Gujarat Court July 2002 Judgments
Cit Vs. Arvind Jewellers
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-2002
Reported in: [2002]124TAXMAN615(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.At the instance of the revenue, the following questions of law are referred to for the opinion of this court for the assessment year 1981-82 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in setting aside the order made by the Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, the conclusion reached by the Appellate Tribunal in setting aside the order made by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is even otherwise sustainable in law ?'2. The assessee is a partnership firm and had filed its return of income disclosing net loss of Rs. 2,777 in business of purchase and sale of ornaments and jewellery. The Income Tax Officer issued notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) along with the requirement letter. After considering the material produced by the assessee and the explanation offere...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Dilip Ratilal (Huf)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Guj)136; [2003]260ITR306(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law is referred for our opinion in respect of the assessment year 1979-80.'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of her capital interest in the firm of Raja Textile Mill?'2. We have heard Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. Though served, nobody appears on behalf of the respondent-assessee.3. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family and during the year under consi-deration, i.e., 1979-80, it was a partner in a partnership firm, Raja Textile Mill. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act in respect of her capital interest in the said partnership firm. The Wealth-tax Officer rejected this claim. But in appeal, the learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner relying upon the ratio of the decision in the case of CWT v. Radhey Mohan Narain :...
Tag this Judgment!indukumar C. Patel Vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Guj)572
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following questions are referred for our opinion in respect of the asst. yr. 1979-80 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in making additions on account of compulsory deposit with interest in the total wealth ? '2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not deducting gross amount of provisions for taxation as a liability while applying Rule 1D of the WT Rules for determining the break-up value of shares of private limited companies?' 2. At the hearing of the reference, none appears for the assessee though served. Mrs. Mona Bhatt, the learned standing counsel appears for the Revenue.3. As far as question No. 1 is concerned, our attention is invited to our decision dt. 27th June, 2002 of this Court WT Ref. No. 2 of 1939 (reported as CWT v. Smt. Avaniben Ajaybhai) wherein this Court pointed out that the provi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sthanakvasi Vardhman Vanik JaIn Sangh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR366(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. This reference was made at the instance of the Revenue and the following question of law was referred for the opinion of this court :'Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that donation received by the assessee-trust of Rs. 1,85,064 which was not utilised for the object of the trust, was not income of the trust?'2. The assessment year involved in this reference is assessment year 1986-87. The assessee is a public charitable trust. The Income-tax Officer has found from a perusal of the balance-sheet that an amount of Rs. 1,85,064 received by the assessee during the accounting period relevant to the assessment year in question was taken to the balance-sheet directly. The said amount was received by the assessee towards construction of wadi for the caste people. The amount was thus received towards the object of the trust. The Income-tax Officer has taken the view that the amount in question represented income of the assessee and the same wa...
Tag this Judgment!Dhulaji Bhikhaji Khant Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ4827
J.R. Vora, J.1. This Appeal is preferred by the accused ofSessions Case No.67/1994 of the Court of Sessions,Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar against the judgment dated21st December, 1994 of the learned Additional SessionsJudge, convicting the present appellant for the offenceunder Section 302 of the Penal Code and sentencing him toimprisonment of life and for fine of Rs.500=00 and indefault to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of six months.2. The facts reveal that the complainant of thiscase Babuji Manaji Parmar is a resident of VillageKatwad. His sister Tejalben was married to the presentappellant 10 years prior to the date of the incident.Out of this marriage Tejalben had two children - a boynamed Jasuji and a girl named Jashoda aged 10 years and 7years respectively. The married life of Tejalben and thepresent appellant was not going well and wheneverTejalben used to visit her parental house, she wascomplaining that her husband, the present appellant wassuspicious about her character and was ...
Tag this Judgment!indukumar C. Patel Vs. Cwt
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN173(Guj)
Counsels: Manish R. Bhatt & Mrs. Mona Bhatt, for the Revenue.In the Gujarat High Court M.S. Shah & K.A. Puj, JJ.JUDGEMENTM.S. Shah, J. In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following questions are referred for our opinion in respect of the assessment year 1979-80 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in making additions on account of compulsory deposit with interest in the total wealth ?'2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not deducting gross amount of provisions for taxation as a liability while applying rule 1D of the Wealth Tax Rules for determining the break-up value of shares of private limited companies ?' 2. At the hearing of the reference, none appears for the assessee though served. Mrs. Mona Bhatt, the learned standing counsel appears for the revenue.3. As far as question No. 1 is concerned, our attention is invited to our decision dated 27-6-...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Sthanakvasi Vardhman Vanik JaIn Sangh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Guj)95
Judgment K.A. Puj, J.This reference was made at the instance of the revenue and the following question of law was referred for the opinion of this court :'Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that donation received by the assessee-trust of Rs. 1,85,064 which was not utilized for the object of the trust, was not income of the trust?'2. The assessment year involved in this reference is assessment year 1986-87. The assessee is a public charitable trust. The Income Tax Officer has found from the perusal of the balance-sheet that an amount of Rs. 1,85,064 received by the assessee during the accounting period relevant to the assessment year in question was taken to the balance-sheet directly. The said amount was received by the assessee towards construction of Wadi for the caste people. The amount was thus received towards the object of the trust. The Income Tax Officer has taken the view that the amount in question represented income of the assessee and the same was...
Tag this Judgment!Cwt Vs. Chandrakala Kasturbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN170(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. At the instance of the revenue, the following question of law is referred to this court for its opinion for the assessment year 1983-84 :'Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Wealth Tax Officer to value the shares of Kasturbhai Mayabhai (P) Ltd. held by the assessee on the basis of yield method ?'2. We have heard Mrs. Mona Bhatt, the learned standing counsel appearing for the revenue. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondent-assessee though notice was duly served.3. The assessee is an individual. The assessment year involved is 1983-84 for which the relevant valuation date was 31-3-1983. Before the Tribunal, the following ground had been raised in the appeal filed by the department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) :'The learned Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in law and on facts in directing the Wealth Tax Officer to value the shares of Kasturbhai Mayabhai (P) Ltd. held by the assessee on the basis of yield method....
Tag this Judgment!Cwt Vs. Dilip Ratilal (Huf)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN458(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. At the instance of the revenue, the following question of law is referred for our opinion in respect of assessment year 1979-80 :'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth Tax Act in respect of her capital interest in the firm of M/s Raja Textile Mill?'2. We have heard Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the revenue. Though served, nobody appears on behalf of the respondent-assessee.3. The assessee is a HUF and during the year under consideration, i.e., 1979-80, it was a partner in a partnership firm of M/s. Raja Textile Mill. The assessee claimed exemption under section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act in respect of her capital interest in the said partnership firm. The Wealth Tax Officer rejected this claim. But in appeal, the learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner relying upon the ratio of the decision in the case of CWT v. Radhey Mohan Narain : [1982]135ITR372(All)...
Tag this Judgment!Mahmad Istekhar Mumtaz Ahmed Rahemani Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-17-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1646; 2003(88)ECC303; (2002)3GLR347
H.H. Mehta, J.1. These two appeals are filed by original accused Nos. 1 and 4 of Sessions Case No. 10 of 1997 tried and decided by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara, for challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 19th January, 1999 rendered in aforesaid Sessions Case, and therefore, as per the request of learned Advocates of both parties in two appeals, these two appeals are heard and decided by this common judgment.2. The original accused Nos. 1 and 4 have, by filing these two appeals viz. Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 1999 and Criminal Appeal No. 265 of 1999 respectively under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (forshort 'Cr.P.C.) challenged correctness and legality of judgment (Exh. 73) of conviction and sentence dated 19th January, 1999 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Sessions Case No. 10 of 1997 by which the accused No. 1 is convicted under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C. of offences punishable under Sections 8-C ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »