the said property for Rs. 13,50,000 by a sale deed registered on December 4, 1980. Out of the sale proceeds, the two assessees and also Jasudben invested Rs. 3 lakhs each by purchasing house properties for residence. Before the Income-tax Officer, both the asses...
Babubhai Shantilal Patel and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1993
Reported in: (1994)1GLR838
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The petitioners challenge the legality and validity of the acquisition proceedings and the award dated 7-1-1993 by filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are agriculturists. They are owners of land of different survey numbers of village Gaviyar, taluka Choriasi, district Surat. In respect of the land of various survey numbers belonging to the petitioners. Notification dated June 27, 1989 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') was issued by the Government. It was published in the Official Gazette on August 10, 1989 and in two newspapers on July 25, 1989 and July 26, 1989. At village site it was published on October 4, 1989.2. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on September 27, 1990. It was published in the Official Gazette on September 27, 1990. Section 6 Notification was published in newspapers on December 8, 1990 and December 9, 1990. It was notified at village site on January...
Gram Panchayat, Damnagar Vs. Sharadkumar D. Acharya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1993
Reported in: (1994)1GLR579; (1995)ILLJ51Guj
Mehta, J.1. The petitioner-Gram Panchayat is aggrieved by the judgment and award of the Labour Court granting reinstatement with back wages to the respondent-workman. 2. The Labour Court has held that the action of termination of the services of the respondent was retrenchment and condition precedent laid down in Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 had not been followed and, therefore, the termination was illegal and void. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner-Panchayat submitted that the workman was on probation and, therefore, termination of service within the probation period would not amount to retrenchment as defined in Section 2(oo) of the I. D. Act. Secondly it was submitted that the petitioner had not completed one year of continuous service and, therefore, no retrenchment compensation was payable and, therefore, the condition precedent was not applicable in the present case. Thirdly, it was submitted that the post, which the petitioner was occupying, has been...
C.M. Rao, Food Inspector Vs. Rohit Kumar Kanchanlal Bhavsar and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1993
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1848; (1994)2GLR1638
ORDERB.J. Shethna, J.1. This Revision Application is filed by the Food Inspector, who is the original complainant, for enhancing the sentence imposed by the learned J. M. F. C, Rajpipla on 10-6-87 in Criminal Case No. 699 of 1986 whereby the respondent-accused were convicted for the offences punishable under Section 7 read with Section 16(1)A(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 ('Act' for short) and sentenced them till rising of Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- in default to undergo 7 days RI.2. On 26-3-86 the complainant look sample of groundnut oil from the shop of the respondents-accused, which was found to be adulterated. Therefore, Criminal Case No. 699 of 1986 was filed by the complainant before the Court of learned J. M. F. C., Rajpipla. The accused remained present before the Court through their advocate and submitted purshis Exh. 35 stating that they want to plead guilty and, therefore, charge may be framed. Accordingly charge was framed at Exh. 36. Pursuan...
Patel Mavji Jodha Dihora and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1993
Reported in: (1994)1GLR737
A.P. Ravani, J.1. Rule. Mr. M.H. Rathod waives service of Rule on behalf of respondents. In the facts of the case, at the request and with the consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, the petition is ordered to be heard today. Short question is - Does the provisions of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 require that the application requesting the Collector to make reference may be signed by the 'person interested' himself, and if it is signed by his duly authorised Advocate/agent, would it not be maintainable?2. The petitioner is an agriculturist. He owns land in village Alang, Taluka Talaja, District Bhavnagar. His land admeasuring 2 Hecters 84 Aries and 29 Sq. Meters was sought to be acquired at the instance of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation for establishing industrial estate at village Alang. After the publication of notification under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the...
Pravinchandra Jeram Sindhal Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporati ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-16-1993
Reported in: (1993)2GLR1663
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Pravin J. Sindhal by this writ petition under ArticleS 14, 16 and 226 of the Constitution of India, has moved This Court, inter alia praying for issuance of the writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents-The General Manager, Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, Ahmedabad and the Divisional Controller, Kachchh Division, Bhuj, the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 herein respectively, to appoint him on compassionate ground to any suitable post in any of its departments with immediate effect.2. According to the petitioner, the happens to be son of the deceased. Jeram Meghji Sindhal who was serving as Bus Driver at Bhuj Depot of G.S.R.T. Corporation (respondent No. 2 herein) and died on duty in an accident that took place on 27-4-1975, near Gondal while driving his bus on Bhuj-Junagadh route. According to the petitioner, his birth date is 5-12-1963, and accordingly, at the time when his father met with accidental death, he was mi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »