Gujarat Court September 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.
SalimuddIn @ Jugan N. Ansari Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-1999
Reported in: 2000(71)ECC425; (1999)3GLR699
M.S. Parikh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30th June 1992 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City of Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No. 228/91. The appellant herein (for short `the accused') came to be convicted under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (for short `NDPS Act') and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.1,00,000, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. He was also convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 months. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge directed substantive sentences to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, leading to the trial of the accused may briefly be stated:-On 1-4-1991, Police Constable Jagatsinh informed PSI Mr. D.B. Jadeja that one person Salimuddin @ Jugan Niyazuddin Ansari carrying with him some stock of c...
Deputy Executive Engineer, Gujarat Maritime Board Vs. Hasmukh M. Jasan ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-02-1999
Reported in: [2000(85)FLR886]; (2000)1GLR367
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. The above two Special Civil Applications and the connected Civil Application are proposed to be disposed of by a common judgment and order. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the above matters are as under : 3. The prayer in Special Civil Application No. 10750 of 1998 is for quashing and setting aside the Award dated 15.9.1998 delivered by the Labour Court, Jamnagar, whereas the prayer in the connected Special Civil Application No. 11179 of 1998 is for maintaining the Award aforesaid insofar as it directs reinstatement of the employee, but the prayer is that the said Award be modified to the extent it has denied back wages to the employee. The prayer in the Civil Application is under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short 'the Act') for direction to the employer to deposit all wages due from 18.12.1988 and for payment thereof to the employee. 4. Hasmukh M. Jasani, respondent in one petition and petitioner in other petition was appointed on a short term p...
Union of India and anr. Vs. Bachu Badia
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-02-1999
Reported in: (2001)3GLR2734
B.C. Patel, J.1. Union of India (Railways) being aggrieved by the judgment delivered by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench on 2-4-1998, has approached this Court.2. It is contended by learned Advocates Mr. Yajnik and Mr. Sheth appearing for the Railways that the Tribunal has committed serious error in considering the case of the original petitioner as the application was barred by limitation. It is pointed out to us from the order that the case of the applicant, as set out in the application, was of oral termination with effect from 20-5-1985. The Tribunal was moved on 8-3-1989, after a period of about four years, along with an application for condonation of delay being M.A. No. 717 of 1989. The Tribunal has observed that, 'The applicant has not furnished any satisfactory explanation for the long delay in filing this application challenging the termination order. The M.A., is rejected and consequently prayer (A) of Para 7 regarding quashing of termination order is rej...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. R.T. Adhvaryu
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-02-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR155
B.C. Patel, J.1. Union of India (Railways) and its officers have preferred this Special Civil Application against the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in Original Application No.21 of 1992 on 19.12.1997. The question raised before this Court is that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to exercise the powers under the provisions contained in the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as the Act) on the ground of non-disposal of the appeal finally by the Appellate Authority within a period of six months from the date of preferring an appeal, even if the Tribunal is approached within a period of one year from the expiry of the said period of six months? On the other hand, Mr. Shah, learned advocate for the respondent has submitted that the question raised by the railways is not tenable in view of the provisions contained in Sections 20 and 21 of the said Act.2. It appears that, on 21.11.1990, the Divisional Commercial Superintendent passe...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Wintex Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1999
Reported in: (2000)159CTR(Guj)226; [2000]245ITR266(Guj)
C.K. Thakkar, J.1. The following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this Court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that under the provisions of s. 40A(8) of the IT Act, 1961 for the purpose of determining the disallowance, the net amount of interest has to be taken into account ?' 2. For the asst. yr. 1978-79, the assessee debited interest of Rs. 13,18,829, against which it had received interest of Rs. 1,38,205. The ITO disallowed interest under s. 40A(8) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the gross amount of interest without deducting interest received. In appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the decision of the ITO. In further appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal held that for determining the disallowance, the net amount of interest should be considered. 3. According to the Tribunal, the point at controversy was whether in order to determine disallowance of interest ...
income Tax Officer Vs. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1999
Reported in: (2000)163CTR(Guj)554
C.K. Thakker, J.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order passed by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad in ITA Nos. 2811 and 2812 of 1997 on 11th December, 1998, the present appeals are filed by the Revenue under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. According to the Revenue, the following substantial question of law deserves to be determined by this Court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee could not be held to be an assessee deemed to be in default under s. 201(1) and thereby cancelling the orders passed by the AO under s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act ?' 3. Shortly stated, the facts are that the assessee Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Ltd. ('company' for short) filed its annual returns under s. 206 of the Act for financial year 1995-96 on 24th May, 1996. A survey was carried out at the premises of the assessee-company on 19th July, 1996, by the Income-tax Off...
Suo Motu Vs. Vatva Industries Association and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj33; (1999)3GLR2758
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. This suo motu petition was at the instance of a note filed by the Assistant Environment Engineer of the Gujarat Pollution Control Board. That note dated 1-12-1998 records that during the visits and inspections, Board officials observed huge quantity of hazardous waste dumped near Ramol village. It is stated that earlier under similar circumstances, this Court had initiated suo-motu action against some industrial units situated at GIDC, Vatva, in Special Civil Application No. 5258/ 97 to 5264/97 and the directions issued in those proceedings were not complied with. It is then stated that the Gujarat Pollution Control Board had received a number of complaints from the nearby villagers/farmers and the President of the Ramol Nagar Palika, alleging that due to the pollution by some units, their well-water was contaminated with colour. Accordingly, it is stated that the Board visited the site on 13th October, 1998. A copy of the report was attached with this note. It i...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Ravjibhai Panchanbhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1999
Reported in: [2001]252ITR184(Guj)
C.K. Thakker, J.1. The following question is referred for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the assessee was entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(xxxiii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?'2. The short facts of the case are that the assessee claimed exemption under Section 5(1)(xxxiii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Under the said provision, the value of any assets brought into India by a person of Indian origin who was ordinarily residing in a foreign country and who. on leaving such country, has returned to India with the intention of permanently residing therein, is exempted from payment of wealth-tax for a period of seven successive years commencing with the assessment year next following the date on which such person returned to India. The provision came into force with effect from April 1, 1977. It is an admitted fact that the as...
income Tax Officer Vs. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-01-1999
Reported in: (2001)163CTR(Guj)554
C.K. Thakker, J.Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order passed by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad in ITA Nos. 2811 and 2812 of 1997 on 11-12-1998, the present appeals are filed by the revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').According to the revenue , the following substantial question of law deserves to be determined by this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee could not be held to be an assessee deemed to be in default under section 201(1) and thereby cancelling the orders passed by the assessing officer under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act T'2. Shortly stated, the facts are that the assessee Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'company') filed its annual returns under section 206 of the Act for financial year 1995~96 on 24-5-1996. A survey was carried out at the premises of the assessee- company on...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›