Gujarat Court April 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.
Shaily Engineering Plastics Ltd. Vs. Designated Authority Under Kar Vi ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: [1999]239ITR90(Guj)
BY THE COURT :1. This petition is relating to dispute which arises out of the special scheme enacted by the Finance Act of 1998 to settle the disputes under the direct tax as well as indirect taxes known as Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'KVSS'). 2. The facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner which is a company has filed its return of income for asst. yr. 1996-97 on 29th Nov., 1996, declaring a total income of Rs. 1,19,69,413 on which Rs. 55,05,930 was the amount of tax payable. The said amount was not paid by the assessee. On 18th Nov., 1997, the second respondent AO intimated to the petitioner under s. 143(1)(a) about making a prima facie adjustment to the income returned by the assessee by making additions of sums of Rs. 1,12,12,567 bringing the total taxable income at Rs. 2,32,01,977 correspondingly specifying the increased tax liability of Rs. 1,65,32,082. The assessee disputed the adjustment made under s. 143(1)(a) by filing appeal on 26t...
Achyut Chinubhai Vs. A'bad Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-16-1999
Reported in: (1999)2GLR368
1. Heard learned counsel.This Special Civil Application has been filed against the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation by the petitioners with the prayers as under:-'(A) to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the alleged auction sale of the properties of the petitioners alleged to have been held on 23rd and all subsequent steps in pursuance of the said auction sale alleged to have been held by the respondent Corporation;(B) Pending the final hearing and disposal of this petition, to grant interim relief restraining the respondent Corporation from taking any steps in pursuance of the alleged auction sale of the petitioners' properties alleged to have been held on 23rd of June 1983, and further restraining the Respondent Corporation from disposing off any other properties of the petitioners by auction sale for recovery of Municipal Taxes without first adjusting the amount of compensation rec...
Prabhat Solvant Extraction Industries Ltd. Vs. S.S. Khan
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-15-1999
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Guj)59; [1999]238ITR510(Guj)
ORDERBY THE COURT : 1. This petition challenges the order dt. 8th March, 1999, by the designated authority under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme introduced by the Finance Act, 1998. The petitioner has filed a declaration envisaged under s. 89 of the Finance Act, 1998, claiming the benefit of the claim for settlement of tax arrears. 2. The designated authority having considered the declaration and facts of the case accepted the declaration and computed the amount payable under s. 88 by holding that the addition relating to closing stock in the assessment for asst. yr. 1994-95 also arose from the materials discovered during the search. The additions made in asst. yr. 1994-95 are treated as made in consonance to search proceedings under s. 132 of the IT Act and the additional amount payable was determined as per sub-clause (v) of sub-s. (a) of s. 88. 3. The petitioner contends that search was conducted on 20th April, 1995, and all enquiries related to the valuation of stock for the financia...
Meghdoot Laminart (P) Ltd. Vs. Rajiv Sinha or His Successor in Office ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-15-1999
Reported in: (1999)155CTR(Guj)386; [1999]238ITR918(Guj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Rule. Service of rule is waived by learned counsel for the respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner challenges the notices issued under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, for reopening the assessment for the asst. yrs. 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, and 1991-92, by issuing notices on 1st February, 1999. The contention of the assessee has been two-fold. Firstly, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment during the assessment proceedings, the recourse to s. 147 for reassessment could not have been taken place after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. As 4 years have already expired since the end of each of the relevant assessment years in respect of which notices have been issued, the initiation of proceedings and assumption of jurisdiction by the AO is wholly without authority of law. It has also been urged that reasons recorded before ...
S.K. Simpi Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-15-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR861
K.R. Vyas, J. 1. The petitioner who was serving as Under Secretary to Government, has filed this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for directing the respondents to change his date of birth from 4-3-1936 to 14-5-1938 and to give all service benefits as would accrue to him. 2. In order to understand the grievances of the petitioner, certain facts are required to be stated. 3. The petitioner was appointed as a Clerk with effect from 15-6-1959 in the erstwhile Bombay State. It is the case of the petitioner that he submitted the certificate of his age, nationality and domicile etc. issued by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Bombay, wherein the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 14-5-1938. Apart from this the certificate, it appears that the petitioner also produced Secondary School Certificate wherein the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 4-3-1936. On the basis of the Secondary School Certificate, in the service record, his date of bi...
Belim Jiva Rahim Sultan Vs. District Collector
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-15-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR626
M.R. Calla, J.1. Heard learned Counsel. This Special Civil Application was filed in this Court on 2nd May 1997. The ex parte ad-interim order in terms of Para 18(B) was granted on 3rd June 1997 and it lasted upto 30th September 1997.2. It appears that the main Special Civil Application itself was dismissed on account of the absence on 30th September 1997 and the same was restored by order dated 4th December 1998 (Coram: J.M.Panchal & M.H.Kadri, JJ.). It appears that during the pendency of this petition, while there was a stay order in terms of Para 18(B), i.e. with regard to the possession only in the acquisition proceedings, after the ad-interim order was vacated on 30th September 1997, the award was passed on 7th January 1999. Amendment was then sought challenging the award dated 7.1.1997.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners Mr.Parekh has argued that the date of the declaration under Section 6 being 27th August 1996 and date of its publication in the Gazette being 19th Septembe...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. D.K. Trading Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-13-1999
Reported in: [1999]238ITR887(Guj)
ORDERBY THE COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. These are applications under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, at the instance of the CIT, Gujarat, relating to asst. yrs. 1986-87 to 1990-91. He requires this Court to direct the Tribunal, to submit statement of case and refer the following questions of law which are identical in all applications and said to be arising out of its appellate order relating to asst. yrs. 1986-87 to 1988-89, in appeals filed by Revenue and in relation to asst. yr. 1990-91 in appeal filed by assessee in same set of facts and circumstances : '1. Whether, the appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the CIT(A) directing the AO to adopt the status of the assessee as that of a registered firm 2. Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the AO to exclude the income of the sister concerns clubbed with the income of the assessee 3. Whether the Tribunal ought not to have appreciated that the asses...
Gujarat Agro Industries Corpn. Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-13-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj6; (2000)4GLR309
ORDER The Gujarat Agro Industries (P) Ltd. etc. etc. Versus The Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad and others (with Appln. for Ex parte Stay). 12-12-1980. These matters were called on for hearing today. Upon hearing counsel for the Court special leave to appeal in all the matters and granted stay on condition that seventy five per cent of the tax is deposited with theMunicipal Commissioner, within 2 months from today. On such deposit being made by the Appeals to be heard and disposed of. Sd/- Court Master.' 3. The petitioner failed to deposit the amount of the tax at 75 per cent with the Municipal Corporation within two months from 12th December, 1980, i.e. within the time stipulated under the Supreme Court's order dated 12-12-1980 as a condition for stay. Whereas the petitioner Gujarat Agro Industries Ltd. failed to deposit the amount of 75 per cent within the period of 2 moths from 12-12-1980 as granted by the Supreme Court, the Chief Judge, Small Cause Court proceed...
State of Gujarat Vs. S.K. Gadhvi and Co. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-13-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj16
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. The appellant State, original defendant, has challenged the judgment and decree recorded in Civil Suit No. 3751/77 decided by the learned Judge of City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad, whereby, the suit of the respondents -- original plaintiffs -- came to be partly decreed for the recovery of sum of Rs. 55,561/- against the claim of Rs. 1,52,861/-. 2. The plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit for the recovery of the aforesaid amount for the work done by original plaintiff No. 1, a partnership firm, for damages in respect of construction of bridge across river Andheri near Vataman in Ahmedabad District. The plaintiffs, inter alia, contended that the defendant State committed default and delayed giving designs and, therefore, they suffered damages. 3. As per agreement, Ex.47, the work was required to be started on 4th November, 1968 and was to be completed on or before 3rd November, 1969. The agreement could not be fulfilled by the plaintiff on account of the failure on the p...
Dharabhai Kamabhai Bharwad Vs. Mohammed Rafiq Isabhai Surti
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-12-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC121; 2001ACJ1334
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. Admit. Mr. MTM Hakim, learned advocate appears and waives service on behalf of respondent No. 1. Upon the joint request of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. In this appeal, under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the challenge is against the judgment and award, recorded on 30.6.1998, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 1393 of 1995, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad, at the instance of the original opponents - insured and insurer of matador vehicle.3. Respondent No. 1 is the original claimant, who came to be awarded an amount of Rs. 2,53,400/- by way of compensation, for personal injuries sustained by him on account a vehicular accident, which occurred, on 1.6.1995, at about 8.15 P.M. near Vatva, in Ahmedabad Rural District, when the original claimant was proceeding on his scooter, dashed against the truck going in front of him, as the driver, all of a sudden, applied the break without giving signal, and thereaft...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »