Gujarat Court December 1999 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.
Mahesana District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd. Vs. Commissio ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1999
Reported in: [2002]258ITR780(Guj)
1. At the instance of the assessee, the present reference is made before this court where in the following questions have been referred :'(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the contribution paid as per the provisions of Section 69 of the Gujarat Rajya Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, is not deductible in the computation of the total income ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that depreciation was not admissible on 30 per cent value of the plant and machinery received from Indian Dairy Corporation ? (iii) Whether, on the facts, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that 30 per cent. of value of the plant and machinery received from Indian Dairy Corporation was not to be included in the computation of the capital employed for the purpose of granting relief under Section 80J ?' The assessee, Mehsana District Co-operative Mil...
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Vs. Mukeshkumar Babulal Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR871
ORDER1. This Appeal is allowed. The gross rateable value fixed by respondent at Rs. 7020/- in respect of the appeal premises bearing F.P.No. 144/48 T.P.S.3 of Special Property Ward (Resi) is hereby quashed for the period from 25-5-87 to 31-3-89.2. The special notice no. 49 dtd. 31.8.87 and municipal tax bill No. 48 dtd. 28.9.88 are hereby quashed.3. The respondent is directed to refund the taxes if paid, to the appellant, with 18% interest from the date of deposit within three months.4. Looking to the facts of the case, there is no order as to costs. Date: 31-1-92(K.H. Vyas)Chief Judge.'Identical orders were passed in other Appeals also.9. All these 12 orders are the subject matter of challenge in these 12 First Appeals.10. Small Causes Court while allowing the Appeals against the assessment as was made by the concerned Officer of the Municipal Corporation, quashed the Rateable value fixed by the respondent - Corporation in respect of the premises in respective Appeals. Special Notices...
Rajabhai Bhimabhai Rabari Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1999
Reported in: (2000)3GLR25
A.R. Dave, J.1. Rule. Learned AGP Shri U.A. Trivedi waives service of rule for the respondents. At the request of the learned advocates, the petition is finally heard today.2. The petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 7.11.98 passed by the Deputy Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, Govt. of Gujarat, whereby the said revisional authority has upheld the order of the Collector, Surendranagar dated 12.6.96 whereby the Collector, Surendranagar, had quashed and set aside the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Wadhwan Sub-division dated 5.12.92 granting 2 acres of land forming part of Survey No. 714 situated at village Vadod in favour of the petitioner.3. The Deputy Collector, Wadhwan Sub-division, Surendranagar, had granted 2 acres of land to the petitioner as the said land is abutting the land bearing survey No. 71 belonging to the petitioner. It was granted to the petitioner because the said land was having an irregular shape and it was a fragment, which could no...
Gohel Sunil Devshi Vs. State Election Commission
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: (2001)1GLR163
A.M. Kapadia, J. 1. What is challenged in these two petitions which are filed under An. 226 of the Constitution of India is the direction dated 8-12-1999 issued by the State Election Commission in view of the amendment made in Rule 7 of the Gujarat Municipalities (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short) whereby the authorized representatives of the recognized political parties are directed to give notice in form No. B (party mandate letter) indicating as to who is the official candidate and who is the dummy candidate before 3 p.m., on 13-12-1999.2. As these petitions involve determination of common question of facts and law, I propose to dispose of them by this common judgment.3. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, it would be advantageous to refer to the facts stated in Special Civil Application No. 10041 of 1999.4. From the averments made in the petitions, it is manifest that election programme for the members of 52...
State of Gujarat Vs. Jagdishbhai Kevarbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1999
Reported in: (2001)GLR342
M.R. Calla, J.1. These eight First Appeals against the order dated 30-3-1998 passed by the Assistant Judge at Himatnagar in LAQ Cases No. 3396/89 to 3403/89 were filed before this Court on 5-4-1999. Subsequently the Civil Applications seeking condonation of delay of fifty days in filing the First Appeals were filed on 19-6-1999. Rule was issued in the civil applications on 27-9-1999 and in response to the rule issued by this Court, which was made returnable on 15-10-1999 appearance was entered by Mr. Mukesh R. Shah, Ld. advocate appearing for the claimants, that is Respondents No. 1 to 5.2. On 22-11-199 in Civil Application No. 5799 of 1999 in First Appeal No. 1913 of 1999 the following order was passed by the Court:-' This application for condonation of delay is yet one more application showing the movement of file from table to table to explain the delay in filing the appeal beyond limitation. The learned AGP is directed to furnish the report within two weeks that within five years' ...
Ramesh @ Bhangari Babaji Thakor (Zala) Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2545; (2000)2GLR825
A.L . Dave, J.1. The Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City, Ahmedabad passed an order of detention on 30-3-1999 in respect of the petitioner in exercise of powers under Section 3(1) of the Gujarat Prevention of Antisocial Activities Act (for short PASA Act).2. The grounds of detention reveal that the Detaining Authority took into consideration three prohibition cases registered against the detenu so also the statements of two anonymous witnesses recorded by the sponsoring authority. The Detaining Authority exercised powers under Section 9(2) of the PASA Act and did not disclose the identity of the witnesses on being satisfied that the witnesses had genuine apprehension from the petitioner in respect of their person and properties. The Detaining Authority after considering the possibility of resorting to less drastic alternative remedies came to the conclusion that detention under PASA is the only remedy that can be resorted to to prevent the petitioner from pursuing his antisocial act...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sayaji Iron Works Quarry (P) Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1999
Reported in: [2000]244ITR628(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J.1. The CIT, Gujarat Central, Ahmedabad, under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') moved the Tribunal for reference to this Court by filing Ref. Appln. No. 267/Ahd/1984 for asst. yr. 1975-76 and the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for consideration of this Court : 'Whether, the decision of the Tribunal in holding that the penalty for late filing of the return in required to be computed on the basis of difference in the first assessment and the assessment on reopening is correct in law ?' 2. It transpires from the record placed before us that the return was duly filed by the assessee on 30th July, 1975, and as observed by the Tribunal there was no delay of a completed month. It transpires that the ITO thereafter reopened the assessment under s. 147 and after issuance of notice which was served on the assessee on 27th February, 1979, the revised return was filed on 10th October, 1979. This resulted in delay of about six months....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chalthan Vibhag Khand Udyog Sahakari Ma ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1999
Reported in: [2000]244ITR557(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat, has referred the following question for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee claimed certain benefits such as deduction of Rs. 4,04,400 under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and Rs. 1,417 under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest received from the members of the co-operative societies and dividend and interest received from the co-operative societies. The Income-tax Officer by his order, dated August 28, 1981, rejected the claim of the assessee. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appea...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. H. Link
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1999
Reported in: [2000]244ITR93(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J. 1. The CIT, Baroda moved the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') for making reference under the provisions contained under the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The question of law referred are as under : 1. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income computable under the head 'salaries' had not been earned in India as contemplated under s. 9(1)(ii) of the IT Act ?' 2. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the living allowance did not form part of the salary under s. 17 of the IT Act, and therefore, exempt from tax ?' 3. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the value of rent-free accommodation would not constitute a perquisite within the meaning of s. 17(2) of the IT Act, 1961 ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Power Build Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1999
Reported in: (2000)162CTR(Guj)41; [2000]244ITR19(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J. 1. At the instance of CIT, Baroda, reference is made by the Tribunal raising the following question of law as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the payment made towards royalty to the collaborators was an allowable revenue expenditure ?' 2. The assessee, carrying on business of manufacturing various types of motors and weighing machines, was assessed for the asst. yr. 1979-80. Before the AO, the copy of agreement, dt. 31st March, 1976, was filed. The said agreement was thereafter amended on 3rd March, 1977. In view of the original agreement, the assessee-company was under obligation to return the books, technical data papers, drawings relating to the products authorised to be manufactured by the foreign collaborators. However, in view of amended agreement, the assessee was entitled to retain all these documents, technical data, design, documentation, etc. In view of the e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »