Gujarat Court June 2001 Judgments
Amersy Exports Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2001
Reported in: (2002)2GLR1645
R.R. Tripathi, J. 1. The present petition is filed by Amersy Exports Private Limited challenging the order dated 20-2-2001, which is produced at Annexure-K to the petition, on various grounds. Before the said challenge can be examined, the short facts giving rise to the present proceedings are required to be stated herein.2. That certain demands of the workers of the petitioner-unit were pending for the last about 10 months, as is mentioned in the public notice dated 16-10-1999, which was issued by the petitioner, a copy of which is at Annexure-C to the petition. It is the case of the petitioner that in support of the said demands the workers issued threats and there was deliberate go-slow attitude on the part of the workmen and as an off-shoot of the said attitude of the workers, on the night preceding 6-10-1999 i.e. there was some rioting in the unit and damage was caused by stoning, and therefore, the Management had declared lock-out. This fact is borne out from the public notice, w...
Tag this Judgment!Dilip Chinubhai Shah Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR680(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J. 1. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred to this court the following question of law arising out of its order passed in I. T. A. No. 2007/Ahd of 1984 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 capital gains of Rs. 34,425 was liable to be included in the total income of the asses-see ?' 2. The facts giving rise to the reference, in a nutshell, are as under : Shri Chinubhai Motilal Shah, who died intestate on February 20, 1965, was survived by his three daughters, four sons and a widow. After his death, one of his properties, a residential house situated at Panchvati, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad, devolved upon his four sons. By executing a memorandum/deed dated March 27, 1973, the said property was given to the Hindu undivided families of the four sons. Though the said residential house wa...
Tag this Judgment!Thakor Udaji Abhuji and Thakor Prahladji Manaji Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2001
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3193
Sharad D. Dave, J.1. The appellants/original accused of Sessions Case No. 272 of 1992 have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Mehsana dated 14.5.1993, by which both the appellants have been convicted under Sec. 376 and 363 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Sec. 363 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.2. We may state here that after the appeal was presented by the appellant/original accused through the jail and after it was admitted by this court on 20.12.93, both the appellants were given legal assistance of the Advocate Sri B.N.Raval. When the appeal was called out for hearing, the learned A.P.P. for the State pointed out to us that t...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Raoof Alias Raoof Abdul Kader Shaikh Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2001
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3252
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Rule. Service of rule is waived by Mr. H.L. Jani, learned APP appearing for the State.2. Heard learned advocates for the parties.3. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' for short) challenging the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad dated 25th January, 2001 in criminal miscellaneous application no. 2453 of 2000 in sessions case no. 240 of 1996. The petitioner, initially, approached the learned Additional City Sessions Judge by filing application to transfer sessions case No. 240 of 1996 to other sessions court in the same sessions division. The concerned sessions court rejected the application filed by the petitioner on 20th October, 2000 and observed while rejecting the said application by observing that the petitioner may prefer transfer application before the forum if he is desired. With such observations, application ...
Tag this Judgment!Keshvanand Harinarayan Swami Kamal Vishweshwer Sharma Vs. State of Guj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-2001
Reported in: 1997CriLJ3173
A.L. Dave, J.1. These two Criminal Appeals arise out of a judgment and order rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, in Sessions Case No.118 of 1994 on March 18, 1996.2. The facts leading to the present appeals are that, a First Information Report came to be lodged by one Mitesh Manubhai Shah before the Dwarka Police on June 18, 1994 against one Swami Keshvanand and another one Ravindra alias Mama of Sanatan Seva Mandal, an institution working at Dwarka. The charged levelled against the two accused persons were punishable under Sections 376, 354 and 114 of Indian Penal Code.3. According to the prosecution, sister of the first informant - Rita - was studying in the school run by Sanatan Seva Mandal, at Dwarka. About three months prior to the date on which the F.I.R. was lodged, the girl was called by accused-Ravindra at about 12.00 noon and was taken to the room of accused-Keshvanand. It is the case that Swami Keshvanand initially made indecent advances towards Rita and...
Tag this Judgment!G.S.R.T.C., Ahmedabad Vs. B. Arunchandra and Co. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Guj343
D.P. Buch, J.1. The appellant-Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, incorporated under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950, has preferred this First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the Judgment and decree dated 24th September, 1979 under which the learned Judge of the City Civil Court, Court No. 12, dismissed the suit of the present appellant with cost.2. The facts may be briefly stated as follows.The appellant, a Corporation incorporated under the aforesaid Act of 1950, instituted a Civil Suit being Civil Suit No. 1429 of 1975 for the recovery of Rs. 11,625/- with interest at 6% per annum of cost of the suit from the respondents abovenamed. It may be stated at the outset that the first respondent is a registered partnership firm, whereas Respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 are shown as the partners of the said partnership firm, Respondent No. 1.The appellant instituted the aforesaid civil suit before the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad allegi...
Tag this Judgment!Sheth Brothers Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: [2001]251ITR270(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. 'It has been said that the taxes are the price that we pay for civilization. If so, it is essential that those who are entrusted with the task of calculating and realising that price should familiarise themselves with the relevant provisions and become well-versed with the law on the subject. Any remissness on their part can only be at the cost of the national exchequer and must necessarily result in loss of revenue. At the same time, we have to bear in mind that the policy of law is that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings, that stale issues should not be reactivated beyond a particular stage and that lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in other spheres of human activity. So far as the income-tax assessment orders are concerned, they cannot be reopened on the score of income escaping assessment under Section 147 of the Act of 1961 after the expiry of four years from the end of ...
Tag this Judgment!Sheth Brothers Vs. Joint Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: (2001)169CTR(Guj)519
D.A. Mehta, J.'It has been said that the taxes are the price that we pay for civilization. If so, it is essential that those who are entrusted with the task of calculating and realising that price should familiarise themselves with the relevant provisions and become well-versed with the law on the subject. Any remissness on their part can only be at the cost of the national exchequer and must necessarily result in loss of revenue. At the same time, we have to bear in mind that the policy of law is that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings, that stale issues would not be reactivated beyond a particular stage and that lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in other spheres of human activity. So far as the income-tax assessment orders are concerned, they cannot be reopened on the score of income escaping assessment under section 147 of the Act of 1961 after the expiry of four years from the end of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jalaram Oil Mills
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-21-2001
Reported in: (2001)171CTR(Guj)426; [2002]253ITR192(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the levy of penalty of Rs. 30,000, imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under Section 271(1)(c) of the 1961 Act was justified in law ?'2. The assessment year under consideration is 1971-72 and the accounting period relevant for the said assessment year is S. Y. 2026. The assessment under Section 143(3) was framed by the Income-tax Officer on March 28, 1974. As against returned income of Rs. 9,720, the assessee was assessed on a total income of Rs. 40,189 by making an addition of Rs. 27,500 as income from undisclosed source in respect of certain amounts credited in the name of six different creditors, apart from various disallowances with which we are not concerned at present. The Income-tax Officer initiated proceeding...
Tag this Judgment!Cadila Laboratories Ltd. Vs. the Registrar of Trade Marks
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-21-2001
Reported in: 2002(24)PTC308(Guj)
K.M. Mehta, J. 1. Cadila Laboratories-petitioner has filed this appeal under Section 109 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 against the judgment and order dated 14.11.1990 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Trade Marks, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent No. 2). Respondent No. 2 by the said decision was pleased to reject the application filed by the petitioner for registration of its Trade Mark consisting of the word 'Brofex' (word per se) for the specification of goods to read as 'Pharmaceutical and Medicinal Preparations' in class 5 of 4th Schedule to the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The petitioner had also filed this application under Section 12(1) read with Section 18(4) of the Act. The Registrar was pleased to reject the application and ordered for advertisement in the Trade Mark Journal.2. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:2.1 The petitioner has filed an application on 14.9.1987...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »