Gujarat Court September 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.
Dolat Industries Vs. Krishna Oil Industries and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Guj91; (2002)2GLR1836
J.R. Vora, J. 1. This application is filed for the review or the modification of the Order passed by this Court in Appeal From Order No. 436 of 2000 on 19-7-2001 (reported in 2007(3) GLR 2308),2. Facts goes to show that the present applicant filed Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000 in the Court of District Judge at Jamnagar stating that the plaintiff is a partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling edible oil and their brand name or trade mark is 'EKKA'. The description of the trade mark is also described in detail by the plaintiff. The grievance was made that the defendant by adopting the similar trade name and trade mark of 'TIN EKKA' passes off their goods as the goods of the plaintiff and were liable to the action under common law and for that suit came to be filed for restraining the defendant from using the trade mark label 'TIN EKKA' with the device which is being used by the defendant and for the damages caused to the plaintiff by passing off the goods. ...
Sadhuram Gordhandas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: (2002)172CTR(Guj)201; [2002]253ITR695(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred the following six questions for the opinion of this court in compliance with the directions issued by this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'): '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the Income-tax Officer had lawfully reopened assessment proceeding under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether, the Tribunal was justified in taking into account irrelevant aspect such as voluntary disclosure scheme and the disclosure made thereunder, etc., as against the question of mere difference of opinion on the valuation of the closing stock for the purpose of legality of reopening of the proceedings 3. Whether, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the point was totally untenable having no factual basis and whether the...
Sadhuram Gordhandas Vs. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN603(Guj)
Mehta, J. The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred the following six questions for the opinion of this court in compliance with the directions issued by this court under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act):'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding that the Income Tax Officer had lawfully reopened assessment proceeding under section 147(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, the Tribunal was justified in taking into account irrelevant aspects such as Voluntary Disclosure Scheme and the disclosure made thereunder, etc., as against the question of mere difference of opinion on the valuation of the closing stock for the purpose of legality of reopening of the proceedings ?3. Whether, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the point was totally untenable having no factual basis and whether the said finding is not contrary...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Arvind Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: (2001)171CTR(Guj)362; [2002]254ITR529(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench A, has referred the following five questions for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, the reimbursement of medical expenses and house rent allowance to the managing directors are to be considered for the purpose of computing the disallowance under Section 40(c) of the Act ? 2. Whether, the cash payment of house rent allowance to the employees is to be considered for the purpose of computing the disallowance under Section 40A(5) of the Act ? 3. Whether, in law and on facts, the assessee is entitled to a deduction of Rs. 2,69,842 paid to Mettur Beardsell Ltd., on account of royalty ? 4. Whether, the disallowance under Rule 60D is to be computed by grouping together all the tours undertaken by a person during the year ? 5. Whether, in law and on facts, the assessee was entitled to deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act ?' 2. The assessment year is 1984-85 and the relevant accounting period is 1983. So far as questio...
State of Gujarat and ors. Vs. Aniruddhsinh Mahipatsinh Jadeja
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: (2002)2GLR1174
D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J.1. This L.P.A., has been preferred by the State and Inspector General of Polite (Prison) to challenge the order of the learned single Judge dated 14-8-2001 whereby against the decision of the authority of the State, parole has been granted to the petitioner who is a life-convict for a period of five days so that he may offer condolences to the members of his family, after the accidental death of his younger brother on 18-5-2001.2. Learned single Judge, after considering the objections raised to the grant of parole of the petitioner, imposed stringent conditions requiring security and escort to be provided to the petitioner at his cost and on deposit of Rs. 1 lakh as a condition precedent of his release. The stringent conditions on which parole has been granted are required to be reproduced to appreciate the objections raised by the authority of the State to the grant of parole to the petitioner :'(a) That the State Government will provide strict, complete and co...
Ramkrishna Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 2003(159)ELT43(Guj)
D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J.1. By this petition, challenge is made to the demand of Excise Duty on a by-product (half-burnt coal ash) described as cinder. According to the respondents, cinder is an excisable item falling within the Heading 26.21 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 under old tariff item No. 68. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that coal ash or cinder which is obtained by use of coal in boiler for generating electricity cannot be held to be a manufactured excisable item, either under the old tariff or the new tariff. It is not disputed that the present case pertains to the old tariff item No. 68. Reliance on behalf of the petitioner is placed on the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Company Limited v. Union of India reported in 2001 (131) E.L.T. 535 (Guj.). Learned counsel for the Department has informed this Court that against this decision a Special Leave Petition has been filed in the Supreme Court and is pend...
Krunal Oil Marketing Ltd. Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-10-2001
Reported in: [2002]125STC371(Guj)
M.S. Shan, J.1. Rule. Mr. U.R. Bhatt, learned waives service of Rule on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2. No direct relief is sought against respondents Nos. 3 and 4. Hence the petition is taken up for final disposal today.2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, a registered dealer under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 thereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has challenged the order dated July 19, 2001 passed under Section 48 of the Act and two provisional attachment orders dated July 27, 2001 under Section 48A of the Act and the assessment order dated July 30, 2001 passed by the Sales Tax Officer (4), City Division 41, Ahmedabad.3. The petitioner had purchased goods from the persons who were registered as dealers under the Act on the date of relevant transactions in the year 1995-96. The petitioner's case is it was after the aforesaid transactions that the Sales Tax Department cancelled the registration of three dealers retrospectively and that on ...
Cit Vs. Textile and General Engineer Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-08-2001
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Guj)539
D.A. Mehta, J.In compliance with the directions issued by this court under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has raised and referred the following four questions for the opinion of this court :(i) 'Whether, the Tribunal has been right in law in confirming the view taken by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in deleting the penalty imposed by the Income Tax Officer under section 271(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?(ii) Whether, the finding of the Tribunal that on completion of assessment in the status of a registered firm the assessee was entitled to a refund and hence no penalty was leviable, is correct in law ?'(iii) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in distinguishing the judgment in the case of CIT v. R. Ochhavlal & Co. : [1976]105ITR518(Guj) wherein it was clearly held that when a registered firm commits a default, the provisions of section 271(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, would come into...
Mitesh Rolling Mills P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-2001
Reported in: [2002]258ITR278(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following questions have been referred for our opinion in respect of the assessment year 1981-82 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that in an assessment under Section 144 the assessee need not be given an opportunity of being heard by the Income-tax Officer ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the addition of cash credits of Rs. 1,81,451?' 2. The facts leading to the filing of this reference briefly stated, are as under :The Income-tax Officer framed the assessment under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on a total income of Rs. 2,50,127. The return of income was filed on June 29,1981 declaring total income at nil. Another return also declaring total income at nil was filed on January 22, 1982, as the date of verification in the...
Mitesh Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-06-2001
Reported in: (2002)177CTR(Guj)142
M.S. Shah, J.In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following questions have been referred for our opinion in respect of assessment year 1981-82 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that in an assessment under section 144 the assessee need not be given an opportunity of being heard by the Income Tax Officer ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the addition of cash credits of Rs. 1,81,451 ?'2. The facts leading to filing of this reference, briefly stated, are as under :The Income Tax Officer framed the assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on a total income of Rs. 2,50,127. The return of income was filed on 29-6-1981, declaring total income at Nil. Another return also declaring total income at Nil was filed on 22-1-1982, as the date of verification in the first return was not ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »