Gujarat Court October 1995 Judgments
Shriniketan Members Association and anr. Vs. Appropriate Authority and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-20-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(Guj)206; [1996]219ITR359(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the order dt. 31st July, 1995 passed by the Appropriate Authority under s. 269UD(1) in Chapter XX-C of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner has also prayed for an order directing respondent no. 1 to issue no-objection-certificate in terms of s. 269UL of the Act. 2. On 27th March, 1995 the petitioner on the one hand and respondents Nos. 3 to 5 on the other hand entered into an agreement for purchase of the property in question, being land with building admeasuring about 1961 square metres for a consideration of Rs. 1,75,90,125. The petitioner and respondents Nos. 3 to 5 submitted Form 37-I before Appropriate Authority on 6th April, 1995. On 11th July, 1995 the Appropriate Authority issued notice under s. 269UD(1A) of the Act to petitioners and respondents Nos. 3 to 5 to show cause as to why the Appropriate Authority should not exercise power of pre-emptive purchase as ...
Tag this Judgment!Ranchhodbhai Galabhai Patel and anr. Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-20-1995
Reported in: (1996)131CTR(Guj)52; [1996]219ITR427(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenges the order passed by the Appropriate Authority under s. 269UD of Chapter XX-C of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for brevity). 2. On 9th April, 1994, petitioner No. 1 (transferor) and petitioner No. 2 (transferee) entered into an agreement for sale in respect of a plot of land admeasuring 4000 sq. mts. situated within the limits of village Ravat. Tal. Haveli, District Pune, for a consideration of Rs. 25,00,000. On 14th Sept., 1994, the petitioners filed Form No. 37-I in the office of the Appropriate Authority. On 12th Dec., 1994 show cause notice was issued by the Appropriate Authority under s. 269UD(1A) of the Act to the petitioners. On behalf of the petitioners reply dt. 17th Dec., 1994 was submitted by the Chartered Accountants. The Appropriate Authority thereafter passed the impugned order dt. 26th Dec., 1994, Annexure A to the petition. The petitioners thereafter filed rectification app...
Tag this Judgment!NajmudIn I. Bharmal and ors. Vs. Charotar Gramoddhar Sahakari Mandali ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-20-1995
Reported in: (1997)1GLR547
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Should the appellants be granted or not the decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell, dated 8-12-1977 (Exh. 71), in respect of a land bearing Survey No. 354/2, situated in Gondal, Rajkot District which is an agricultural land, admeasuring about 7 acres, is the central theme of the present appeal.2. The appellants are the original plaintiffs who initiated legal battle, by filing Special Civil Suit No. 76 of 1978, in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Gondal, for specific performance of the aforesaid agreement to sell (Exh. 71), and in the alternative claimed a decree for Rs. 1,00,000/-, by way of compensation or damages, for breach of the agreement, including refund of Rs. 15,000/-, paid by them as earnest money against the respondents, who are the original defendant Nos. 1 to 5.3. Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 filed their written statement, at Exh. 16, inter alia, contending that, they are impleaded, unnecessarily, only on the ground that they are office-bearers o...
Tag this Judgment!Laboni Developers Vs. Appropriate Authority and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-19-1995
Reported in: (1996)130CTR(Guj)512; [1996]219ITR284(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenges the order passed by the Appropriate Authority under s. 269UD - Chapter XX-C of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for brevity) and prays for an order directing the Appropriate Authority to issue a certificate in terms of s. 269UL(1) of the Act. 2. On 5th April, 1995, the petitioner and respondent No. 3 entered into an agreement for purchase of the property in question for a consideration of Rs. 45,00,000 (Rupees Forty five Lacs only); the total area of land is 2,605.32 sq. mts. On the said land, there were three structures being a (i) bungalow; (ii) servant quarters; and (iii) a separate structure for residence of gardener and servants. On 17th April, 1995, the petitioner (intending purchaser) and respondent No. 3 (intending seller) filed Form No. 37-I in the office of the Appropriate Authority. On 11th July, 1995, show cause notice was issued by the Appropriate Authority under s. 269UD(1A) ...
Tag this Judgment!Bachubhai Kanjibhai Chauhan Vs. S.B. Tolia
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-17-1995
Reported in: (1997)3GLR2362
C.K. Thakker, J.1. Rule. Mr. Bambhania, Additional Government Pleader, appears and waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.This petition is filed by the petitioner for an appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondent-Authority to treat period of suspension of the petitioner as on duty and to pay his salary and other benefits on that basis.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed on August 2, 1978 as Watchman, Class IV, and was serving in District Court, Bhavnagar. In connection with an incident said to have taken place on 29th March, 1985, First Information Report was lodged against the petitioner, being C.R. No. 59 of 1985. It was for offences punishable under Section 394 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It was the case of the prosecution that the petitioner, alongwith two other accused, had beaten complainant Bhikhabhai Bachubhai Vaghr...
Tag this Judgment!Dhoraji Nagarpalika Vs. Arif Ismail Godil
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR515
S.D. Shah, J.1. In this Civil Revision Application against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (JD) at Dhoraji at Exh. 185 in RCS No. 254 of 1985 insofar as it granted adjournment only on imposing condition of costs, no serious challenge is raised before this Court. To that extent the order is upheld and C.R.A. stands rejected.2. It is not necessary to hear the other side while considering the second request made to this Court. It is a matter between this Court and the serious remarks made by the learned Judge in his order against practising advocate at Dhoraji. The observations made which are stated herein in extenso are undoubtedly directed against the senior advocate and various practices allegedly adopted by the senior advocate for delaying the proceedings of every suit. The learned judge has made reference to the practice being constantly followed by the senior advocate and has passed certain strictures or adverse remarks against the conduct of the senior advocate which ar...
Tag this Judgment!Vishal Rajendra Trivedi Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1995
Reported in: (1997)1GLR1
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. The question of indeed, quite great importance that arises for consideration in this appeal is-'Whether the prosecution witness who having once been examined through and through before the trial Court, and quite relying upon his evidence and also along with that of others, if the trial Court has reached the conclusion thai the prosecution has proved its case beyond doubt, much less the reasonable doubt to hold accused guilty for the alleged offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P. Code sentencing him to life, then whether under such undisputable circumstances it would be just, legal and proper for this Court to recall and examine the very same witness as Court witness and/or at the instance and on an application of the appellant-accused under Sections 311 and 391 of the Cri. P. Code 1973, made by the convict-prisoner because as submitted the same was likely to change the very nature and complexion of the offence alleged against him and ultimately thereby modify an...
Tag this Judgment!Harshadkumar Natverlal Dalal Vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-12-1995
Reported in: [1996]219ITR592(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. As identical question of law arises in all the three cases we propose to decide all these three cases by this common judgment. The issue for consideration in the present case is whether value of goodwill which was not purchased for a price by the assessee and not part of the book assets as disclosed in balance sheet is to be included while assessing the value of business assets under s. 7(2) of the WT Act r/w r. 2C of the WT Rules, 1957. 2. The dispute relates to the question whether value of goodwill which is generated by a person in the course of carrying on his business is to be included for computing net wealth of the assessee in terms of s. 7(2) of the WT Act. Under the scheme of the WT Act, s. 3 provides that every individual is to be charged to wealth-tax in respect of his net wealth on the corresponding valuation date of every assessment year at the rates specified in the schedule. Net wealth has been defined in s. 2(m) generally to mean the amount by which t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Rajeshkumar R. Gandhi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-1995
Reported in: [1996]219ITR408(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. A joint statement of case has been submitted by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A' in respect of four asst. yrs. 1980-81 to 1983-84 and referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this Court arising out of WTA Nos. 450 to 452/A/88 and WTA No. 1079/A/1987 : 'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts directing the WTO to value the immovable properties in accordance with the new valuation rules which were brought on the statute book by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989, Sch. III, w.e.f. 1st April, 1989 2. The facts necessary for the present purpose are that during the pendency of appeals regarding wealth-tax assessment of the assessee for the asst. yrs. 1980-81 to 1983-84, s. 7 of the WT Act providing for manner of determining the value of any asset other than cash was substituted by Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989 w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. Prior to its amendment, s. 7 provided that the value of any asset other than cash for the purpose...
Tag this Judgment!Shivam Construction Co. and ors. Vs. Vijaya Bank, Ahmedabad and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-1995
Reported in: AIR1997Guj24; (1997)1GLR774
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The appellants have questioned the legality and validity of the judgment and decree recorded in Summary Civil Suit No. 712 of 1984 by the City Civil Court Judge, at Ahmedabad on 29th April, 1994, decreeing the suit of the respondent No. 1 Vijaya Bank for a sum of Rupees 5,66,368/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum on Rs. 3,76,000/.- from the date of the suit till, realisation, by invoking the aid of the provisions of Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the 'Code').2. At the admission stage we found that there was no any illegality in passing the impugned judgment and decree. However, we had called for the record and proceedings after issuing notice to the contesting respondent No. 1 Vijaya Bank. After having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the appellats and the respondent Vijaya Bank and considering the testimonial and documentary collections emerging from the record of the present case, we are of the opinion that the appeal is required ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »