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.
Subash Chandrakant Mashruwala Vs. Suresh Chandrakant Mashruwala and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-1993
Reported in: (1993)2GLR1796
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Respondent No. 1 in this revision is the original plaintiff, who instituted Civil Suit No. 1716 of 1980, in the City Civil Court, at Ahmedabad, against respondents No. 2 to 6 and the petitioner, who is original defendant No. 5. The plaintiff filed the suit for partition and accounts in respect of immovable properties described in Schedule 'A' to the plaint. The accounts of the properties alleged to have been Joint Hindu Family properties were also sought.2. The plaintiff, inter alia, contended that, he is one of the members of the Joint Hindu Family and defendants No. 3, 4 and 5 are his brothers, and defendant No. 2 is his mother, and the properties owned and possessed by original defendants No. 1 and 2 are Joint Hindu Family properties acquired by defendant No. 1 from the Joint Hindu Family funds.3. The plaintiff also, inter alia, contended that, his grandfather was carrying on the business in the name and style of 'M/s. Mulchand Jaikishandas' and the said business of...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jamnadas and Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR218(Guj)
Y.B. Bhatt, J. 1. The present reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, raises the following questions for our opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that in the present case the returned income did not fall short of 80 per cent. of the correct income, referred to the Explanation to clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Income-tax Act, as in force at the relevant time is correct in law? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty imposed on the assessee by the Inspecting Assistant commissioner under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?' 2. The assessee being a registered partnership firm, was engaged in the business of cotton, cotton seeds, etc., and for the assessment year 1972-73, it had returned an income of Rs. 1,31,460. The business premises of the assessee were...
Ravindra D. AmIn Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR815(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. IT Ref. No. 360 of 1980 is made at the instance of the assessee and the other reference is made at the instance of the Revenue. The questions which are referred to this Court under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 are as under : At the instance of the assessee : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 5,21,964 was the deemed dividend in the hands of the assessee under s. 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, 1961 ?' At the instance of the Revenue : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that the provisions of s. 194 of the Act are not applicable to the instant case and, therefore, the assessee was not liable to pay any interest under s. 201(1A) of the Act ?' 2. One Dahyabhai Motibhai Amin also known as Dahyabhai Motibhai Manasvi, the assessee in IT Ref. No. 360 of 1980 and his brother Purshottamdas Amin were running a flour mill in partnersh...
Sushilaben Kantilal Shah Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR912(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati J.1. The following five questions are referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessee under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the cost for which the bigger Hindu undivided family as the previous owner acquired the property in question on March 25, 1970, is capable of being ascertained ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that (i) Navinchandra, (ii) Dhirajlal and (iii) Lalitchandra were not previous owners of the property in question within the meaning of Explanation below section 49(1), Income-tax Act (as the text stood on April 15, 1972) 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that in the face of provisions of section 49(1), Income-tax Act, the general doctrine of real profits or ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sanmitra G. Shashtri
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR870(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. The following two questions are referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has been right in law in holding that the transfer of one-half share in land owned by the assessee in the firm in which the assessee was the partner did not give rise to taxable capital gains ? 2. Whether, when a person brings non-monetary contribution as capital on joining a firm as a partner, there is no consideration receivable by him as a result of extinguishment of his interest in proprietary assets which are liable to capital gains under section 45, read with section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. In Sunil Siddharthbhai v. CIT : [1985]156ITR509(SC) the Supreme Court has held (headnote) :'When his personal assets merge into the capital of the partnership firm, a corresponding credit entry ...
Dr. NitIn S. Vora Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-04-1993
Reported in: (1994)1GLR83
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. 'Whether any post in the hierarchy of the State administration can ever be said to be equivalent merely because the concerned authority deems it proper to describe it to be at par with regard to the pay scale, cadre and inter-se transfer?' This indeed is a short question which has cropped up for determination in this writ petition in the context of following facts.2. Facts: Petitioner Dr. Nitin S. Vora who was already serving as a Medical Officer in E.S.I.S. Hospital at Ahmedabad, in response to an advertisement given by Gujarat Public Service Commission in Gujarati daily 'Sandesh' dated 15-10-1988, applied for the post of Deputy Director, Medical Services, E.S.I.S., Ahmedabad [for short Dy. Director']. In pursuant to the said application, petitioner was called for interview by G.P.S.C, and thereafter, by communication dated 21-8-1990 [Annexure A'] he was informed that he was found to be fit for the post of Dy. Director, and his name has been placed at Sr. No. 1 in th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›