Gujarat Court January 2001 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.
John Hamilton Christian Vs. Blue Bird Agency and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)3GLR1929
H.H. Mehta, J.1. The original complainant of Municipal Case No. 786 of 1982 which was pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Municipal), Surat has by filing this Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'Cr. P.C.') challenged the correctness, legality and propriety of judgment dated 26th August, 1987 rendered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Municipal), Surat (who will be referred to hereinafter as 'the learned Magistrate') in aforesaid Municipal Case No. 786 of 1982.2. Here in this present Criminal Revision Application, revision petitioner was the original complainant and revision opponent Nos. 1 to 5 were the accused Nos. 1 to 5 respectively in aforesaid case, and therefore, the parties will be referred to herein after as the complainant and respective accused persons respectively at appropriate places.3. The facts leading to this Criminal Revision Application in a nutshell are as fol...
Kanakprabhadevi Narpatsinhji Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)3GLR2406
M.R. Calla, J.1. This is the plaintiffs' First Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 29-2-1980 passed by the Civil Judge (S.D.), Ahmedabad (Rural), at Narol in Special Civil Suit No. 9 of 1978 whereby the plaintiffs' suit was dismissed with costs.2. The plaintiffs, four in number, i.e. four daughters of Jayvant Kunwar (mother) and Jayvant Sinhji (father) filed Special Civil Suit on 2nd February, 1978 in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Ahmedabad (Rural), at Narol. They came with the case that their mother Jayvant Kunwar who was known as Rani Sahiba had become the full and absolute owner of the agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos. 252/3, 254 Part, 262. 501, 678 Part. 320 Part and 571 Part situated within the sim of village Utelia in Taluka Dholka and after the death of their mother Rani Sahiba, the agricultural lands as above devolved upon them and they as her heirs became the full and natural owners of the aforesaid lands. Besides declaration that they had become the full and ...
State of Gujarat Vs. Bhupendra Kumar Jagjivandas Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ1517Guj
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State against the order dated March 20, 1990 of JMFC, Manavadar in Summary Case No. 89 of 1990 for an offence of violation of Section 67 of the Factories Act, 1948. 2. That on December 18, 1989 one Shri S.R. Bodar who is designated Inspector under Section 8(1) of the Factories Act, 1948 visited the factory premises of the accused and found that one child labourer named Jyotsna Phlabhai was working in the factory employed at Sr. No. 25 of Pay Roll Muster of December, 1989. On ascertaining the age it was found that she was aged about 12 years viz. less than 14 years and in view of this fact it was found that accused had violated Section 67 of the Factories Act, 1948 and was liable to be punished under Section 92 of the said Act. In the complaint dated February 20, 1990 (Exh. 1), It is thereafter stated that though the offence under Section 67 of the Factories Act, 1948 would be normally punishable under Section 92 of the said Act, the accus...
Gujarat Agro Oil Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2001
Reported in: [2002]256ITR230(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the following question of law, arising out of the order dated March 30, 1984, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' in I. T. A. No. 829/Ahd of 1983, has been referred to this court for its opinion under the provisions of Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on the basis of material placed before the Tribunal, the amount of legal fees of Rs. 80,850 was expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the business and therefore allowable under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. We have heard the learned advocate, Shri J. P. Shah, appearing for the assessee, and the learned advocate, Shri Akil Qureshi, appearing for the Revenue.3. The circumstances in which the question referred to hereinabove has arisen, in a nutshell, are as under :The assessee, Gujarat Agro Oil Enterprises Ltd....
Cit Vs. Silver Cotton Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)170CTR(Guj)377
A.R. Dave, J.At the instance of the revenue , the following question of law arising out of the order passed in IT Appln. No. 1765/Ahd/1983, by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has been referred to this court, for its opinion, under the provisions of section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has been right in law in holding that the provisions of section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were not attracted in respect of the excess provision for bonus amounting to Rs. 54,745 written off by the assessee during the year in question ?'2. Learned advocate Shri B. B. Naik has appeared for the revenue and, though served, nobody has appeared for the respondent-assessee. In the circumstances, looking to the importance of the issues involved in this reference application, learned advocate Shri J.P. Shah has been appointed to assist the court as amicus curiae.3. The facts giving rise ...
State of Gujarat Vs. Gopal Glass Works Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3454
D.A. Mehta, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State against the order of JMFC, Kadi in Criminal Case No. 1088/88 seeking enhancement of the sentence.2. That on 21.7.1987 Shri K.M.Patel, the Government Labour Officer designated as Inspector under section 27 of the Payment of Bonus Act,1965 visited the factory premises of respondent no.1 - named Gopal Glass Works Pvt.Ltd.. It was found by the Inspector that the respondents had committed breach of provisions of rule 5 of the Payment of Bonus Rules,1965 along with section 19(b) of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. After following the necessary procedure and obtaining sanction a complaint was lodged. All the three respondents-accused pleaded guilty when the charges were read out to them and filed a pursish on 23.7.1990 requesting the Trial Court to set them free after admonishing them, or in the alternative, impose a fine of the minimum amount.3. The three respondents - accused having pleaded guilty, the Trial Court passed the order in the ...
Gujarat Agro Oil Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)170CTR(Guj)458
A.R. Dave, J.At the instance of the assessee, the following question of law, arising out of the order dated 30-3-1984, passed by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench B in ITA No. 829/Ahd/1983, has been referred to this court for its opinion under the provisions of section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on the basis of material placed before the Tribunal, the amount of legal fees of Rs. 80,850 was expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business and, therefore, allowable under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?'2. We have heard learned advocate Shri J.P. Shah appearing for the assessee and learned advocate Shri Akil Qureshi, appearing for the revenue.3. The circumstances in which the question referred to hereinabove has arisen, in a nutshell, are as under :4. The assessee, Gujarat Agro Oil Enterprises Ltd., is a subsidiary of Gujarat Agro Industries Corpora...
Champakbhai Parsottambhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-11-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Guj200; (2001)2GLR1814
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. By this petition under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, challenge, at the instance of the appellant-original petitioner, is against the orderpassed in Tax Appeal No. 17 of 1998 by the Director of Transport, Gujarat State which came to be confirmed in, Special Civil Application No. 9282 of 1998, by the Learned single Judge on 31-8-2000, on the main premise that, the appellant cannot be fastened with liability for payment of arrears of Motor Vehicles Tax as he had sold the vehicle. 2. In order to appreciate the merits of this appeal and challenge against it, a few relevant material facts may be highlighted, here as under :- 1. The appellant-original petitioner is doing a business of Travel Agent, at Anand. The petitioner is the owner of some luxury buses. 2. Out of them, one luxury bus bearing No, GTG-4444 had already been sold to the respondent No. 3, one Mr. D. N. Patel, as per the case of the original petitioner, and therefore, the petitioner is not liable for the p...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shashikalaben Navnitlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-11-2001
Reported in: [2001]250ITR656(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. In all these references at the instance of the Revenue, the following common question is referred to us in respect of the assessment year 1983-84 :'Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Income-tax Officer to take the average price of bonus shares for computation of capital gains in respect of sale of equity shares of Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. without reducing the cost of original shares on averaging the cost price on receipt of bonus shares ?'2. It may be stated that in each reference, in the question referred, the number of equity shares of Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. is mentioned, but for the sake of convenience and brevity the common question set out above does not include the number of equity shares of the above company.3. It is an agreed factual position that all the assessees had purchased equity shares of Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. ('the company' for short) prior to June 1, 1964. The company had issued bonus sha...
Cit Vs. Shashikalaben Navnitlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-11-2001
Reported in: (2001)166CTR(Guj)29
M.S. Shah, J.In all these references at the instance of the revenue , the following common question is referred to us in respect of assessment year 1983-84 :'Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Income Tax Officer to take the average price of bonus shares for computation of capital gains in respect of sale of equity shares of Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. without reducing the cost of original shares on averaging the cost price on receipt of bonus shares ?'2. It may be stated that in each reference, in the question referred, the number of equity shares of Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. is mentioned, but for the sake of convenience and brevity the common question set out above does not include the number of equity shares of the above company.3. It is an agreed factual position that all the assessees had purchased equity shares of Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') prior to 1-6-1964. The company had issued bonus shares...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »