Gujarat Court August 2002 Judgments
Gohil Amarsing Govindbhai (Decd.) by L.Rs. Vs. Shah Mansukhlal Chhagan ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj78
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The present Second Appeal is filed being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and decree dated 31st March, 1978 passed in Civil Appeal No. 40 of 1977 by the learned 2nd Extra Assistant Judge, Baroda, whereby the appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 222 of 1973 by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Karjan, dated 18th December, 1976 was confirmed. 2. The plaintiff, respondent herein, filed Regular Civil Suit No. 222 of 1973 to get the possession of the suit house from the defendant, appellant herein. It is the case of the plaintiff that he had good relations with the defendant and his family members from the time of deceased father of the defendant. As the plaintiff was in need of money, he demanded from the defendant. The defendant told the plaintiff to execute 'an agreement to sale' of his house situated at 'Brahman Vaas' at Village Dethan. On 29th December, 1962,. a document was executed wherein it is mentioned tha...
Tag this Judgment!Kamlaben Ranchhodbhai and anr. Vs. Harsukhlal Zaverchand Vaid
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR509
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. The petitioners herein are the tenants of the suit premises and the respondent is the landlord of the same. The respondent-landlord filed an application before the Civil Judge (J.D.), Jetpur, being Misc. Civil Application No. 40 of 1987. The said application was filed under Section 13A of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act. By filing the aforesaid application, it was prayed that the applicant wants to repair the suit premises and after removing the roof, he wants to construct a building with a terrace by putting a cement slab over the suit property. In the application, the landlord stated that there is another vacant room available, which is in the occupation of the landlord and he is willing to give the said alternative premises to the tenant for temporary occupation till the rented premise is renovated.2. The trial Court, by its order dated 31-1-1991, allowed the said application and granted permission to the applicant-landlord to renovate...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Rangraj Keshumal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Guj)471; [2004]267ITR476(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law, arising out of the order dt. 28th Jan., 1988 passed by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', in ITA No. 563/Ahd/1986, has been referred to this Court for its opinion under the provisions of Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'):'Whether the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the income earned from thefirm belonged to Rangraj Keshrimal Family Trust and thereby deleting the saidincome from the income of the assessee?'2. The facts giving rise to the present reference are as under: 3. The assessee, as a trustee of Rangraj Keshrimal Family Trust, was partner in a partnership firm, named M/s Darshan Traders. As partner of M/s. Darshan Traders when the assessee was assessed in reassessment, proceedings, it was held by the ITO that the income from the business arising out of the partnership firm belonged to the assessee. Being aggrieved by the assessment order passed by the ITO...
Tag this Judgment!Usha Fertilizers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: [2004]269ITR591(Guj)
D. A. Mehta, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the penalty of Rs. 43,000 under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. For the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act').3. The assessment year is 1975-76 and the relevant accounting period is year ended on June 30, 1974. The applicant-assessee is a partnership firm which came into existence with effect from April 1, 1974, under a deed executed on April 2, 1974. The said partnership comprised of one Shri Arvindkumar Babubhai and Smt. Kokilaben Chandravadan. The said Shri Arvindkumar was a student of first year in the college.4. It appears that the assessee-applicant made payments on various dates without having sufficient cash balance on the date of payment. The details of such payments are as under :------------...
Tag this Judgment!Usha Fertilizers Vs. Cit
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-2002
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN414(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench A, has referred the following question:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the penalty of Rs. 43,000 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?'2. For the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. The assessment year is 1975-76 and the relevant accounting period is year ended on 30-6-1974. The applicant-assessee is a partnership firm which came into existence with effect from 1-4-1974, under a deed executed on 2-4-1974. The said partnership comprised of one Shri Arvind kumar Babubhai and Smt. Kokilaben Chandravadan. The said Shri Arvind kumar was a student of first year in the college.4. It appears that the assessee-applicant made payments on various dates without having sufficient cash balance on the date of payment. The details of such payments are as under:Sr. No.AmountAc...
Tag this Judgment!Dahyabhai Solanki, Law Officer, Gujarat Pollution Control Board Vs. St ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-28-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ767; (2003)1GLR597
D.H. Waghela, J.1. By this Revision Application under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Cr.P.C.'), the Law Officer of the Gujarat Pollution Control Board ('the G.P.C.B.' for short) has prayed to set aside the judgment and order of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 2487 of 1988 whereunder the accused persons (the respondents No. 2 to 4 herein) are discharged under Section 245 of the Cr.P.C.; even before framing of the charge.2. The Law Officer of the G.P.C.B. filed a complaint against the accused persons ('the respondents' for short) on the basis that the accused, a company headed and run by its two directors, were manufacturing approximately 15 tons of H. Acid per month and discharging, from their factory, the trade effluents, in the form of 4.50 lac litres of water per month, without any treatment at all. They had applied for consent under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 ('the Act' for short) w...
Tag this Judgment!Shiril Babulal Shah Vs. Kusumben Wd/O. Chhaganlal Shah Through Her Leg ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-28-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR298
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Heard learned Counsel Shri Sharma for the petitioner and learned Counsel Shri J. B. Pardiwala, for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, appearing on Caveat. The respondent Nos. 4/1 to 4/4, legal heirs of the original defendant No. 4 had not contested in appeal and not thought it fit to challenge the Appellate Court's order.2. Three plaintiffs viz. (i) Kusumben wd/o Chhaganlal Shah, (ii) Bharatkumar Chhaganlal Shah and (iii) Kalpeshkumar Chhaganlal Shah, jointly filed Regular Civil Suit No. 44 of 1988 against the two defendants, viz. (i) Late Shri Babulal Harakchand Shah and (ii) Shiril Babulal Shah, son of late Shri Babulal Shah, before the Court of learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Navsari, to recover the possession of the rented premises under Sections 13(1)(c), 13(1)(g) and 13(1)(k) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel & Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act').3. During the pendency of the suit original tenant Babulal Shah died therefore, his legal heirs i.e....
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Amora Chemicals (P) Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Guj)64
JudgmentD.A. Mehta, J.This is a reference at the instance of the Commissioner, Baroda, for assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82. The relevant accounting periods are financial years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81, respectively.2. The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the rental income from the bank of Baroda was taxable under the head 'business income' or 'income from other sources' ?2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the interest difference on the extra amount of Rs. 2,50,000 could be allowed as a deduction ?'3. We have heard Mr. B.B. Naik, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant revenue and Mr. R.K. Patel, advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent-company.4. The facts, briefly stated, are that on 1-7-1978, the assessee-company entered into an agreement with L.M. Patel and B.M. Patel (Hindu undivided family...
Tag this Judgment!Kadia Bhaveshkumar Jayantilal Vs. Sardar Patel University and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-28-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR3460
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Rule. Mr. Mitul Shelat for respondent No. 1-University waives service of rule and Ms. Nisha Parikh for Mr. Ramnandan Singh for respondent No. 2 waives service of rule.2. At the joint request of the learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard and finally disposed of today.3. The petitioner is a practicing Advocate at the District Court at Anand. He appeared in the Third Year LL.B. (Special) (First Semester) examination held in November, 2000. In first three papers; (1) Criminal Procedure Code, Juvenile Justice Act and Probation of Offenders Act; (2) Law of Evidence and (3) Civil Procedure Code and Limitation Act. In the internal examination held by the respondent No. 2-College he secured 22 marks in each of those three papers out of total 30 marks. Thus, his aggregate of internal College examination was 66 marks out of total 90 marks in three subjects. Whereas, he secured 45, 47, and 43 respectively in the aforesaid papers out of marks of 70 in the external e...
Tag this Judgment!Jaybharat Fabric Mills Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOi) thro' Se ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2003(90)ECC361; (2003)2GLR999
A.R. Dave, J. 1. Rule. Mr. D.N. Patel, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appears and waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents. At the request of the learned Advocates for the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing today. 2. The petitioner-Company is a manufacturer of man-made fibre and fabrics. Some goods belonging to petitioner No. 1-Company had been seized on 23-12-1992. The goods, which had been seized, had been subsequently released upon furnishing a bond and security deposit. After following the necessary procedure, ultimately by an order dated 28-6-2002, the security given by petitioner No. 1 was ordered to be appropriated under the provisions of Rule 173Q(b) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 34 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The said order dated 28-6-2002 has been challenged by the petitioners in this petition. 3. Mr. Paresh M. Dave, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners has ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »