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.
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Kamlaben Subodhchandra A.P. of Late Kira ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: (2004)190CTR(Guj)110; [2004]269ITR570(Guj)
M.S.Shah, J.1.In this Reference at the instance of the Revenue, the following questions are referred for our opinion under Section 64 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 :'1. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that a deduction of Rs. 1,50,000/- in marriage expenses of three unmarried daughters be allowed out of the property of the deceased ?2. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that while giving exemption u/s. 44 in respect of house property included in the value of the estate one has to assume as if the house happened to come to the share of the deceased on a fictional partition of the HUF before the date of the death and in allowing exemption of Rs. 1,00,000 instead of to the extent of the share of the deceased the house property ?'2. The facts leading to this Reference, as found by the Tribunal, are as under :Shri Kiranchandra Subodhchandra of Ahmedabad died on 28.5.80 at the age of 37 years. The estate duty account was filed by the Accou...
Laxmanbhai Becharbhai Kehar Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Police and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3114
C.K. Buch, J.1. Heard Mr. R.N. Ghotra learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. H.H. Patel learned A.P.P., for the respondents.2. The petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the Order of externment dated 9-3-2001 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, North Division, Baroda City, Baroda and the subsequent Order passed by the appellate authority Under Section 60 of the Bombay Police Act in the month of October, 2001.3. Today, Mr. H.H. Patel learned A.P.P., has tendered the affidavit-in-reply of Vijaysinh Gautam, Deputy Commissioner of Police, North Division, Baroda City, Baroda whereby the respondents have resisted this petition on facts and on the points of law raised by the petitioner.4. The order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Baroda City, Baroda and the order of the Deputy Secretary to Government, Home Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar - the appellate authority-confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Police have been challe...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Kamlaben Subodhchandra
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: [2004]137TAXMAN414(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.In this Reference at the instance of the revenue, the following questions are referred for our opinion under section 64 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 :'1. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that a deduction of Rs. 1,50,000 in marriage expenses of three unmarried daughters be allowed out of the property of the deceased ?2. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that while giving exemption under section 33(1)(n) in respect of house property included in the value of the estate one has to assume as if the house happened to come to the share of the deceased on a fictional partition of the HUF before the date of the death and in allowing exemption of Rs. 1,00,000 instead of to the extent of the share of the deceased the house property ?'2. The facts leading to this Reference, as found by the Tribunal, are as under:Shri Kiranchandra Subodhchandra of Ahmedabad died on 28-5-1980 at the age of 37 years, The estate duty account was filed...
Lapsi Filaments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR879
D.A. Mehta, J.1. Rule. Mr. M. D, Pandya, learned Advocate appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Mr. Mengdey, learned A.G.P., appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. By consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 2. The petitioner is a Limited Company who is a High Tension consumer of the Gujarat Electricity Board i.e. respondent No. 1. By way of the present petition, the order dated 22nd May, 2001 passed by the Electrical Inspector, Surat, under Section 26(6) of the Electricity Act, 1910 is challenged on the various grounds stated in the petition as well as those which were urged during the course of hearing. Against the aforesaid order the petitioner preferred an appeal, as provided under Section 36 of the Act which came to be rejected on 6th October, 2001. 3. Mr. Girish Patel, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Jitendra Malkan has challenged the ord...
Shree Devendra Somabhai Naik Vs. Accurate Transheet Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR589; 2002(25)PTC434(Guj)
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. 1. Admit.Mr. Acharya, learned Advocate, appears and waives process of admission on behalf of the respondent.At the request of the learned Advocates for the parties, the Appeal is taken up for final disposal.2. The present First Appeal is filed under Section 72 of the Copyright Act, 1957 challenging the order passed by the Copyright Board dated 7th September, 2001, whereby it is held that Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is not applicable to the application filed under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The Board also held that the Copyright Board is, deemed to be the 'Civil Court' only 'for limited purpose' otherwise for all other purposes, Copyright Board is a Tribunal and a quasi-judicial authority. Therefore, Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has no application to any petition or application made under Section 50 of the Act.3. Mr. R.K, Shah, learned Advocate for the appellant, submitted that the respondent herein filed an application under Secti...
Devendra Somabhai Naik Vs. Accurate Transheet Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj141
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. Admit. Mr. Acharya, learned Advocate, appears and waives process of admission on behalf of the respondent.At the request of the learned Advocates for the parties, the Appeal is taken up for final disposal.2. The present First Appeal is filed under Section 72 of the Copyright Act, 1957 challenging the order passed by the Copyright Board dated 7th September, 2001, whereby it is held that Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is not applicable to the application filed under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The Board also held that the Copyright Board is, deemed to be the 'Civil Court' only 'for limited purpose' otherwise for all other purposes, Copyright Board is a Tribunal and a quasi-judicial authority. Therefore, Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has no application to any petition or application made under Section 50 of the Act.3. Mr. R. K. Shah, learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the respondent herein filed an application under Secti...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Fabriquip P. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR207(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J.1. The assessee was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Elscope (P.) Ltd. On March 1, 1977, the assessee had sold its undertaking to Elscope (P.) Ltd. under certain terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement entered into between the assessee and Elscope (P.) Ltd. with which we are not concerned in this reference.2. In the assessment framed under Section 143(3), read with Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Officer brought to tax income from house property on notional basis in respect of certain properties transferred to Elscope (P.) Ltd. Further, he did not allow the assessee's claim for carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation, development rebate and investment allowance of the earlier years on the ground that the assessee had ceased to carry on business during the year under reference. The Income-tax Officer had also charged interest under Section 215 of the Act.3. In appeal, following his order dated February 29, 1984, in the case of Sarab...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Natvarlal V. Desai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: [2003]262ITR64(Guj)
K.A. Puj, J.1. In all these, four references were filed by the Revenue and they are pertaining to different assessment years. Income-tax References Nos. 154 of 1989 is in respect of the assessment year 1976-77, 150 of 1989 is in respect of the assessment year 1978-79, 162 of 1989 is in respect of the assessment year 1981-82, and 180 of 1988 is in respect of assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84. Since a common issue is involved in all the four references, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law is referred to for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that no sub-partnership was formed between the assessee and his wife, Smt. Suryakanta Natwarlal, and the share of the assessee's wife could not be included in the income of the assessee, is correct in law and sustainable from the material on record ?'Although there is slight variation i...
Patel Shenaz Bannu and Mehboob Miya Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR3591
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Rule. Mr.P.R.Abichandani, learned AGP waives service of rule for all respondents.2. Mr.N.M.Patel-Secretary, State Examination Board, respondent No.2 herein, is present.3. Considering the urgency involved in the matter, the matter is heard and finally disposed of today by this order.4. All the three petitioners are students belonging to minority community of 'Muslims'. They appeared in the examination of Second Year PTC held by the respondents in the month of May, 2002. Their seat numbers are 5371, 5376 and 5380 respectively. They selected AG High School, Navrangpura, as center for examination. There are in all 12 papers. They appeared in all papers, except paper No.11 (Computer Theory). They could not appear in the examination of paper No.11 (Computer Theory), which was fixed on 10.5.2002 because of the communal riots erupted once again in the area where the petitioners were taking shelter. Therefore, on 12.5.2002 a representation was made by them to the Chairman of ...
Cit Vs. Maganial Mohanlal Panchal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: [2002]124TAXMAN34(Guj)
M.S. Shah, J. In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred for our opinion in respect of the assessment year 1980-81 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in directing the Income Tax Officer to pass an order under section 171 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for partial partition ?'2. The assessee claimed before the Income Tax Officer that a partial partition had taken place amongst the members of the Hindu undivided family on 3-3-1979. It was stated that a sum of Rs. 50,000 standing to the credit of the Hindu undivided family in the bank account had been divided between the coparceners as under :Rs.1. Shri Maganlal Mohanlal Panchal 30,0002. Shri Kacharabhai M. Panchal 10,0003. Shri Revabhai M. Panchal 10,000The Income Tax Officer refused to recognise the partial partition in view of sub-section (9) of section 171 introduced with effect from 1-4-1980. The Appellate Assistant Commissi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »