Gujarat Court January 2003 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.
P.C. Trivedi Vs. Gajaraben Chandulal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3397; (2003)3GLR1876
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The Appellant-Food Inspector of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has challenged in this Appeal, the impugned judgment and order of acquittal dated 9-6-1989 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 8, Ahmedabad, acquitting the respondent-accused Gajaraben Chandulai for the offence under Section 7 of the Food Adulteration Act in Summary Case No. 779 of 1986.2. It is the case of the appellant that on 17-12-1985 he had gone to the shop of accused Gajaraben, the respondent No. 1, and took sample of cow milk which was sent to the Public Analyst. The Report of the Public Analyst shows that it contained 3.9 percent milk fat and 7.3 percent milk solid not fat. The requirement is 8.5 percent solids not fat. Thus, there was a deficit of 1.2 percent. Therefore, complaint was filed. Another sample was sent to the Central Food Laboratory. The Report of the Laboratory shows that it was having 2.5 percent fat and 8.8 percent solid not fat. Thus, fat was 1 percent ...
Ashit Shipping Services and anr. Vs. Board of Trustee and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-17-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Guj202; (2003)1GLR781
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Whether the Regulation 52 of the Kandla Port Regulations, 1967 (Regulation) is ultra vires the provisions of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 and the Constitution of India is the sole, but substantial question, which has emerged for consideration and adjudication in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.With a view to appreciating the merits of the plea of adjudication that Regulation 52 of the Regulations empowering the respondents to demand only a conditional security, subject to the liability and quantum of damages being ascertained/determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction in encashing the bank guarantee of Rs. 6,50,000/-, on the ground of damage caused to the property of the Board of Trustees of the Port of Kandla. Let us have first, a short conspectus spectrum and factual profile leading to the rise of this petition on hand.2. The petitioners are a registered partnership firm and carrying the business as shipping agents. The petitioner...
Balkrishna Ambalal Thakkar Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: (2003)1GLR785
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. It is a matter of regret that even though, this Court has taken the view, more than 15 years back, to the effect that, if any order is passed releasing the seized goods, it is required to be placed before the detaining authority. Yet, in the instant case, such order is not produced by the sponsoring authority before the detaining authority and the detaining authority has not considered the said aspect in the detention order, may be because the said document was not made available to it by the sponsoring authority.2. Apart from the aforesaid aspect, the State Government has not even cared to launch appropriate proceedings under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act 1955, as, even if the detention order is passed, the State is not prevented from launching the ordinary prosecution under the aforesaid provision. The petitioner, who is alleged to have indulged in the activities of black marketing by selling kerosene by charging high price, is not even subjected to t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. B.B. Vyas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Guj)108; [2003]261ITR73(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred the following question for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.'Whether in law and on facts Circular No. 88, dated August 1, 1969, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes but subsequently withdrawn on September 23, 1971, was applicable and the cost of acquisition had to be determined on the basis of the value as determined on the date of conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural land, i.e., when the land became a capital asset ?'2. The matter pertains to the assessment year 1971-72. The assessee is an individual. In the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3), the Income-tax Officer, while computing the capital gain was of the opinion that the cost of the land in question to the previous owner worked out at Rs. 1.10 per sq. yd. was to be given deduction for computation of the capital gain made by the assessee in respect of which the land...
Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Guj)134
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B', has referred the following question at the instance of the direction issued by this Court for the opinion of this Court under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that interest under Section 216 was rightly charged ?'2. The matter pertains to the asst. yr, 1982-83 in respect of which the assessee had filed a return on 29th June, 1982, declaring a total income of Rs. 30,41,556. Revised return was filed by the assessee on 25th Nov., 1983, declaring an income of Rs. 28,95,923. The assesseecompany had filed estimate in Form No. 29 on 15th June, 1981, estimating its income at Rs. 21,06,000 after claiming set off in respect of business loss caused which was of Rs, 3,94,000. Advance tax payable was shown as Rs. 11,87,257. The assessee-company ought to have paid the tax in the instalment of Rs. 3,95,752 as per the estimate filed but it paid ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shree Laxmi Textiles and Allied Corpora ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Guj)44
R.K. Abichandani, J. The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, for the opinion of this Court.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in allowing the amount of Rs. 65,500 being the amount paid to the retiring partners as revenue expenditure ?'2. The assessee-firm came into existence under the partnership deed dt. 1st Nov., 1976, and was engaged in the manufacture of textile processing machines. For the relevant accounting period ended on 30th June, 1979, the assessee filed return of income on 2nd July, 1980, showing income of Rs. 2,71,516. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee claimed compensation paid to the retiring partners of Rs. 65,500 as business expenditure. The ITO, however, held that it was payment of a capital nature and added the amount to the assessee's income. On appeal before the CIT(A), it was held that the payment made to the outgoing p...
ishwarbhai Keshavbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3936; (2003)4GLR816
ORDERAfter the pronouncement of the above order, learned Advocate for the petitioners states that the petitioners desire to go to the higher forum and, therefore, the interim relief granted by the trial court may be extended for a period of six weeks. After having heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners as well as for the respondent and the learned APP, the interim relief granted earlier is extended for a further period of four weeks from today. ...
Nandlal Nanalal Tailee Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3144
P.B. Majmudar, J. 1. By filing this petition, the petitioner-detenu has challenged his detention order, by which the petitioner is detained under Section 3(2)(a) of the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980. The said detention order is passed on 19.8.2002, and along with the detention order, the petitioner is also served with the grounds of detention. 2. As per the grounds mentioned, the petitioner, who is doing the business of selling kerosene, was found to have indulged himself in black-marketing of blue kerosene, which is an essential article and which is meant for distribution to people at a fixed rate. As per the grounds of detention, the petitioner, who is doing his business of white kerosene, was found dealing in blue kerosene business in an unauthorised manner and quantity of the said blue kerosene was also found from his residence. Quantity of 3900 litres of white kerosene was seized and was kept under seizure. Sample of k...
Cit Vs. B.B. Vyas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: [2003]128TAXMAN166(Guj)
R.K. AbichandaniThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.'Whether in law and on facts Circular No. 88 dated 1-8-1969 issued by the (hereinafter referred to as 'the CBDT') but subsequently withdrawn on 23-9-1971 was applicable and the cost of acquisition had to be determined on the basis of the value as determined on the date of conversion of agricultural land into nonagricultural land i.e., when the land become a capital asset?'2. The matter pertains to the assessment year 1971-72. The assessee is an individual. In the assessment proceedings under section 143(3), the Income Tax Officer, while computing capital gains was of the opinion that the cost of land in question to the previous owner worked out at Rs. 1. 10 ps. per sq. yd. was to be given deduction for computation of the capital gain made by the assessee in respect of which the land which was sold durin...
Cit Vs. Shree Laxmi Textiles and Allied Corpn.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: [2003]128TAXMAN176(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' has referred the following question under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in allowing the amount of Rs. 65,500 being the amount paid to the retiring partners as revenue expenditure ?'2. The assessee-firm came into existence under the Partnership Deed dated 1-11-1976 and was engaged in the manufacture of textile processing machines. For the relevant accounting period ended on 30-6-1979, the assessee filed Return of income on 2-7-1980, showing income of Rs. 2,71,516. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee claimed compensation paid to the retiring partners of Rs. 65,500 as business expenditure. The Income Tax Officer, however, held that it was payment of a capital nature and added the amount to the assessees income. On appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), it ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »