Gujarat Court July 2002 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.
Cit Vs. Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-2002
Reported in: [2002]124TAXMAN30(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following questions are referred for our opinion in respect of the assessment year 1974-75 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to claim a weighted deduction under section 35B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the aggregate commission payments of Rs. 53,320 made to Bharatkumar Atmaram & Co. and the Chhamanlal Kasturchand & Co. (P) Ltd. ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to a deduction of Rs. 26,84,235 incurred on machineries replaced, as revenue expenditure ?3. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the claim in respect of (i) medical benefits and (ii) group term insurance has to be excluded for the purpose of section 40A(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?'2. We have heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned senior st...
Cit Vs. H.M.T. Construction Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-2002
Reported in: [2002]124TAXMAN470(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.At the instance of the revenue, the following question of law is referred to this court for its opinion :'Whether the assessee is entitled to depreciation at the rate of 30 per cent on the dumpers employed in its business of road construction ?'2. The Income Tax Officer in the course of assessment proceedings allowed depreciation at the rate of 30 per cent : to the assessee.3. The Commissioner initiated proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that the order passed by the Income Tax Officer was erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. According to the Commissioner, the dumpers were covered in road making plant and machinery' appearing at item No. III-B(14) of Appendix I, Part I under rule 5 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and depreciation was available at the rate of 15 per-cent only. The assessee contended that dumpers came under the classification of 'earth moving machinery' c...
Manibhai Prabhudas Patel and anr. Vs. L.K. Koolwal, Designated Authori ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)177CTR(Guj)386; [2002]258ITR308(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. The petitioners in these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have challenged the orders dated February 25, 1999 and February 23, 1999, respectively, passed by the designated authority rejecting the petitioners' declaration-filed under Section 89 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, The said declaration was filed by the petitioners under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KVS Scheme').2. The brief facts giving rise to the filing of Special Civil Application No. 3247 of 1999 are, that during the assessment years 1982-83 to 1988-89, the petitioner was a partner in the firms of Premier Paper Industries, Pioneer Builders and Swadeshi Industries. The petitioner had filed his return of income for the respective years declaring his share income from the firms on the basis of the returns of income filed by the firms, and as per the allocation of his share of profits according to the said returns of income of the firm. The said ...
Zabuben Jivabhai Rabari Vs. H.K. Limbadiya, Election Officer and T.D.O ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR923
N.G. Nandi, J. 1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 14/16th February, 2002 passed by the District Development Officer, Banaskantha at Palanpur in Appeal No. 4 of 2002 preferred by the present respondent No. 4 under Sub-section (8) of Section 51 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993 and with a further prayer to hold that the petitioner was the only nominated and elected candidate for the office of the Upa-Sarpanch of Khentva Gram Panchayat by issuing suitable directions. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition shortly stated are that the petitioner and respondent No. 4 herein are the elected members in the election of Khentva Gram Panchayat held on 23rd December, 2001; that respondent No. 3 was elected as Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat; that the election for the office of the Upa-Sarpanch of Khentva Gram Panchayat was scheduled to be held on 25th January, 2002 at...
Gordhanpar Gram Panchayat Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR594
D.S. Sinha, C.J. 1. Heard Mr. Rajesh C. Kakkad, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, at length and in great detail.2. Instant Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 17th June, 2002, passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No. 5509 of 2002, whereby the orders dated 2nd November, 2001 and 30th March, 2002, passed by the Collector, Jamnagar, allotting the land to Indian Oil Corporation for construction of petrol pump on Gauchar land to the legal heirs of the martyr of Kargil War, have been upheld.3. In the forefront, submission on behalf of the appellant, is that the impugned orders are bad inasmuch as the villagers of the concerned village were not given any opportunity of hearing, which was in violation of the principles of natural justice. To buttress the submission reliance is placed on the decision of a learned single Judge of this Court in the case of Pachhat Varga Shramjivi Samudaik Sahakari Khedut Co-operative So...
Ketanbhai Sarabhai Shah Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR529
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Rule. Shri P. R. Abichandani, learned A.P.P., waives service of Rule.2. An F.I.R. being CR. No. 26 of 2002 was filed by the complainant Sunilkumar Lalsingh Bali before the Navrangpura Police Station on 10-1-2002 at about 9-00 p.m., for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 418, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with 120B I. P. Code of creating bogus insurance documents like R. C. Book, etc., and thereby misappropriated huge sum of Rs. 1,12,28,000/- for their own purpose by obtaining loan from the Bank, and thereby, cheating the Bank. These offences alleged to have been committed by number of accused during the period from 5-11-1999 to 18-10-2000. The main accused No. 1-Dipakkumar Kohli is the Manager of Punjab National Bank, Navrangpura Branch, Ahmedabad.3. The present applicant-accused was arrested on 18-3-2002 in connection with the aforesaid offences. Therefore, first he applied for regular bail before the Court of learned City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad by way...
Devabhai Chelabhai Koli Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj117
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. Admit.Mr. D. R, Dave, learned Advocate, appears and waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent.2. The present First Appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 1st May, 1999 passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Banaskantha District, Palanpur, in Special Civil Suit No. 106 of 1994, dismissing the suit of the appellant-original plaintiff with costs.3. The suit was filed by the present appellant for getting compensation due to the death of his father, Chelabhai Kasabhai Koli, on account of break down of an electric wire from the electric pole, and was lying on the public road. The suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant was contested by the present respondent original defendant, Gujarat Electricity Board, on the ground that the plaintiff had no relationship with the deceased. Though the said defence was agitated in the reply filed in the suit at Exh. 34, the learned Judge did not frame any issue on that point. On the contrary...
Rameshbhai Kalabhai Makwana Vs. Hirjibhai Kalabhai Makwana and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj107
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. 1. The present First Appeal is filed on 24th September. 2001 being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 17th July, 2001 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Gondal in Special Civil Suit No. 14 of 1989.2. On 26th December. 2001. this Court passed the following order :'Admit, Expedited.'On the accompanied Civil Application No. 13072 of 2001, the Court was pleased to pass the following order :'Rule returnable on 4-2-2002, Parties are directed to maintain status quo.'3. On 18th June, 2002, the learned Advocate for the appellant-applicant pointed out that the defendants, after having filed written statement at Exh, 29, did not remain present before the Court below, as is mentioned in the judgment under challenge before this Court. The learned Advocate also pointed out the nature of controversy involved in the matter. He submitted that the learned Judge of the Trial Court has committed gross error in dismissing the suit despite answering the issue No. 1 ...
Sureshbhai Babubhai Sunara and ors. Vs. Ahmedabad District Co-op. Bank ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR3707
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr. K.G. Vakharia, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for Mr. Tushar Mehta for the respondent No. 1 waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Mr. Dabhi, learned A.G.P. appears and waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No. 2. With the consent of parties matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. The present petition is preferred by the petitioners who are claiming to be the members of Vatva Kadamgiri Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') against the order dated 17-8-2001 passed by the Gujarat State Co-operative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Lavad Appeal No. 68 of 2000.3. The short facts of the case are that the petitioners are the members of Vatva Kadamgiri Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. The case of the petitioners is that the erstwhile organiser and the developer of the Society, namely, Naranbhai Pandya and others had obtained the loan of Rs. 18,13,000/- from the respondent No. 1-Bank...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›