Gujarat Court March 1995 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.
Natvarlal Dayarjibhai Patel Vs. Union of India and Others.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-25-1995
Reported in: (1996)128CTR(Guj)122; [1996]218ITR226(Guj)
The judgment of the court was delivered byC. K. THAKKER J. - This petition is filed by the petitioner for and appropriate writ, direction and/or order quashing and setting aside the order dated October 27, 1994 (annexure-A), to the petition passed by the appropriate authority, respondent No. 2 herein by which an order was passed in exercise of the power under section 269UD(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No. 3 owned a plot of land admeasuring 675 sq. yds situate at Maninagar, Ahmedabad, on which seven shops were constructed. All the shops were let out to different tenants and they were in possession since many years. The petitioner was also one of the tenants. Since respondent No. 3 was willing to sell the property and the petitioner was one of the sitting tenants, the petitioner was interested in buying the property. An agreement to sell was, therefore, entered into between the petitioner and respondent...
Surat Jilla Khedut Samaj and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR25
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners seek to challenge the notification dated 30th July, 1983 issued by the State Government under Section 169(3) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961, increasing rate of cess levied under Sub-section (1) of Section 169 in relation to the Surat District under the jurisdiction of the Surat District Panchayat to 150 paise from 50 paise on every rupee of land revenue payable for a period of 2 years on and with effect from 1st August, 1983. On 26th March, 1984 Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.H. Bhatt, while admitting the petition, had granted ad-interim relief as prayed for by the petitioners as a result of which the increase in the rate under the impugned notification could not be released by the District Panchayat.2. The petitioners are holding agricultural lands in the district of Surat. By a resolution passed on January 19, 1980, the respondent No. 2 District Panchayat had resolved to recommend levy of cess at the rate of 50 paise on every rupee of every sum paya...
Ambalal Bhavanishanker Upadhyaya Vs. Rasiklal Manilal Mehta and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR51
D.G. Karia, J.1. This Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated October 9, 1986 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar in Sessions Case No. 41 of 1982. By the impugned judgment, the learned Additional Sessions Judge ordered to acquit the accused persons under Section 235(1) for the offences punishable under Section 436 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge observed in the operative order of the judgment that as mentioned in para 29 of the judgment, the complainant who is the petitioner herein, deposed falsely and therefore, the learned Judge having taken cognizance thereof ordered to issue a show cause notice under Section 344 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code to the complainant to show cause why he should not be punished for the offence of giving false evidence or having fabricated false evidenc...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kashiram Textile Mills (P.) Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-1995
Reported in: [2001]252ITR162(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. By its order dated January 5, 1984, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has drawn a statement of case and referred the following three questions of law for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner cannot issue directions under Section 144A during the pendency of a reference before him under Section 144B(4) ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing depreciation and initial depreciation under Section 32(l)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The facts found by the Tribunal as appear from the statement of the case and the order of the Tribunal are that the assessee is a private limited company dealing in purchase of ...
Bhagwanji Vishavji Thakkar Vs. Pravinchandra Jivanbhai Patadia and anr ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1438
S.D. Shah, J.1. By this Civil Revision Application, the petitioner-tenant, who has in his favour a temporary mandatory order directing Jivanlal Jerambhai Patadia - second respondent (landlord) to restore possession of the suit premises to the present petitioner, has made grievance that by dubious and diabolical design, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (son and father) have not only rendered order of the High Court of Gujarat in favour of the present petitioner meaningless but has obtained prohibitory injunction so as to keep petitioner out of the suit premises. It is such order of injunction granted by two Courts below, which is under challenge in this Civil Revision Application.2. In order to properly appreciate the grievance of the petitioner-tenant and the circumstances under which the respondents son and father have overreached and rendered nugatory the success of the petitioner-tenant in obtaining mandatory direction for restoration of possession of suit premises from three Courts incl...
Air Conditioning Specialists Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-23-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR448; [1996]221ITR739(Guj)
1. This petition is filed by the petitioner for a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside an order passed by the CIT, Baroda, on 14th Oct., 1985, Annexure-A to the petition and by directing the respondent authorities to pay interest to the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of s. 214 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on excess amount paid by him. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that it is a partnership firm engaged in the business of air-conditioning, having principal office at Baroda. The petitioner filed income-tax returns for asst. yrs. 1980-81 and 1981-82 before the ITO, Circle I, Ward A. The ITO made assessment order and held that the petitioner was entitled to refund of certain amounts. He, however, did not allow interest on the ground that the last instalment of the advance tax was not paid by the petitioner within the stipulated period, though it was paid before the end of financia...
Bhikhubhai Kedarbhai Patel and ors. Vs. the Deputy Collector, Modasa a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj16
M.B. Shah, J. 1. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 15th October, 1984 passed by the learned Assistant Judge, Sabarkantha, at Himmatnagar, in Land Reference Cases Nos. 495/84 and others, the claimants have preferred these appeals. Statement showing the details and particulars of First Appeals and Land Reference Cases is as under:Sr. No.First AppealName of ClaimantsLAR NO.Survy. No.Area H-A Sq. mt1.981/88Bhikbhabhai K. Patel Jayantibhai K. PatelVinubhai K. PatelKiranben K. Patel495/844151-80-002A2.982/88Ismail MohmedhusainIbrahimbhai MohmedhusainAyesaben W/o. AbdullabhaiMohmadbhai196/844070-67-123.983/88Maganbhai Revabhai497/844170-16-004.985/88Amichandbhai Kodarbhai499/844451-96-00Amnubhai Kodarbhai4440-00-245.986/88Dehyabhai Dhulabhai500/844/6/21-58-566.987/88Kantibhai Hirabha Punjabhai HirabhaiKodarben Hirabhaii502/84389 Paiki4-22-327.988/88Mohanbhai Jeeingbhai Smt. Shamimbhai GafarbhaiIbrahimbhai GafarbhaiAhmedabhai Gafarbhai501/84416/11-90-208.989...
Consumer Education and Research Society, Ahmedabad and Etc. Vs. Union ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Guj133; (1995)2GLR1655
B.N. Kirpal, C.J. 1. The challenged these three matters is to the validity of the notification issued by the State of Gujarat, which had the effect of cancelling the earlier notification, under which a Wild Life Sanctuary had been established under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The aforesaid Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'The said Act') was enacted by the Parliament and it came into operation on 9th of September, 1972. The said Act was extended to the State of Gujarat on 1st of February, 1973. On 14th of April, 1981, a notification was issued by the State of Gujarat, whereby 765.79 sq. kilometers of land in Lakhpat Taluka of Kutch District was declared as a Wild Life Sanctuary under Section 18(1) of the said Act. The sanctuary is more commonly known as the 'Narayan Sarovar Sanctuary'. The declaration of the sanctuary was to be by a notification and Section 21 of the Act required the notification to ...
Kaira District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Commi ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: (1995)128CTR(Guj)405; [1995]216ITR371(Guj)
1. Rule. Mr. M. J. Thakore waives service of rule for the respondent. 2. By this passion, the petitioner challenges the notice, exhibit-K dated February 7, 1994, issued under section 148 read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, inter alia, on the ground that, on the face of it, the assessee has not been found to have failed to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for the assessment of its income during the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1987-88, the income of which is sought to be reassessed and, therefore, the notice is clearly barred by time. 3. Under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, a notice for the reopening of completed assessment after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year can be issued only in a case where the assessing authority has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 1...
Kaira District Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. Vs. Assistant C ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: [1995]216ITR428(Guj)
1. Rule. Mr. M. J. Thakore waives service of rule for the respondent. 2. The petitioner challenges the notice (exhibit-J at page 109), dated March 9, 1995, issued by the assessing authority under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for rectification of order dated February 27, 1991, in relation to the assessment year 1988-89. The notice of rectification reads as under : 'In this case, the A.O. was passed under section 143(3) on February 27, 1991, and during the verification it is found that deduction under section 80P(2)(d) was not allowed correctly as it appears that there was no investment with the said co-operative bank while it is only the balance in the current account when the bank allowed interest and as such the conditions of section 80P(2)(d) should have been allowed according to the provisions of section 80AB of the Income-tax Act, because interest paid by the assessee on borrowed funds of Rs. 2.24 crores is directly related to the sales which is deposited with the Kaira...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »