Gujarat Court May 2002 Judgments
Pradip J. Mehta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2002
Reported in: [2002]256ITR647(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions for the opinion of this High Court :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the status of the assessee for the year in question was not that of 'resident but not ordinarily resident' as claimed by him ? (2) Whether the Tribunal has erred in law in interpreting provisions of Section 6 of the Act while holding that the assessee's case did not fall within the purview of Section 6(6) of the Act as claimed by him in view of undisputed position of his status in relation to preceding ten years ?' 2. The Income-tax Officer found that the assessee had resided in India in the last nine previous years for the number of days shown below :SI. No.Financial yearStay in India(1)1980-81 91(2)1979-8062(3)1978-79272(4)1977-7850(5)1976-77 197(6)1975-76365(7)1974-75 36...
Tag this Judgment!J.M. Trivedi and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR242
D.H. Waghela, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, ten Deputy Executive Engineers have called into question fixation of their seniority in the final seniority lists dated 8-5-1984 and 10-1-1985 of the respondent No. 2-Board. After filing of the petition in August 1989, it came to be admitted in January 1991 fixing the date of final hearing on 18-4-1991. Thereafter, the petition appears to have been listed for final hearing in the year 1999, and after being once dismissed for default in the year 2000, came to be finally argued now. By now, all the petitioners have been promoted to the higher posts and three of them have already retired while one has occupied the highest promotional post of Chief Engineer.2. After being recruited on lower posts, the petitioners were, between December, 1977 and December, 1978, expressly posted on the promotional post of Deputy Engineer until further orders and appointed to officiate as Deputy Engineer (Civil) on 'purely temporary, ...
Tag this Judgment!Pirubhai Noorbhai Shaikh and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR546
K.R. Vyas, J. 1. The appellant (original accused No. 1 and 3), in this appeal, have challenged the judgment and order dated 17-12-1998 passed in Sessions Case No. 94 of 1993 by the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad. The learned Judge, at the end of the trial, convicted the appellants for offence punishable under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default, to undergo R.I. for one year. As far as original accused No. 2 is concerned, according to the learned Judge, his case fell under Section 27 of the Act as small quantity of narcotic substance was found from his possession which was intended for his personal consumption and not for sale. He, therefore, gave benefit under Section 27 of the Act to the original accused No. 2 and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 1500/-, in default, to undergo imprisonment a prescribed unde...
Tag this Judgment!V.S. Shah, Manager Vs. Assistant General Manager and Disciplinary Auth ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2002
Reported in: (2002)IIILLJ823Guj
D.H. Waghela, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has mainly challenged the charge-sheet dated May 6, 1998 and the final order of punishment of the appellate authority reducing the basic pay by eight stages.2. The respondent-Bank had, by charge-sheet dated May 6, 1998, levelled several charges and, after holding of a departmental enquiry and by an elaborate finding, it was held that the charges of wilful insubordination and disobedience of lawful and reasonable order of superior, the charge of doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank and the charge of doing acts unbecoming of a bank officer were proved. The petitioner had submitted a detailed representation in response to the enquiry authority's findings and, after considering the same, the disciplinary authority had imposed the punishment of reduction to a lower grade, i.e. Junior Management Grade Scale I in the basic pay of Rs. 5,980/-, with immediate effect. The petitioner had, there...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Shri Govindbhai R. Vankar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2002
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3631
H.K. Rathod, J. 1. Heard Mr. Pranav G. Desai, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant - petitioner Corporation. Present Misc. Civil Application is filed by the original petitioner with prayer to recall the order passed by this Court on 11th April, 2002, whereby the main matter has been ordered to be dismissed in default.2. Considering submissions of learned advocate Mr.Desai and the averments made in this application, present misc. civil application is allowed. The order passed by this Court dated 11th April, 2002 in SCA No.4714 / 1989 is hereby recalled with all prayers on record on the date of order and accordingly, the main matter is restored to its original number. This Misc. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly.Since this Court has restored the main matter to its original number and file, this Court has heard learned advocate Mr.Pranav G. Desai for petitioner Corporation and Mr. Girish Patel for respondent in connection with main matter.The petitioner Cor...
Tag this Judgment!Pradip J. Mehta Vs. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2002
Reported in: (2002)175CTR(Guj)394
R.K. Abichandani, J.The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Branch 'A' has referred under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the following questions for the opinion of this High Court :'(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the status of the assessee for the year in question was not that of 'resident but not ordinarily resident' as claimed by him?(2) Whether the Tribunal has erred in law in interpreting provisions of section 6 of the Act while holding that the assessee's case did not fall within the purview of section 6(6) of the Act as claimed by him in view of undisputed position of his status in relation to preceding ten years ?'1.1 The Income Tax Officer found that the assessee had resided in India in the last nine previous years for the number of days shown below :Sr. No.Financial yearStay in India(1)1980-8191(2)1979-8062(3)1978-79272(4)1977-7850(5)1976-77197(6)1975-76365(7)1974-75365(8)1973-74365(9)1972-733652. Th...
Tag this Judgment!President, Jetpur Navagadh Nagarpalika Vs. Dist. Collector Shree and o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR64
M.S. Shah, J. 1. Rule. Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, learned A.G.P., waives service of Rule for the Director of Municipalities and the Collector, Rajkot.2. In these three petitions under An. 226/227 of the Constitution, the President of the Jetpur Navagadh Municipality has challenged the orders dated 30-4-2001 passed by the Director of Municipalities, Gujarat State by which the Director refused to condone the delay in filing the appeals. The appeals under Section 258(3) of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') were directed against the orders passed by the Collector, Rajkot under Section 258(1) of the Act staying different resolutions passed by the Municipality.By Resolution Nos. 18 and 31(5) passed by the Municipality on 27-4-1998 and by another Resolution No. 93, the Municipality had authorized the President to compromise the matters placed before the Lok Adaiats. Special Civil Application No. 11897 of 2001 pertaining to Resolution No. 92 also covers cer...
Tag this Judgment!Shriram Vinyl and Chemical Industries Vs. Bisil Plast Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR492
C.K. Buch, J. 1. Applicant Shriram Vinyl & Chemical Industries Ltd.,a fully Subsidiary Company of D.C.M. Shriram Consolidated Ltd., Bombay,is the original complainant of criminal complaint lodged in the Court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 15, Ahmedabad through one Shri O.P. Gupta, duly Constituted Attorney. Complaint before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate came to be lodged against Bisil Plast Ltd., and Directors of the Company and one of the officers of this company Mr. Jhony George who was Accounts Manager of accused No. 1 Bisil Plast Ltd., at the relevant point of time, for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 422 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. on 27-3-1997. The said complaint was numbered as Inquiry Case No. 46 of 1997. Complaint was supported by some documents. Considering the contents of the complaint and documents produced in support thereof and the arguments advanced by the Counsel appearing for the complainant, learned Metropolitan Magistrat...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Textiles Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj95
ORDERJayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr. M.D. Pandya appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondents. With the consent of parties matter is taken up for final hearing.2. The short facts of the case are that the petitioner is having electricity supply of 20 H25 HP. On 31-12-1999 the petitioner observed that there is some defect in the meter and, therefore, intimated to the Electricity Board. Thereafter, on 5-1-2000 the inspection was carried and it was found that the meter was running slow by 50% to 75%. Thereafter, the meter was sent for testing on 13-1-2000 and the testing report was also received. The petitioner was issued the supplementary bill amounting to Rs. 2.74,930, 69ps and against the said supplementary bill the petitioner approached this Court.3. Mr. Tushar Mehta appearing for the petitioner submitted that since the whole dispute was pertaining to the slow running of the meter, the authority for deciding the same is the Electrical Inspector and it is not open for the El...
Tag this Judgment!Suo Motu Vs. Registrar, High Court of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Guj388; (2002)2GLR1649
J.M. Panchal, J. 1. The learned single Judge has referred following two issues for consideration of the Division Bench :-(1) Whether, personal service by a litigant or a clerk of the Advocate or any other person, who is not an officer of the Court, is a recognised mode of service? If yes, (2) Whether, the Registrar, Gujarat High Court is empowered to order direct service or the Court alone can permit direct service? 2. The Reference arises in the context of following facts :Special Civil Application No. 11136 of 2000 was placed before the learned single Judge of this Court for admission hearing and the Court had issued notices to the respondents on October 20, 2000 making them returnable on November 20, 2000. The respondent No. 1 has entered its appearance through the learned Government Pleader, but no appearance at the relevant time was entered by the respondent No. 2. Mr. B. S. Patel, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner had stated at the Bar that the respondent No. 2 was se...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »