Gujarat Court February 2001 Judgments
Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-06-2001
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3349
B.C. Patel1. The petitioner No.1 - Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, is engaged in manufacture of Sponge Iron at its plant located at Hazira, Surat. The petitioners, by this petition, have challenged the arbitrary, unreasonable and illegal demand of duty as well as of interest without finalisation of the assessment under the provisions contained in the Customs Act, 1962.2. The petitioner-Company purchased a Secondhand Plant on 'as is where is basis ' from Messers Teviot Investments Limited, ( 'TIL' for short ) for manufacture of Hot Briquetted Sponge Iron by Midrex Process. The Plant was to be dismantled which was situated at Emden, Germany and after shipment, the same was to be re-engineered to erect and instal at Hazira, Surat. There was an agreement with Messers Voest Alpine Incorporation ( 'VAI' for short ) and also an agreement with Midrex International whereunder the petitioner was to pay a sum of DM 2 Million, DM 10.10 Million and DM 23 Millio...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Nutan Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-06-2001
Reported in: (2002)173CTR(Guj)32
M.S. Shah, J.In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following questions have been referred to us for our opinion in respect of assessment year 1984-85 :1. Whether medical benefits and H.R.A. paid to the managing directors were to be considered for computing the disallowance under section 40(c) of the Act2. Whether H.R.A. paid to the employees of the company was to be considered for the purpose of computing the disallowance under section 40A(5) of the Act? 3. Whether all the tours undertaken by a person during the year were to be grouped together and only thereafter the limits, laid down in rule 6D be applied2. We have heard Mr. B.B. Naik, learned counsel for the revenue, instructed by M/s. M.R. Bhatt & Co. Though served, none appears for the respondent-assessee.3. At the hearing of this reference, Mr. Naik points out that the issue regarding reimbursement of medical benefits is covered by the decisions of this court in Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. CIT : [1994]210ITR358(Gu...
Tag this Judgment!Kamalaben W/O Govindbhai B. Sharma Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-06-2001
Reported in: (2001)4GLR320
C.K. Buch, J.1. The appellant -lady Kamlaben wife of Govindbhai Bababhai Sharma has preferred this appeal under Sec. 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and has challenged the judgment and order of conviction and sentence holding her guilty of the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of I.P.C. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, District Kheda at Nadiad at the end of the trial of Sessions Case No. 82 of 1990 convicted the appellant under impugned judgment dated 16th May, 1992, and has imposed punishment of life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/- and in default of fine, one month R.I.2. To appreciate the grievances of the appellant for the verdict recorded by the lower court vis-a-vis the case of the prosecution, we would like to state case of prosecution in brief.According to the prosecution, the appellant, (hereinafter referred to as the accused), is the step -mother of deceased Rasila. Family of the accused and the deceased were residing in village Pathavat (Bar Muvada) of Taluka ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Atul Products Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2001
Reported in: [2002]255ITR85(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J.1. As the legal issues involved in I. T. A. No. 351 of 1999 and in Tax Appeals Nos. 758 to 761 of 1999 are the same, at the request of the learned advocates, all the cases are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The learned advocate, Shri B. B. Naik, has appeared for the Revenue whereas the learned advocate, Shri J. P. Shah, has appeared for the assessee in all these cases.3. In I. T. A. No. 351 of 1999, which has been filed under the provisions of Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'), it has been prayed by the applicant that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal be directed to refer to this court the following two questions arising out of the order dated May 12, 1996, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', in I. T. A. No. 1843/Ahd of 1990, for its opinion.'(1) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Atul Products Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-2001
Reported in: (2001)170CTR(Guj)371
A.R. Dave, J.As legal issues involved in ITA No. 351/99 and in Tax Appeals Nos. 758 to 761 of 1999 are the same, at the request of the learned advocates, all the cases are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Learned advocate Shri B.B. Naik has appeared for the revenue whereas learned advocate Shri J.P. Shah has appeared for the assessee in all these cases.3. In ITA No. 351/99, which has been filed under the provisions of section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), it has been prayed by the applicant that the Tribunal be directed to refer to this court the following two questions arising out of the order dated 12-5-1996, passed by the Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench 'B', in ITA No. 1843/Ahd/1990, for its opinion :'(1) Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) deleting the addition of Rs. 2,93,56,000 representing the alleged under valuation of closing stock(2) Wh...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Bhagvatacharya Narayancharya Public Trust Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-01-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Guj208; (2001)2GLR1356
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. These matters were ordered to be referred by the Division-Bench to a Larger Bench for its decision, considering the nature of the controversy and the importance of the questions involved in them. 2. The following are the questions formulated by the Division Bench :-'(a) Whether Art. 26(c) of the Constitution of India, which confers fundamental right to own and acquire movable and immovable property to every religious denomination or any section thereof, forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution? (b)(i) Whether Gujarat Devasthan Inam Abolition (Amendment) Act, 1977 is open to challenge, as the said Act is placed in the Ninth Schedule? (ii) If a statute does not provide for compensation for abolition of rights and is placed in the Ninth Schedule, whether the said Act would be void or whether the validity of the said statute cannot be challenged as provided in Art. 31B? (iii) What is the effect of Art. 300A of the Constitution which does not provide ...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Housing Board, Ahmedabad Vs. Harilal Jethalal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-01-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Guj259
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. The Gujarat Housing Board has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 27th October, 1988 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court No. 2, Ahmedabad in Civil Suit No. 3799 of 1981 directing the appellant to pay Rs. 6,50,691.00 with proportionate costs and interest at the rate of 12% perannum on the amount of Rs. 6,08,879.00 from the date of the suit till realisation.2. The respondent-plaintiff, a registered partnership firm dealing in building construction activities, had submitted a tender for construction of a building for the Employees' State Insurance Corporation, at Ahmedabad. After negotiations, the appellant original defendant had accepted the tender on 17th August, 1973 and issued a work order to the respondent on 28th November, 1973, fixing the date of commencement of work on 1st December, 1973. According to the respondent, there was delay in issuing the work order due to the fact that the plans for construction had not been approv...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›