Gujarat Court March 2001 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shahibaug Entrepreneurs Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-2001
Reported in: (2001)168CTR(Guj)621; [2001]251ITR433(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. 1. In these references at the instance of the Revenue, the following common questions have been referred to us under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in respect of the assessment years 1970-71 and 1974-75 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, no question of assessing profits under Section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the hands of a holding company arises in case of sale by a holding company as a going concern to its 100 per cent, subsidiary company 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was right in setting aside the assessment and requiring the Income-tax Officer to reframe the assessment ?' 2. The facts leading to Income-tax Reference No. 243A, briefly stated, areas under : Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'KPP'), was a private limited company which maintained its accounts on the basis of the fina...
Tag this Judgment!B.K. Dudani Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-2001
Reported in: (2002)1GLR137; (2002)1GLR200
S.K. Keshote, J. 1. Affidavit-in-reply has been submitted by the Deputy Director, Pension and Provident Fund, which is taken on record. Affidavit-in-reply is also filed by the State Government which is also taken on record. Shri B. K. Dudani, Deputy Conservator of Forests, who was retired, sent a letter to this Court which was treated as a suo motu petition and the Rule was issued to the respondents on 7-2-2001 making it returnable on 8-3-2001. The respondents were directed to file affidavit-in-reply to the Special Civil Application and accordingly they filed the affidavit-in-reply. 2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his retiral benefits were given to him after a considerable delay. In the reply-affidavit the State of Gujarat has admitted that there is a delay in making the payment of the retiral benefits to this person and for this delayed payment of retiral benefits interest has not been paid. However, after issuance of notice by this Court an order has been passed under w...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi Education Trust Vs. Director Social Welfare Deptt., Gandhinagar ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Guj313
ORDERKundan Singh, J.1. By means of this petition, the petitioner-Trust has sought for quashing and setting aside the orders 2nd February, 1999 and 20th March, 1999 passed by the respondent No. 3 Secretary, Social Justice and Empowerment Department and Minister of Social and Welfare Department.2. The petitioner is a registered Public Trust. The petitioner-Trust was granted permission and recommendation for running Ashram Shala for the students of SC/ST and socially backward class. The petitioner-Trust was also running a primary school from standard 1st to 7th and the hostel for the students. The petitioner Trust applied on 11-5-98 to the District Collector for allotting 10 acres of land of survey No. 156 of village Karai, Dist. Gandhinagar to the petitioner-Trust for running an Ashram Shala on the basis of the circular issued by the District Collector. The Deputy Director Social Welfare Department also recommended to the Collector, Gandhinagar for allotment of the said land by his lett...
Tag this Judgment!Centre Point Welfare Association Vs. Nita International
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-2001
Reported in: (2001)4GLR2777
B.C. Patel, J.1. Special Civil Application No. 8931 of 2000 has been filed by Centre Point Welfare Association. S.C.As. No. 8553 of 2000 and 8781 of 2000 have been filed by the Nita International. Spl. C.A. No.8930 of 2000 has been filed by Nijhawan Travels Pvt. Ltd., occupier of shops No. 54 and 48.2. On 17/8/2000 it was stated before the Court by the learned counsel appearing for the Centre Point Welfare Association- occupiers, (hereinafter referred to as 'Association' or 'Occupiers') that all the 4 complexes i.e. A, B, C and D shall not be used for the purpose other than residence and they shall discontinue the use as office complex by mid-night of Sunday - 20/8/2000.3. On 1/9/2000 the Court passed an order in Civil Application No. 7851 of 2000 to the effect that the matter is already pending before the Apex Court and hence the Court is not in a position to pass any order more particularly when the cognizance is already taken by the Apex Court.4. S.C.A. No. 8781 of 2000 was filed by...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs. Mahebubanbibi Wd/O Mahemudbeg Amubeg M ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-08-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC85; 2002ACJ1017; (2001)4GLR2950
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The appellant challenges the judgement and award dated 26th December 1985 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kheda, at Nadiad in M.A.C. Petition No. 175 of 1983, by which the respondents - claimants were awarded an amount of Rs.1,04,000=00 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application till realisation and proportionate costs.2. The accident took place on 6th October 1982 on Nadiad - Petlad road in the outskirts of village Rangaipura. At that time, the deceased alongwith others had gone to village Ravipura at the place of the respondent No.6 by his tractor and trailer. After replacing the transformer, the damaged transformer was kept in the trailer. The deceased Mahemudbeg also sat in that trailer and they all were returning from village Ravipura. The tractor was at that time being driven by the respondent No.5. According to the claimants, it was driven at an excessive speed and in a rash and negligent manner. When the tractor was pass...
Tag this Judgment!Amit B. Seju and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-07-2001
Reported in: (2001)2GLR1725
R.R. Tripathi, J. 1. The present petition is filed by two petitioners who belong to scheduled caste. The challenge in the petition is to an action of the respondents imposing 100% cut in appointment by unilaterally abolishing all the 72 posts of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, which were vacant in the year 1994, instead of imposing only 10% cut as per the Government Resolutions and instructions issued from time to time. The main ground of challenge is that the respondent-authorities have not imposed any cut on the post of (i) Regional Transport officer, (ii) Assistant Regional Transport Officer, and (iii) Motor Vehicle Inspector. The say of the petitioners is that the action is discriminatory and also victimizing the persons belonging to the cadre of AssistantMotor Vehicle Inspectors. The petitioners also challenge the action of the respondent-authorities of not carrying forward the backlog of two posts reserved for scheduled caste category in the cadre of Assistant Motor Inspectors...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Soma Textiles and Industries Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR137(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. 1. In this appeal, the Revenue has proposed the following substantial questions of law for our consideration : '(1) Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,73,876 made on account of change of method of accounting by invoking the provisions of Section 145 of the Act (2) Whether, the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co. is not clearly applicable to the facts of the present case ?' 2. In view of the finding given by the Tribunal that the change in the method of accounting was bona fide and consistently followed in the subsequent years, no substantial questions of law arise in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, summarily dismissed. ...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Sama Textiles and Industries Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-2001
Reported in: [2001]253ITR137(Guj)
M. S. Shah, J. In this appeal, the revenue has proposed the following substantial questions of law for our consideration :'(1) Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,73,876 made on account of change of method of accounting by invoking the provisions of section 145 of the Act ?(2) Whether, the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co. is not clearly applicable to the facts of the present case ?'In view of the finding given by the Tribunal that the change in the method of accounting was bona fide and consistently followed in the subsequent years, no substantial questions of law arise in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, summarily dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Govindbhai Keshavlal Thakker Vs. Samasta Luhana Gnati Registered Trust ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-02-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Guj86; (2001)3GLR2740
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. This revision application has been filed by the original defendant, against whom the opponents herein have filed a suit, being Civil Suit No. 192 of 1996, in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), at Surendranagar. The ease of the present opponents-original plaintiffs in the suit is that plaintiff No. 1 is a registered Trust and the property in question is used for social and religious activities. That the defendant was employed by the Trust in their service to look after the Trust property and by virtue of his employment, he was given one room as a licensee of the left side portion of the suit premises. The defendant was to hand over the possession on the termination of his services. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the defendant resigned on 3-8-1996 by voluntarily handing over his resignation. Still, however, he has continued the use of the said room and he is not vacating the same. It is averred in paragraph 8 in the plaint that the possession of the de...
Tag this Judgment!Nanasaheb Bhikhaji Rao Vs. Rambhao Arjun and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-02-2001
Reported in: (2002)1GLR140
D.C. Srivastava, J. 1. List has been revised twice, none appeared for the respondents. As such, Shri B. J. Shelat, learned Counsel for the revisionist has been heard and the judgments of the Courts below have been examined. 2. The revisionist, landlord filed a suit for eviction of the tenant in chief, respondent No. 1 and also the sub-tenants, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on various grounds. The first ground was that, the tenant was in arrears of rent exceeding six months. The second ground was that, the respondent No. 1, tenant had illegally sub-let the suit land to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 without his consent in writing. The third ground was that, the land in suit was reasonably andbona fidely required by the landlord, revisionist for his personal use. The next ground was that, the sub-tenants, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were creating nuisance on the suit land. Another ground was that; the tenant in chief, as well as, the sub-tenants are using the suit land for purpose which is contrary t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »