Gujarat Court February 1994 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.
State of Gujarat Vs. Maganlal Gordhandas Merchant
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-23-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1581; (1994)1GLR799; (1995)ILLJ206Guj
M.S. Parikh, J.1. This group of acquittal appeals arise from the orders stopping the proceedings of various criminal cases under Section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (II of 1974) and since some common questions of importance arise, they are dealt with in this common judgment.2. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. B.N. Keshwani, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, to the effect that all these acquittal appeals would not be maintainable as the impugned orders do not render acquittal of the accused persons. He in the alternative supported the impugned order by submitting that on account of a single visit on May 18, 1988, even if violations of more than one provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Gujarat Factory Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') are committed, only one complaint could be filed and the accused persons could not be visited with double sentence. In reply, the learned...
Jayantkumar Motichand Doshi Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-23-1994
Reported in: (1997)140CTR(Guj)486
ORDERJ. M. PANCHAL, J. :The petitioner is being assessed as an individual under the provisions of the Indian IT Act, 1961 (the Act for short). The petitioner filed return of the income on 31st August, 1990 for the asst. yr. 1990-91 declaring total loss of Rs. 1,03,330. In response to the statutory notice issued by the Asstt. CIT (Inv.) (2), Rajkot, the petitioner appeared before him. The petitioner is the President of Shri Vitrag Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Rajkot, the registered office of which is situated at New Ghee Kanta Road, Rajkot. The petitioner is carrying on business of developing lands and putting up construction, in the name and style of M/s. Reliable Construction Company. The developer and contractor of Shri Vitrag Co-op. Housing is M/s. Reliable Construction Company. Having regard to the statements of persons recorded during the course of assessment proceedings and also the past record, the Asstt. CIT (Inv.) observed that booking of houses, allotment of houses, and calcu...
Asian Agrico Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-22-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR841(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions for the opinion of this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the provisions of the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the Act were attracted and whether the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee has not discharged the burden is against the evidence and material on record 2. Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the penalty was rightly imposed is reasonable and sustainable or supported by any evidence on record ?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1972-73. The assessee-firm filed a return of income declaring its total income at Rs. 63,830 on July 19, 1972. Copies of the trading account, the profit and loss account, etc., were filed along with the return. While scrutinising the books of the assessee, the Income-tax Officer found th...
State of Gujarat and anr. Vs. Ramanlal Dalsukhbhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-22-1994
Reported in: (1994)2GLR1274; (1995)IILLJ561Guj
B.N. Kirpal, C.J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal, whereby the learned single Judge had allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent, who had challenged the order terminating his services. 2. The respondent was working as a Senior Clerk in Vadodara Central Jail for the period 1970 to 1979. During this tenure, it was alleged that he had misappropriated a sum of Rs. 4,501.33. Four criminal cases were instituted against him. It appears that the respondent admitted his guilt before the Chief Magistrate, after charges had been framed against him under Secs. 409, 465, 467 and 477A, I.P.C. Having admitted the charge, the respondent pleaded for mercy. A report was sought from the Probation Officer, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, and looking into the family circumstances, vide order dated 27th December, 1978, the respondent was released on probation and on bail for good behaviour. 3. The appellants had suspended the respondent on 6th May, 1974 on account of misappropriation of the afo...
Gujarat Public Service Commission Vs. Songar Baldevsinh S. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-22-1994
Reported in: (1994)2GLR1561
B.N. Kirpal, C.J.1. The short question involved in this case relates to the interpretation of Rule 6A of the Gujarat Civil Services (Reservation of Vacancies for Ex-servicemen in Class III and Class IV Posts and Services) Rules, 1975.2. The respondents herein are Ex-servicemen, who had applied for recruitment for the post of Police Sub-Inspector pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Gujarat Public Service Commission. Written test was taken of the respondents, but they were not called for interview. It is, thereafter, that the writ petition was filed.3. The stand of the respondents was that the candidates had to take two types of tests, viz., written test as well as physical endurance test. These tests were prescribed by the Examination Rules. Appendix 'A' of the said Rules provided for the syllabus of the written test as well as indicated as to what were the physical endurance test, which would be taken. According to the said Examination Rules, a candidate, who had qualified in t...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Parshottamdas M. Dhamanwala (Huf)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR772(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', has referred for the opinion of this court under section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the following questions : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal has been right in law in quashing and setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax made under section 25(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, on December 4, 1979 2. Whether, when the Wealth-tax Officer had failed to take cognizance of the fact that there was steep rise in the market value of the plant and machinery used in manufacturing of art silk yarn and fabrics, i.e., business carried on by the firm in which the assessee was a partner, and when he had not taken into consideration rule 2B(2) read with rule 2A of the Wealth-tax Rules, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax made under section 25(2) of the Act ?' 2. The relevant assessm...
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Atul Products Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR788(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has referred for the opinion of the High Court under s. 18 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 r/w s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the following questions : '1. Whether, the Tribunal has not erred in law and on facts of the case in holding that capital employed could not be diminished proportionately with reference to the income exempted under ss. 80M and 80J of the IT Act, 1961 2. Whether, the Tribunal has not erred in law and on facts of the case in holding that gross dividends income is deductible in computing the chargeable profits 3. Whether, the entire amount of debentures issued to the public is required to be treated as capital under Second Schedule to the Surtax, 1964 ?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1976-77. As regards question No. 1, the controversy therein is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Second ITO vs . Stump Schuele & Somappa Pvt. Ltd. : [1991]187ITR108(SC) . In the said ju...
Dudabahai Alias Dadubhai Karsandas Patel and ors. Vs. Sulochanaben Gop ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-21-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Guj68; (1994)1GLR541
ORDERK.G. Shah, J.1. This is a revision application filed under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short 'the Rent Act). The respondent who is the landlady of the premises, which is a shop, sued the petitioners for a decree for possession of the suit premises on the ground that petitioner No. 1 -- the tenant -- has unlawfully sublet, assigned or transferred the suit premises to the other petitioners, i.e. petitioners Nos. 2, 3 and 4. The ground on which the respondent claimed the decree for possession of the suit premises is covered by Section 13(1)(e) of the Rent Act.2. In the plaint, the respondent averred that the suit shop was given to petitioner No. 1 for running his ownership business in grocery therein at a monthly rent of Rs. 30/- PLUS Municipal Tax, other Cess, etc. The respondent, in the plaint averred that the suit shop was given to petitioner No. 1 only for the purpose of running his ownership business and he had no right...
ibrahim Mohit Damanwala and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-18-1994
Reported in: (1995)1GLR242
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Appellant-Ibrahim Mohit Damanwala and three others who came to be tried in Sessions Case No. 81 of 1990 for the alleged offences punishable under Sees. 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 and 20(b)(ii) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for short - NDPS Act] by the learned Sessions Judge, Valsad at Navsari, were at the end of trial ordered to be convicted for the same and sentenced to undergo RI for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. One lakh each, and in default, to undergo further RI for one year, etc. etc. No separate sentences for the offence under Section 66 (1)(b) of the Prohibition Act, and Section 29 of the NDPS Act have been passed.2. The prosecution case as per the evidence of PSIH. Section Patil [PW-6, Exh. 58] is to the effect that when on 2-3-1990 he was in charge of Valsad City Police Station, at about 11-30 p.m. he was informed by Police Constable Vasudev Atmaram [PW-2, Exh. 26] that some persons were selling and ...
Rabari Bharmabai Kana Vs. Sava Karsan and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-16-1994
Reported in: 1994ACJ1105; (1994)2GLR320
B.J. Shethna, J.1. [His Lordship stated the facts of the case and observed:] xxx xxx xxx5. Mr. Nagarkar appearing for Mr. Shelat for the respondent Corporation has frankly brought to the notice of this court the judgment of the Supreme Court in Shivaji Dayanu Patil v. Vatschala Uttam More 1991 ACJ 777 (SC), in which the decision in General Manager, Karnataka State Road Trans. Corporation v. 5. Satalingappa 1979 ACJ 452 (Karnataka), has also been considered by the Supreme Court and, after considering several other judgments of different High Courts and of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court has held that the word 'use' in the expression 'use of a motor vehicle' has a wider connotation and covers accidents which occur both when the vehicle is in motion and when it is stationary. It is further held that use of a vehicle does not cease when it has been rendered immobile on account of breakdown or mechanical defect or accident. In the case on hand before me, though the tyre was punctured, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »